Man of Steel

[DocLathropBrown]

On top of all that, now that the Nolanverse has faded into history, I've gone on the record saying I'm done with bashing on Nolan. The movies are done, some kind of reboot is inevitable so we can all move on now. Whining about it now isn't going to accomplish much except make a bunch of immature forum drama where there doesn't really need to be any.

I agree. I feel the same about people still sore over Superman Returns or Batrman & Robin.... it's over now, get over it. Anger over those two made sense when the franchises were stuck on that path with no improvement in sight. B&R and SR left the Batman and Superman series in trouble, but both series have bounced back. I feel the same with the Nolan Bat films (though they never made me angry anyway). We're guaranteed that his universe is at an end, so all is well. I can even enjoy the trilogy for what it is.

People who still have a burning hatred for old, irrelevent things piss me off more than a bad movie could any day. Not only because it's over with, but in the first place... it's just a movie. No fictional product, no matter how much you love it, should bring you to that kind of behavior. If it does, you need a life.

[johnnygobbs]

Um, I'm standing up to the exact same mentality on the Superman side... and using my better-than-average knowledge of Superman comics to justify it.

The last comment, unless meant ironically, seems at odds with you standing up to the self-proclaimed Batman know-it-alls.  You're committing the same mistake by suggesting that you are better qualified to argue whether a Superman movie is valid or not because of your extensive comic-book collection.  With all due respect, this is not too dissimilar to some of the crap I read from certain Nolan fanboys on other forums, the whole 'I have collected Batman since issue one and therefore my opinion on Burton's Batman overrides the lot of you' type of mentality.

[thecolorsblend]

I always stood up to the Nolanites. And my point was generally that they don't have the depth of familiarity with the comics that they would have you believe. By and large I find that to be a very true statement. You don't need much knowledge of Batman's publishing history to be able to refute that.

Their Superman analog is the Prima-Donners, who cannot accept any other Superman in spite of the fact that they're not terribly familiar with Superman outside of Donner's own. Their "case" is even easier to disprove than the Nolanites because Donner invented so much stuff that was absolutely foreign to the canon at the time. Well and good, worked for his movie, blah blah blah, but it shouldn't become Superman's gospel anymore than Nolan's vision should be for Batman. I do know more than they do about Superman comics. There are people out there who know oodles more than I do but I trust my knowledge and can defend other versions of the character with ease. And that seems to be the part you're not getting. I can justify L&C, Smallville and other adaptations of Superman and demonstrate their worth and value. I'm not giving a "my way or the highway" type attitude; I'm knocking a bunch of pretentious jerks out of their ivory towers by showing that other adaptations have at least as much merit (if not more) than Donner's movie.

[johnnygobbs]

I suppose we're on the same side on this one colors because like you I have little time for the hardcore Nolan fanboys and their assertions that they are the authorities on Batman but I would just be wary of committing the same mistake yourself with Superman.  Also, there are quite a few Batman fanboys I have spoken to on other forums who keep telling me they are essentially authorities on the character and can confidently dismiss the Burton films because like you they are an expert on the comic-books.  This high-and-mighty attitude sucks in my opinion and I don't think any of us who feel this way about the Nolan fanboys should be repeating the same mistake elsewhere.

[The Laughing Fish]

I think any complaints about a movie, as long as you can explain why and as long as they're valid criticisms, is acceptable every now and then. Only every now and then though, not all the time.

[The Dark Knight]

Glad you liked the movie, colors. I see you've adopted my Prima-Donners tag, and I am right behind your philosophy there.

I saw the movie recently and honestly feel people were overly harsh on it. I walked in with no expectations after reading people ripping into it, and hell, I enjoyed myself quite a bit.

I think no matter what is said, a lot of it is people loving Donner's movie and not being able to shake it. I was harsh on MOS issues beforehand, and while I still have some of those views, it was not due to past clinging. To be straight up honest, it's mostly in part to me having a love/hate relationship with the character. Man of Steel moved me more in the love direction.

I did not miss John Williams and frankly, hearing that guy's name being brought up all the time is really old. I did not find Cavill 'brooding'. If anything he was thoughtful. I didn't have an issue there. Russell Crowe was excellent as Jor-El. He really was.

I didn't really rate the other movies, but MOS is easily my favourite live action outing.

[The Laughing Fish]

Glad you liked the movie, colors. I see you've adopted my Prima-Donners tag, and I am right behind your philosophy there.

I saw the movie recently and honestly feel people were overly harsh on it. I walked in with no expectations after reading people ripping into it, and hell, I enjoyed myself quite a bit.

I think no matter what is said, a lot of it is people loving Donner's movie and not being able to shake it. I was harsh on MOS issues beforehand, and while I still have some of those views, it was not due to past clinging. To be straight up honest, it's mostly in part to me having a love/hate relationship with the character. Man of Steel moved me more in the love direction.

I did not miss John Williams and frankly, hearing that guy's name being brought up all the time is really old. I did not find Cavill 'brooding'. If anything he was thoughtful. I didn't have an issue there. Russell Crowe was excellent as Jor-El. He really was.

I didn't really rate the other movies, but MOS is easily my favourite live action outing.

I still like the 1978 movie despite its plot holes, but I can still say that Man of Steel is decent enough to come in second place. I didn't think Cavill was brooding, and if he did it wasn't overbearing. All the talks of him never smiling are false.

[thecolorsblend]

Glad you liked the movie, colors. I see you've adopted my Prima-Donners tag, and I am right behind your philosophy there.

Figured you might be.

I saw the movie recently and honestly feel people were overly harsh on it. I walked in with no expectations after reading people ripping into it, and hell, I enjoyed myself quite a bit.

