The movie is a spectacle though, and it was enjoyable as a movie to watch, and you definitely want to see it in the theater.
Be the Match! www.bethematch.org
2011 - 2012, we believed, they delivered!
2012 - 2013, be the best 7th man in the league! and do it again for Tanner!
Not going to get into specifics...but for the love of God...why am I forced to defend a far superior(in terms of translating the spirit of the comics) movie about Superman, vs the juggernaut Batman saga. I always LOVED Batman and hated Superman. Based on movies alone, SUPERMAN wins. Don't get lost in that battle though. I honestly think your prejudice Nasti colored your opinion. I went into All three Batman movies with an open mind. And I was able to take away some positives. Your abject hatred of Man of Steel is unfathomable. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a comic book movie. Superman is in the WHOLE movie. And it's glorious. Once again I warn...some of the above discussion is getting too spoilery. The bare opinions until next Saturday. Be kind to your fellow LGK'rs.
By the way, I don't buy his shaving theory either. The yellow sun affects the molecular structure of Kal-El's biology but who's to say it does the same thing to his spaceship or the materials it's made of? Heck, the movie itself supports my notion.
Last edited by Ranma; June 15th, 2013 at 07:27 PM.
I have to say I was not disappointed by this movie. I did feel it was sort of rushed and there were some flashbacks that should have not been shown, and the fact that they focused ALOT on lois lane.
But other than that I like how they gave background on Krytpon and the fight scenes were badass. I think this was much better than iron man 3.
Im so pissed i couldnt watch it this morning!!!!!!
It's been a bit of a rollercoaster for me with regards to expectations and opinion on this movie. I started out skeptical when initial discussions had Warner Bros. wanting to make a Superman movie in the same dark, gritty fashion as their Batman trilogy. Then I became cautiously optimistic once reports had Nolan coming up with a take he was jazzed about only to be disappointed when Snyder was chosen as the director. The first few teasers and trailers didn't do much to excite me at all and did more to sway me against seeing the film. However, the third trailer--which I described as "majestically epic" earlier in this very thread--got me totally onboard and really looking forward to it.
After seeing the film at the midnight showing Thursday night, I have to say I'm disappointed, let down, and actually torn whether to like this movie or not. MoS reminds me a bit of the Bond series' "Quantum of Solace" in how there were elements within the film for it to be great only to have execution fall short in delivery of the final product.
I like the cast and thought the performances were great all around given what it had to work with. I also thought the treatment and story was fine as well but the direction left a lot to be desired in the second half, particularly with respect to the action sequences. I believe Spill.com described the action scenes as "excessive spectacle", which I think is an apt term. The movie aims to inspire and impress with visuals, but I feel pursuit of the latter came at the expense of the former. The motivations of the characters made sense and so did the action scenes in the sense of how super-powered beings would exploit such abilities in addition to the resulting collateral damage. However, while such a practical and logical approach may be technically correct, it lacked heart onscreen, which is a wide criticism of this movie.
I'm not saying Zack Snyder is Michael Bay in that he's become a parody of himself, but it does seem like he can't seem to expand beyond certain styles. However, whereas Bay is coasting on his abilities, I think Snyder is trying to improve and has shown more versatility. Having said that, the special effects--while technically done well, for the most part--did have lapses that took me out of the moment during a couple instances. A scene in the trailers with fire shown looked totally fake yet wasn't improved upon in the final product. Even during the extended fight scene, there were moments throughout that had me thinking they could have technically improved upon. Personally, I would have liked to have seen how J.J. Abrams would have handled Nolan & Goyer's script and it's no coincidence that I think "Star Trek: Into Darkness" is the best action movie of the summer, plot holes and all.
I liked the scenes of Clark growing up as they were the most heartfelt but the movie missed on quite a few marks. The action did more to numb than awe. I left the theater more shell-shocked than overwhelmed and it wasn't because I was groggy from staying up late to attend the midnight showing. The inconsistent concern for human life throughout the movie just didn't jive. This film is lacking in what its predecessors and other films were able to accomplish:
- Cavill, like Routh, was a capable Clark/Superman but neither had the charm and magic of Christopher Reeve
- for all the action scenes incorporated in this film, none were as impressive as the plane scene in "Superman Returns"
- the stadium/world cheering scene also in "Superman Returns" was more uplifting than anything found in this movie
- the Metropolis fight scene in "Superman 2" was more dramatic and impactful than the one in MoS despite the disparity in special effects technique
- the first flight scene was not nearly as engaging as the one in the first Iron Man film
- while this may be unfair, but was there any moment that even came close to the helicopter scene in the original "Superman" movie?
Last edited by Ranma; June 16th, 2013 at 12:47 AM.
In case anyone is curious, here is what former Superman writer, Mark Waid, thinks in a spoilerish review, but I'll quote a non-spoilerish snippet:
Mark Waid, ThrillBent.com (6/14/13)
Non-spoiler review: It’s not for me. It had some very nice moments, several I wish I’d written (and at least three I did, I’m proud to say–there was lots of BIRTHRIGHT in it), but I can’t imagine wanting to watch it again anytime soon. YMMV. It’s a good science-fiction movie, but it’s very cold. It’s not a very satisfying super-hero movie. That said, if your favorite part of SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE was Superman standing in the Fortress while Jor-El lectured him, you’re gonna love MAN OF STEEL.
Superman being in the whole movie ISN'T a good thing. This is an origin story. Two of the most widely respected origin stories in comics were Superman: The Movie and Batman Begins. You don't see Superman or Batman for at least the first hour in each. And the first hour isn't bombarded with action but rather dialogue and actual story. Otherwise I wouldn't give two s***s about the hero when he's in trouble. Now maybe you didn't like those movies, but I think if you ask most people, they'd say that THOSE are comic book movies. Not this mess.