Man of Steel....cant wait

mclsound · « **on:** 12 Jun 2013, 12:19 pm »

So with Marvel dominating the screens..this is a pinnacle moment for DC comics to bring out their most important character.
I hope it is aww inspiring.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #1 on:** 12 Jun 2013, 07:30 pm »

I actively dislike the character, but even I am looking forward to Man of Steel!

With Nolan and Snyder at the helm it looks like they're leaving the "camp" approach behind and aiming for a more serious and less cartoonish version of Super Man. And of course, it helps that Henry Cavill is one of my favorite "new" actors. His work in The Tudors was really great.

jackman · « **Reply #2 on:** 12 Jun 2013, 09:51 pm »

I'm intrigued by this new film, even though Superman is my least favorite superhero. Also, even though Marvel dominates these types of movies, the most interesting characters and best movies of this genre, IMO, are the latest Batman movies, with Christian Bale.

I hope this movie is better than previous Superman movies. Could be an interesting series.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #3 on:** 13 Jun 2013, 03:36 am »

I think Nolan will bring that "Dark Knight" sensibility to the character; he should be less of a puss.

Marvel has recently been eating DC's lunch, but for many years they couldn't get it right to save their lives.

jarcher · « **Reply #4 on:** 13 Jun 2013, 05:46 am »

I'm a big fan of Nolan, but I think he'll really be proving something if he can resurrect this dusty character. I'm actually tiring of the dark / gritty superhero angst-y thing, and the last Superman w/ the Messiah overtones headed somewhat in that direction. So I hope he's not gonna try to repeat the "dark night" formula w/ Superman. Think the market agrees on this and one of the reasons the original Iron Man was so successful.

ajzepp · « **Reply #5 on:** 13 Jun 2013, 07:15 am »

Early reviews are very strong

EDIT: Actually, the early reviews I read were strong, but Rotten Tomatoes only has it at a 57% right now (i.e. "rotten")...that's a shocker

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #6 on:** 15 Jun 2013, 04:37 am »

The RT score is dropping by the hour. Still gonna see it, though.

Chazro · « **Reply #7 on:** 15 Jun 2013, 08:11 pm »

Saw it yesterday, what can I say? It's better than 'Superman Returns', Iron Man 2&3, Batman III, and a lot of the others. But this ain't my Superman, not by a longshot! It just amazes me that gazillions of bucks are spent on the never ending special effects but apparently not too much is spent on the script! Oh well, at least it lends itself to a sequel, unlike the last Superman movie, a much deserved one-n-done. As a long-time comix fan I firmly believe that each generation deserves to own their comic book heroes. In other words, Superman, Spiderman, etc. shouldn't be yr older brothers version, or yr Dad's, or in Superman's case, yr granddad's. The Superman currently being depicted in the books AND the screen simply isn't the same guy I grew up with. It remains to be seen if this version will have a 75-yr shelf life!

goldlizsts · « **Reply #8 on:** 16 Jun 2013, 03:29 am »

Quote from: Chazro on 15 Jun 2013, 08:11 pm

Saw it yesterday, what can I say? It's better than 'Superman Returns', Iron Man 2&3, Batman III, and a lot of the others. But this ain't my Superman, not by a longshot! It just amazes me that gazillions of bucks are spent on the never ending special effects but apparently not too much is spent on the script! Oh well, at least it lends itself to a sequel, unlike the last Superman movie, a much deserved one-n-done. As a long-time comix fan I firmly believe that each generation deserves to own their comic book heroes. In other words, Superman, Spiderman, etc. shouldn't be yr older brothers version, or yr Dad's, or in Superman's case, yr granddad's. The Superman currently being depicted in the books AND the screen simply isn't the same guy I grew up with. It remains to be seen if this version will have a 75-yr shelf life!

