Man of Steel

[Shirtless Crackhead]

For a bunch of hipsters who talk about depth in film, they sure need it made obvious huh.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

for reals

[Gay Uncle]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ERf1nnVuAw

 

Said the perfectly fine film.

Edited June 18, 2013 by Vivirtruvian

[Ataraxis]

I don't care about anyone's opinion so much that I would pay them for it.

[Tidus Klein]

(off topic: I hate my home computer! stupid thing blocks everything!)

but in other news I liked the movie, wasent the best but it was up there.

[Gay Uncle]

I have waited a long time for this movie, and if I had to answer the question of if it was worth the wait, my answer would be:

 

No.

 

Was it bad? No - but it wasn't great. However, unlike critics of movies who criticize movies in complete isolation, I can spare some compassion and consideration to the film. The biggest downfall is how much time was spent on building the character from the ground-up. A great chunk of screen time is dedicated to fleshing out the story of Superman, which honestly seems superfluous to an audience who needs to be fairly sheltered to not know the origin story. However, as this is a reboot, I can understand why this would have been included, however any follow-up movies are going to need to be punchy and to the point if they are going to gain any fan following. Even then, there are a lot of jumps where Kal-El suddenly 'becomes Superman.'

 

I feel the film has been berated by critics because they want to see something special or different in every film they watch. What they need to understand is that for a fan of the character, this is fresh in that we get to see the Man of Steel earning his stripes. That said, Smallville did a rather compelling job of this years ago.

 

Where Man of Steel falls short is that it isn't the movie we've all been waiting for - it feels like a prelude. The action sequences are great and the final showdown between Superman and Zod ended in a way that had me truly conflicted, yet in praise.

 

Ultimately, no new ground was covered other than the fact that the film wasn't bad.

 

--

 

To put another spin on it, where the Hollywood movies are failing is the fact that they seem to be restricted in what they feel they can tell. There is an annoying sense that this movie couldn't be an adaptation of 'All-Star Superman' because the character hasn't been introduced to the screen audience enough to delve into such an arc. Yet, the animated versions of the character can do as they please, with little worry of 'where the character is at in his (perceived) cinema timeline' and hence tell far more compelling stories.

 

I really wish Hollywood would drop this whole 'we need to reboot a character before we get to the good stuff' (because the last movie or two were ill-received) psyche, and just use a good story.

 

But that would probably only appeal to the hardcore fans, which are a minority of the Box Office.

 

Fuck society. Introduce comics to the school curriculum.

Edited June 26, 2013 by Vivirtruvian

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

To put another spin on it, where the Hollywood movies are failing is the fact that they seem to be restricted in what they feel they can tell. There is an annoying sense that this movie couldn't be an adaptation of 'All-Star Superman' because the character hasn't been introduced to the screen audience enough to delve into such an arc.

 

Also, they can't be All-Star Superman because that story has a very definite end. That wouldn't work well for an intro movie to the new Superman.

[Gay Uncle]

Exactly. It could be a great film in its own right, but apparently everything needs to be sequel-friendly.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

Sure, but they want to establish a new franchise. I don't think that's inherently wrong.

 

Also we have an All-Star Superman film. It's animated too.

 

Last thing Dwayne McDuffie ever did, RIP him. He was a good dood.

 

I don't like set up movies, in general, I agree with you there. My favorite film of all time, The Godfather, had sequels, but it didn't need to set itself up. It was a great standalone film. That should be the focus for any film-maker/studio, imo. And no I'm not saying people need to make more Godfathers that's not happening because that film is God and the rest are men.

 

The only semi-counterpoint to that that I think makes sense (fuck whatever else Hollywood spits) is that as a comic book story they pretty much always are set up to have sequels. Blessing and curse of the medium. If you read any ongoing (let's say Superman and Action Comics since we're talking supes here) they pretty much always end on a cliffhanger of some kind unless it's the last issue of an author who is ending his take on the character (not run off the book). So like Grant Morrison's Action Comics #21 or w/e one it was that ended his recent run on AC.

[Shirtless Crackhead]

Hollywood has run out of ideas.

[Ataraxis]

Hollywood has run out of ideas.

 

Nah, they're just running with one that's really good for them. And that is that sequels make money.

[Shirtless Crackhead]

Why make new shit when rehashing old shit makes just as much money, and you don't have to pay an army of writers?

[Rachis]

They still have to pay a writer. No rehash is the exact same thing as the original.

[Exorcet]

I have waited a long time for this movie, and if I had to answer the question of if it was worth the wait, my answer would be:

 

No.

 

Was it bad? No - but it wasn't great. However, unlike critics of movies who criticize movies in complete isolation, I can spare some compassion and consideration to the film. The biggest downfall is how much time was spent on building the character from the ground-up. A great chunk of screen time is dedicated to fleshing out the story of Superman, which honestly seems superfluous to an audience who needs to be fairly sheltered to not know the origin story. However, as this is a reboot, I can understand why this would have been included, however any follow-up movies are going to need to be punchy and to the point if they are going to gain any fan following. Even then, there are a lot of jumps where Kal-El suddenly 'becomes Superman.'

 

I feel the film has been berated by critics because they want to see something special or different in every film they watch. What they need to understand is that for a fan of the character, this is fresh in that we get to see the Man of Steel earning his stripes. That said, Smallville did a rather compelling job of this years ago.

 

Where Man of Steel falls short is that it isn't the movie we've all been waiting for - it feels like a prelude. The action sequences are great and the final showdown between Superman and Zod ended in a way that had me truly conflicted, yet in praise.

 

Ultimately, no new ground was covered other than the fact that the film wasn't bad.