Can't remember if I've ever said so around here but basically I went into this thing with an attitude of not needing Man of Steel. I mean, I'll always regard Singerman as a betrayal. There will never be a day when I look back on it and think "y'know, it really wasn't half-bad". For those of you of this disposition, imagine waiting 19 years for a new Batman movie and what you get is Batman & Robin. I like B&R but a lot of you don't so just imagine how pissed off you'd be. To carry the analogy forward, again for those of you given to this disposition, you had to wait seven years for Batman Begins and really enjoyed it.

I've got different opinions than a lot of Superman fans so bear that in mind when I say I've got four seasons of Lois & Clark, four Reeve films, the first two seasons of Adventures of Superman, all of Fleischer, aspects of that Superboy TV show, 10 seasons of Smallville, the entire run of STAS and JLU stuff and, oh yeah, 46 years worth of comics (from 1960 to 2006). All of that's mine to choose from when I want a Superman fix.

On that basis, I didn't "need" Man of Steel and I didn't "need" it to be good. The fact that it turned out as well as it did is cause for celebration but I'm in a much different place now than I was back in 2006.

I think no matter what is said, a lot of it is people loving Donner's movie and not being able to shake it.

Nothing will ever convince me otherwise at this point. I'm sorry but the comparisons to Donner have popped up too many times for me to think that's not a major factor. Plus, Zack Snyder has a crap reputation with the critics and with an entire segment of fanboys.

I did not miss John Williams and frankly, hearing that guy's name being brought up all the time is really old. I did not find Cavill 'brooding'. If anything he was thoughtful. I didn't have an issue there. Russell Crowe was excellent as Jor-El. He really was.

I hadn't realized how badly I wanted a new take on Jor-El until Crowe did his thing. I ate his performance up with a spoon.

The best part of all this is that we finally have a new benchmark for Superman flying effects. Up to this moment, the peak of the mountain, the creme de la creme, the best, most realistic, most inventive and most dynamic flying sequence featuring Superman ever committed to film was Smallville's season 4 premiere. A TV SHOW had a better flying sequence than a $250+ million film! But the flying stuff from MOS blows the doors off anything that's come before, and I'm glad for that. It is how it should be.

Speaking of which, let me finish this tirade by saying that Snyder clearly understands what makes for a dynamic flying sequence. Watch this:

It's even harder to watch that stuff post-MOS these days than ever before. First, as an action beat, it's not very impressive. Worse though, the sequence never really gets moving until the 3:21 mark... by which time it's almost over.

But second, you can't help but think how Snyder would've handled this scene. Snyder would understand that you have to keep Superman BIG inside the frame. It helps sell the majestic, heroic, powerful angle. Stick with medium shots, heavy close ups or otherwise positioning Superman HUGE inside of the frame. Singer used a lot of wide shots where Routh looked like a speck against that huge plane and it's hard to convince yourself he has any prayer of stopping it.

There was insane potential here and Singer completely squandered it. It's even more frustrating when you already know Snyder would've knocked it out of the park, sent someone to bring it back and then knocked it out of the park again just to prove he can. Ugh...

[The Dark Knight]

It's funny. Reviews said the film went overboard in the action department. There was action, but I truly did not think it was slanted one way. With the flashbacks and such, the movie felt like a movie and not an extended videogame sequence.

Agreed about the flying effects. For the first time, I felt Superman's raw power. And how impossible it would be for someone like Batman to defeat him. It just would not happen. Get a load of his take-offs. In particular at the end of the film where he speaks to the army dude. He is in the air and out of sight in the space of a second. No other Superman media has matched that.

Importantly, I felt this movie was very 'now' and modern feeling without sacrificing the character. I think those zoom-ins, even though they were a bit overused, contributed to this. It made it feel like a documentary in a way. The shots of the polar bears and such gave it grounding too.

I can and can't believe some people out there prefer 'Singerman' or say Man of Steel is better but only marginally. But then again, these people say Cavill did not smile and there was zero humour, which is flat out untrue. Bottom line, I was willing to get on board a reboot. I'm not so sure if these people were. And if they were, when it actually came and they saw what it meant, they got cold feet.

Just as Hans Zimmer's score roundly got 1/5 reviews, again, mostly due to comparisons to Williams. Comparisons that simply don't equate to the aims of a 2013 film. Things get silly like that.

[thecolorsblend]

Yes indeed. One thing I heard a lot of Batman fans say after BB came along was how much they enjoyed watching Bruce's arc toward becoming Batman. It felt very genuine to them.

I got the same enjoyment from seeing Clark go through a similar thing in MOS. I may be completely alone on this one but I probably could've survived a full hour of Clark working odd jobs, going through flashbacks or whatever else. Maybe I've just watched too much Smallville but I don't need to see Superman loud and proud two minutes after an origin movie starts. I didn't think wide audiences would either and I think the movie's success bears me out.

Now that I think about, if you compared time stamps you'd probably find that Clark becomes Superman at roughly the same points in MOS and STM.

Apart from ticking off certain parts of the fanbase, another thing MOS has done has been to make it okay to take an objective view of the previous films. Superman II has arguably suffered the most. People have become a lot more vocal about that movie's problems ("Superman gave up his powers just to get with Lois," "Superman murdered Zod in cold blood," "the Metropolis battle could've used a lot more physical combat and fewer comedic gags," etc). It sort of reminds me of what happened to Ang Lee's Hulk after TIH came out. It wasn't politically incorrect to have not liked the 2003 Hulk anymore. In the wake of MOS, it seems the same thing is happening with other Superman media, particularly the Reeve films. S3 and S4 have been picked on for years but now the first two are going under the microscope as well. I don't want it to get out of hand (like things did with Burton and Schumacher after the BB came out) but those films are long overdue for some objective evaluation. The consensus has come to be that it's okay if you don't think they're perfect as Superman stories go.