I can't agree more! Hollywood is making movies behind closed doors more and more now, not that they're trying to save $$, but that's the trend. The sad thing is that it's not cheap I suppose. Yet, somehow they're billed as blockbusters. Perhaps, budget-wise. Success or quality-wise in terms of value, artistic achievement, not quite making the grade IMO. Yeah, with computer tricks, lots of beyond-belief special effects can be created. Well, that seem to AMAZE many movie-goers though. But.... I've seen quite a bundle of these wizardries, but I am not impressed. They're either quite "darkish" (somehow they look gloomy!), or they're bombastic with much explosion and implosion. Shall we say it's truly a sad "state of Hollywood"? Sadder yet, George Lucas is now saying going to the movie will likely cost you $50, or even several hundred. That suxxs. What can I say? It's like baseball. It used to attract a lot of little kids to the game 'cos a bleacher seat is a buck or two. Now?????

Oh, back to Man of Steel I guess. It's a mixed bag. The script first is very weak I thought. There are places I just couldn't understand. Just felt retarded, as I couldn't logically follow it. The last hour or so, soooo much destruction. Shall I say "great" studio creations? Ridiculously long time spend on the gimmickries. While Sueprman was indestructible. The villains were ALMOST indestructible, as the movie dragged on......

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #9 on:** 16 Jun 2013, 04:52 am »

Frankly Superman is a lame ass character that belongs to another age.

Every pathetic grab at the cash is probably gonna be tepid at best. At the heart of it Supes just isn't very interesting IMO. He's a one-dimensional wish fulfillment character that has whatever power the writer needs at the time. I wouldn't waste my money watching a big screen retread of the same tired character if I wasn't such a fan of Henry Cavill. I think he deserves to be a major star, and hopefully this film is the springboard he needs to get better parts.

goldlizsts · « **Reply #10 on:** 16 Jun 2013, 10:12 am »

Quote from: Rob Babcock on 16 Jun 2013, 04:52 am

Frankly Superman is a lame ass character that belongs to another age. Every pathetic grab at the cash is probably gonna be tepid at best. At the heart of it Supes just isn't very interesting IMO. He's a one-dimensional wish fulfillment character that has whatever power the writer needs at the time. I wouldn't waste my money watching a big screen retread of the same tired character if I wasn't such a fan of Henry Cavill. I think he deserves to be a major star, and hopefully this film is the springboard he needs to get better parts.

Think he's already a mega-buck star. Weekend boxoffice loot was one of the few biggest all-time I heard. So, there's no reason he hasn't reaped big some fame! Of course, nobody has the crystal ball to tell us if he'll fade. My crystal ball says there'll be another created-on-the-computer closed-door sequel to this prequel.

Ericus Rex · « **Reply #11 on:** 16 Jun 2013, 02:28 pm »

Quote from: Rob Babcock on 16 Jun 2013, 04:52 am

I wouldn't waste my money watching a big screen retread of the same tired character if I wasn't such a fan of Henry Cavill. I think he deserves to be a major star, and hopefully this film is the springboard he needs to get better parts.

I've only seen him in The Tudors and I thought he was quite weak in that role. What else would you recommend I check out?

Ericus Rex · « **Reply #12 on:** 16 Jun 2013, 02:30 pm »

Quote from: ajzepp on 13 Jun 2013, 07:15 am

Early reviews are very strong

EDIT: Actually, the early reviews I read were strong, but Rotten Tomatoes only has it at a 57% right now (i.e. "rotten")...that's a shocker

Mixed reviews here in Boston area papers. I'll check it out on Netflix. I have precious little time to go to theaters these days so it has to be a special movie.

goldlizsts · « **Reply #13 on:** 16 Jun 2013, 03:34 pm »

Quote from: Ericus Rex on 16 Jun 2013, 02:28 pm

I've only seen him in The Tudors and I thought he was quite weak in that role. What else would you recommend I check out?

In "The Man of Steel", it's the 1st time I saw this Superman. In the blockbuster, I didn't think he was that super. I personally don't think this particular role requires that much expressive skills, so I can't say how good, or how bad he was. He was OK I guess.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #14 on:** 18 Jun 2013, 06:33 am »

I just got back from MaS and overall I enjoyed it. To me the high points were Cavill and Crowe, while Costner also was a pleasant surprise. Cavill injected enough humanity and depth, I felt, to make the least interesting comic book character in D.C. actually watchable. True, the script was a complete mess, and it must have melted down a dozen server farms to make! I don't recall seeing any film so computerized outside of Pixar. I've also never seen a finale as bombastic; it's wall to wall mayhem to the deafening Sturm und Drang blare of the brass.

