I thought Burton's original Batman was a fun movie with a lot of great moments. At the time, it was the best Batman had been done and thus i really liked it. Nolan simply surpassed him (as i suspect "Man of Steel" will well surpass S:TM) - movie making is just better today than it was then for genre films.
Yeah, but even at the time of Burton Batman, the contemporary comics stories blew it away. The Reeve Supermans have continually held up alongside the best the Supes comics have to offer.
Yes! It was ALOT of fun to see in the theater. Has lots of NOW iconic lines & scenes. Nolan did a great job with Batman. I still haven't seen TDKR. But BB and TDK were good. Hopefully MoS will be satisfactory.
Seriously El Chup. Watch Batman (1989) and then watch The Dark Knight. If you still hold this opinion...
On the first point - yes, the reference was only to on-screen. There's a shit-ton of absolutely classic stuff in the comics scattered over the years. As for the Donnor films, even the first one, there were moments that are classic but overall, the mega-cheese and MASSIVE plot holes are just awfully tough for me to overlook. I'm not as big a fan as others, though admittedly Reeve did own the part.
Some more reviews rolling in: USA Today, Time, and the Los Angeles Times all give it a positive review. In 24 hours, I'll be sitting in a theater almost 2/3rds of the way through the film. I can't wait.
MoS is analogous &/or parallel to STiD with its choice of villain. What I mean is STiD revisited Khan from Trek Prime's second theatrical release, and MoS revisits Zod from Superman Prime's second feature film.
Y'know, I would've just summed that up as... "Khan's back, Zod's back, what a fucking YEAR!! :squee:".
And Man of Steel has fallen below 60% on Rotten Tomatoes, earning it a rotten label. On the plus side, most of the "name" critics seem to have liked it. Peter Travers at Rolling Stone has given it a positive review.
Meh. The problem with Rotten Tomatoes is that you can have movies which haven't even been released yet being ranked highly or as garbage. Its really only valuable some weeks after the film has opened, or if there's a dramatic change in the rating of a film after opening weekend (i.e. a movie everyone thought was going to be awesome turns out to blow dead bears). Otherwise, its just fapping fanboys making claims based on their biases, rather than the actual merits of the film.
There are about 8 bad critical reviews on RT. I read some of them. Among some of the reoccurring complaints:- - Too dark - Too long - Clumsy - Zod not given enough to do - Costner not in it enough - Black Perry and female Jimmy Olsen too PC - Zimmer's score inferior to John Williams - Cavill generally the best part of the movie, but still unable to surpass Reeve in terms of charm and gravitas Pretty much what I was expecting I have to say. But, if Cavill is half decent in it, it's still reason enough for me to check it out. But I get the feeling that filmmakers these days still don't get what made STM so successful, and indeed the character himself - namely the beacon of light and hope that he is. A lot of the reviews say that Superman spends the movie moping around and moody. THey could be what is putting some of the critics off more than the rest, and why we may still not be in an era where the hope and inspiration of Superman is ready to return.
I look at that and my mind makes the following connection, both lines delivered as in the film: Zod: Kneel before Zod! Khan: You are in a position to demand...nothing.
one review i read basically said "You have to be VERY careful if you are going to tell a dark story with Superman - and they weren't very careful. Basically, the whole "if you make him dark he's not really Superman anymore" bit. I, for one, am not one of those who thinks the only good Superman is the boy-scout version. Supes got a little pissy a few times in JLU and it worked quite nicely. If that's the biggest issue, it's not going to bother me much (the OUTFIT is too dark, but that's another story!)
Okay, the bad reviews? Forget about them. This movie is awesome. That's not to say that ALL the criticism is invalid, just that the sheer amount of awesomeness overrides it. Here are some random thoughts: 1. About 20 minutes(?) of the opening is devoted to Krypton. It is epic and truly alien. Everything from costumes to architecture to art direction to technology are suitably interesting. You might argue that there's too much, but I think it's necessary if you want Zod to be more than a cardboard cutout. 2. Lois Lane's relationship to Clark/Superman is revised substantially. Purists may balk, but me likee. Me really likee. An important consequence--actually, it's probably the reason why--is that Lois is no longer a damsel in distress, but an active participant in the plot. And, damn, Amy Adams is just really cute. 3. Kevin Costner. Very effective as Jonathan Kent. Yes, I wish there was more with him, but he gets several poignant moments in the film. The last one--it occurs during the denouement--should come across as hokey, but I got a little lump in my throat. I liked that his Jonathan Kent wasn't a softie, wasn't a man overflowing with warmth. Because that makes the moments where a little emotion peak through that much more powerful. 4. Holy sweet mother of fuck is there a lot of damage done in this movie! Hopefully, there's a lot of unused office space in downtown Metropolis. Otherwise, I'd put casualties in the 30-50,000 range. 5. Too much action in the finale? I'd say just enough. 6. The almost 2.5 hour run time sailed by without me ever feeling bored. 7. Word of advice? Evil Kryptonian shows up, don't go toe-to-toe with them unless you happen to be a Kryptonian, too. Many people learn this lesson the hard way. Or would've if they had survived. 