 

--

 

To put another spin on it, where the Hollywood movies are failing is the fact that they seem to be restricted in what they feel they can tell. There is an annoying sense that this movie couldn't be an adaptation of 'All-Star Superman' because the character hasn't been introduced to the screen audience enough to delve into such an arc. Yet, the animated versions of the character can do as they please, with little worry of 'where the character is at in his (perceived) cinema timeline' and hence tell far more compelling stories.

 

I really wish Hollywood would drop this whole 'we need to reboot a character before we get to the good stuff' (because the last movie or two were ill-received) psyche, and just use a good story.

 

But that would probably only appeal to the hardcore fans, which are a minority of the Box Office.

 

Fuck society. Introduce comics to the school curriculum.

 

I liked the build up probably more than the fighting. The story was interesting, the battle though I was looking forward to it, didn't completely convince me, for lack of willing to explain what I mean.

[SUMERIAN BLOOD GOD]

I finally saw this last night and thought it was great. I'm just going to spoiler everything after here since I'm gonna talk about plot and shit.

I remember thinking one thing they did really well was how they showed how fast the kryptonians are. His speed is something I've seen a lot of people overlook when they think about Superman but he's raced the fucking Flash and shit. That one hot kryptonian bitch moved really well. In general I thought all the fight scenes were well done. More movies need to throw trains at people.

 

I'm a little torn about papa Kent's death. On the one hand, it gives a ton of meaning to why Supes has kept himself under the radar until Zod & Co. show up and I like it for that. On the other hand, I feel like papa Kent could've gotten a slightly more heroic death. It was a tough scene and it's really the only one in the movie I'm kinda on the fence about. Overall I'd say it was done well.

 

I mentioned it to Wong but why the fuck was Lois even on the plane dropping phantom bomb on the S.S. Zod? All she had to do was tell that old dude to stick the key in the hole.

 

pause

 

 

[Mom]

I think it's first movie to actually properly demonstrate the destructive potential that only a kyrptonian could have.

The tornado scene was the weakest in the entire movie.

 

Hans Zimmer is force.

Edited November 15, 2013 by The OB Express

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

I watched the movie again last night and I enjoyed it still

 

the pops kent scene was weird because plotwise it was pretty forced, and the logic was wild shaky, but the acting was pretty good so they sold me on it.

 

My heart and mind were not in agreement with each other

[SUMERIAN BLOOD GOD]

Yeah I'd say that's what swung me over in favor of the scene. On paper it sounds bad but when you actually see it it comes together pretty well.

[LS]

The only part of this movie I liked was Zod's rant about losing his purpose. I felt like that retroactively fleshed out his character to a really surprising degree, to the point where I identified with him more than just about anyone else in the movie. It almost made the stupid fight scene worthwhile. I dunno, one strong line of dialogue was more than I expected from a Superman movie.

 

At risk of summoning forth exogen, my perception of Superman has always been as modern Aristotelian philosophy; at least, that was the angle from which I found it interesting. The idea that your planet is holding you back - that all the separates normal people from gods is the matter surrounding them, and that if you remove that matter you're perfect - has always been an interesting one to me. Superman's twist on this is that for every race of people, it's a different thing. One man's poison is another man's nectar; the planet that holds us back sets him free. His poison has (almost) entirely been removed from existence, so he is a god, not just transiently, but actually. They went into this more than I expected them to, but not as much as I'd hoped. Again, the only part where I felt it really came out was the last fight scene with Zod, which was so stupid on a superficial level I couldn't really appreciate it. Whatever else it was, it was so blatantly there to be there that I couldn't get passed that. It felt slapped on, obligatory.

 

I think the real issue I have with Superman is that it seems much more an idea than a story, if you get what I mean. I understand all superheroes are to some extent concept driven, except maybe like the Ninja Turtles or something, but Superman seems especially so. If someone pitched me the idea, I'd either find it boring, or, if they did so in a way invoking the one way in which I find it interesting, I'd tell them it was definitely a short story idea, not a novel idea. I mean, what can you really do with this? Obviously a lot, since they comic has gone on for like 80 fucking years, but they've already addressed the one aspect I find sort of interesting, and not very well, so I'm not really sure where they can go from here that would work for me. Bring in Batman, I guess? That would probably at least be funny.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

Your right, Superman is a concept more than anything. Grant Morrison said in the book he wrote, Supergods, that Clark represents a Sun god from most mythologies, as well as a savior of all life and the ideal to which humanity aspires to. So basically he's like Ra, Vishnu, Krishna, Utu, Jesus Christ, Maitreya, etc. Because of this, you have to approach the writing of the story understanding that you are dealing with the modern equivalent of a solar deity/savior/ideal man, and write as such.

 

So basically his best stories tend to treat him as modern mythology.

 

idk what point i'm even trying to make except that I agree with you that Superman is an idea.

[Shirtless Crackhead]

Praise the sun yo.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2013/103/d/5/praise_the_sun__by_bozikis-d61je08.png

[Clones]

Solaire is actually Superman in the Dark Souls world.

 

It all makes sense now.

[YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR]

hahahaha

 

solaire is a fucking clown tho

 

dood flips out cuz he got a bug to sit on his head

 

He is a pussy he just happens to say some really funny things

 

sometimes

 

he's as big a loser as the onion guy only diff is his outfit is better and warriors of sunlight have the ill gold color when you get summoned

Edited November 19, 2013 by YUNG ADULT CONTEMPORARY

[Clones]

Oh yeah that's right, forgot Solaire is also a fucking idiot.

 

I retract my previous comment about him and Superman.