Again, I had low expectations since Supes is the most childish and adolescent of all the comics, and the one with the least depth. So I was pleasantly surprised. I was almost disappointed when the film got to Earth, though. There was a great film to me made about the last days of Kryton.

It's hard to say where they can take the franchise from here. It's hard to imagine they could out-bombast this one, although there are a few villains in the D.C. universe capable of giving Supes a run for his money. I'll probably watch the next installment so long as Cavill is in the role.

goldlizsts · « **Reply #15 on:** 18 Jun 2013, 12:00 pm »

Quote from: Rob Babcock on 18 Jun 2013, 06:33 am

I just got back from MaS and overall I enjoyed it. To me the high points were Cavill and Crowe, while Costner also was a pleasant surprise. Cavill injected enough humanity and depth, I felt, to make the least interesting comic book character in D.C. actually watchable. True, the script was a complete mess, and it must have melted down a dozen server farms to make!.................

Ah, I've seen several sci-fi flicks, with much computer trickery, and didn't realize that they could have been concocted from different "projects", then "spliced" together. That may be the problem with them, continuity and consistency.

Yeap, the finale was the main attraction to most people (why it's sold so well!?). It's just pretty much constant headless blasting (like for an hour?; I lost track in the dark! It wasn't that bad that I was "watching the watch".). Well.... it's a success at the box office, 'nuf for the last bragging rights, for posterity?

With some movies, I go for entertainment pretty much, with no "artsy" inclination. This was one of them. In the end there was 'nuf entertainment value I guess. But.... my theory is that with such money dumped into production, couldn't they have done a more decent job? Or, they're just milking the moviegoer/fan!?

rooze · « **Reply #16 on:** 18 Jun 2013, 02:46 pm »

If you can't woo them with a good storyline, wow them with special effects. Batman Begins managed well on both counts which is why it gets such rave reviews. It sounds like TMOS is just going after the effects crowd again.

The problem is, we've seen it all before, which is why I think these CGI movies are sliding downhill (albeit slowly) with many viewers. I'd sooner watch Lawrence of Arabia, again.

Cacophonix · « **Reply #17 on:** 18 Jun 2013, 04:49 pm »

I saw this last weekend, and thought that it was just ok. The initial story promised a bit more nuanced superhero, but as time went on, we were assaulted by the blasts and special effects and it started to become a drag. At one time i thought i was watching a Michael Bay movie. The storyline and editing is inconsistent.

Chazro · « **Reply #18 on:** 18 Jun 2013, 07:44 pm »

This thought actually occurred to me during the last 45 minutes when my mind began to wander (1 bldg. going down = wow, after the 5th or 10th...not so much). I believe that in most forms of art, and even sports, there comes a time when a maturity settles in and the saying; "less is more" manifests itself. When a musician realizes that even though 100 notes can fit, the song is best served, and more is conveyed by playing less. I swear to you that I was thinking all this during the flick! Perhaps we're experiencing a historic time in special effects where pretty much anything thought of can be put on a screen, but here's the point, just 'cause you can doesn't mean you should! I hope that sometime in the future, the filmmakers will realize that less IS more, that special effects are so much more special when they're not clubbing you over the head with them!

jarcher · « **Reply #19 on:** 18 Jun 2013, 07:55 pm »

Well said. Maybe it's a function of getting older, but I recall starting with one of the last Star Wars movies and continuing on to date, for example recently with Iron Man 3, that I actually almost find myself getting bored even during intense action / special effect scenes. Some of the banter of the first Iron Man was actually more satisfying for that reason. Not about to become a Downton Abbey junkie or anything, but there really does need to be more story / character mixed in to those super hero movies to maintain interest.