8. The conclusion? Stunning. I was wondering "How is he going to...?" and then I was like "Oh, shit. That's how." 9. Cavill is great as Clark. BTW, there's not really any difference between Clark and Superman in this film. Cavill appears shirtless in one scene and there were gasps of approval from the audience: the guy is built like Superman. 10. Did you like seeing Kryptonians fight in Superman II? That's baby shit compared to this, not even a mild scuffle. 11. The closing dialog is a perfect capper for the film. I'm wanting a sequel next week. 12. My complaints/criticisms? The appearance of the avatar of Jor-El doesn't generate the awe it does in Superman: The Movie. A friend of mine put it accurately: he shows up like some kinda ghost from The Shining. What must be an enormous human cost from the final battle is not considered. 13. The film is told in non-linear fashion; it jumps around from era-to-era. I liked this, as it amounted to telling the backstory while proceeding with the story. 14. Young Clark's lack of control of his powers was very well-handled. Likewise, his alienation is vividly portrayed. You feel bad for him: he suffers some injustices from others and turns the other cheek because, well, that's the kind of guy he is. 15. Supporting cast is all very good. Christopher Meloni (Colonel Hardy), Laurence Fishburne (Perry White), Harry Lennix (General Swanwick), Diane Lane (Martha Kent), Richard Schiff (Professor Hamilton--wish he'd had a bit more to do, but he does get a key moment), Antje Traue ( Faora)...they play their characters well. Hats off to the guys who play young Clark Kent, too. 16. Music is terrific even if it doesn't rise to the level of John Williams' iconic score. 17. Michael Shannon is very good as Zod. He does unhinged well. 18. Superman learns to fly!!! 'Nuff said. 19. Maybe need to dial back just a bit on the product placement. 20. Can't wait to see it again. Not perfect, but very, very solid. I'd give it an A-. This IS the Superman movie you've waited for. Unless you don't like superheroes. In which case, you should see Before Midnight instead.
I still haven't caught STiD yet Thinking of maybe catching STiD and seeing nuSupes in the same day as matinees. Be $16.00 to see both that way the same day in the same theater. I hope I can swing it time-wise. Otherwise watch both separately.
Just back from seeing it. It's not without its flaws, but the critical backlash astounds me. I think someone mentioned the Justice League Unlimited episode where Superman finally stops holding back and gives Darkseid a colossal beating -we finally got to see that Superman on film. Also I would gladly see Antje Traue resurrected as Wonder Woman.
Pretty good movie. I'm no great Superman buff, but I enjoyed it. - A little bit of a theme going about making your own choices/destiny - The focus on Kent's pre-Superman days was different, and I think it worked out well - Cavill pretty much was Superman. Zod was convincingly threatening as well - Plummeting helicopter, check. Plummeting Lois, check - . . . But no large barnyard animals in the tornado? - Fight scenes were good - What they do with the Clark/Lois dynamic going forward could be interesting - This Perry White is more a Rams Dick Vermeil than an Eagles Vermeil - Building codes in Metropolis must not be enforced. One or two of those high-rises went down after damage that a Jenga tower would laugh off - Actually, there was a lot of the "things that are damaged must explode" mentality to be seen. Are they piping propane into those office buildings? - KJ caught a bit that I missed. On the construction site, when Superman gets slammed into the X Days Since The Last Accident sign, the 1 and 6 get knocked off and leave just the 0 behind - Shaky-cam mostly worked, dramatic chipmunk zoom made its point but was overused, unsteady-cam mostly needed to go away
Really enjoyed it, topped IM3 and STiD for me. A darker Supes than in the Donner movies, but captures the character wonderfully, and full of hope. Cavil makes for a good Supes too. I was amused that the film's core was about freedom vs programming, given Snyder studiously avoided Watchmen's premise of pre-destination. Eclipsed the Donner movies by some margin, and whilst not perfect was an excellent start to DC's attempt to counter Marvel's movie success. I'd like to see more of Zod and Jor-El too, if they ever plan to bring Doomsday into the mix they could do worse than a side movie involving those two tackling Doomsday...
I loved it. My ONLY complaint is that the action was SOOOOO far over the top that it took me right out of the movie. Other than that, I was thoroughly pleased. Loved all the character bits. Wonderful film.
Reasonably good. Not going to rave like Paladin (it isn't anywhere near Nolan's Batman movies) but I was pleasantly surprised given the reviews. The good: The Krypton stuff was very interesting. Michael Shannon's Zod. Faora. Kevin Costner The score. The bad: Too much CGI pyrotechnics. I grow tired of watching Manhattan get pasted in every blockbuster. The new fortress of Solitude sucks compared to the old one. The final scene declaring some sort of unconditional loyalty to America, rather than Earth. Undermined the entire point of standing against Zod. The so-so: Cavill as Superman. Hard to criticise him for anything specific but he doesn't make you think he was born for it, like you did with Reeve. The dialogue - ropey in places, great in others.
Sitting in a theater waiting to see it a second time. Most of RickDeckard's gripes I agree are negatives, but I rate them minor. I don't think Supes was declaring some kind of unquestioning loyalty to America, just reassuring the military that he does think of himself as American. I liked that. And, although Reeve is a tough act to follow, I think Cavill makes the role his own.
I haven't seen MoS yet, but appreciate all the reviews. I'm guessing MoS II will be about Lex Luthor. Who would be good casting as Lex Luthor?
Great movie! Looking forward to Man Of Steel 2. Cavill was a good Superman, but Amy Adams was a great Lois Lane. MUCH better than whatshername from the last movie.
