Escape to the Movies: Man of Steel

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

I'm going to ignore all the ad hominems. Also, I'm well aware of the tale of the two cities references, and I appreciated that you caught the republic for me. So, regarding the Democratic Party in the United States, I am well aware that they are functionally no different from the Republican Party. I'm well acquainted with PRISM, etc. I assure you, I am not a shill for the Democrats. However, their espoused viewpoints are quite different from their actions. The Dems sell themselves as a party of egalitarianism and pacifism. They are the inheritors of the tradition of the Civil Rights Movements, blah, blah, blah. Obviously, what little truth there is, if any, is buried beneath mountains of lies, but, that's how they want to be perceived. The populist veneer of the Obama Administration, for example, masks one of the most corrupt administrations in recent memory. People are frequently not what they say they are. I would think that would be obvious.

And this leads us directly to Bane. Bane who has promised equality for the downtrodden of Gotham is actually just interested in killing them all. They're 'useful idiots.' He cannot be controlled by the corrupt businessmen who think they can use him for their own ends. He is the Terror that follows Revolution. He is Robespierre and Franco and Stalin. The point there is clearly that when you break down the walls that protect all of us, theoretically to overthrow your oppressors, you invite much worse destruction on yourself. (Sounding pretty conservative)

As for the cellphone radar point, yes, he breaks it once he's done, but, he still does it. It's still justifiable to invade the privacy of the citizens of gotham, because batman knows better. And then, because he's good, he breaks it, just like governments always say they will. If that's not a love letter to the Patriot Act, I don't know what it is.

Regardless, perhaps the problem is that you're throwing around political labels without defining them. If the Democrats aren't liberal, then what are they? What is liberal? And how is Nolan's viewpoints mapped to them? And kindly remember that personal insults are evidence of weak arguments.

"The superman movie for people who don't like superman."

I have quite a few instances where moviebobs perception of a movie turns out to be complete opposite of my own opinion. Yet, I almost obsessively watch all of his reviews, and carry with me his words to pre-emptively tarnish films I might thoroughly enjoy. However, in this case, the quoted line told me all I need to know. I'm well enough versed in comic book history and storytelling to know that: 1. Who superman is. 2. Why he's fundamentally boring, and 3. Which steps are needed to make an unstoppable force meet an interesting object.

If what moviebob says is true, and I get to watch an attempt (any attempt) to reach point 3 which includes enough flashing colors and world-ending fist punches, I will confindently place myself in the ticket line.

This is all.

ThunderCavalier:
Snip

I agree, but it seems like no character in fiction can be moody EVER, despite having more than adequate justification for it without people screaming "EMO!!!" these days.

OT: Personally, the only problem I had was with the origin story. For one thing, everybody and his mother knows Superman's origin story by now, especially everybody who would go to watch the movie, so redoing it is pretty pointless, and even if it was really necessary they spent WAY too much time on it, 10, 15 minutes tops would have been plenty. For another, I liked the parts with Krypton and such, but the constant flashbacks being scattered throughout the movie was a pain. I would have preferred it much better if they had despensed with the flashback format and just told Clark's childhood to adulthood straight from beginning to end, THEN got to the rest of the movie. It would have flowed better that way and it would have been much easier to get invested in each part of the movie. I also despised Pa Kent's downright retarded sacrifice, even if the reason for it hadn't been rendered moot halfway through the movie anyway.

I think there were a few things that I liked most, one being bringing Superman down to a more realistic level overall. I have always HATED the campy versions of Superman, (or camp in general really) the ones that are the embodiments of Truth! Justice! AND THE AMERICAN WAY!!! because of how painfully obnoxious and up the a** with messages it always is, as well as how unidentifiable it is, and I also hate the tendency to shoehorn humor in there just for the sake of having it, not because it adds any value, and doing a terrible job of executing the humor anyway. If avoiding that means Superman becomes darker and edgier from now on so be it.

Another is the fact that they kept Kryptonite out of the movie and only spent maybe 5 minutes total with Superman being depowered, and for the most part they didn't turn Clark into a complete moron just to make the plot work. All are plot devices most Superman stories just can't seem to avoid doing that have always been incredibly lazy and cheap and it's nice to see them dodging this, at least for this ONE movie.

Last, and I think the best, they had Superman go up against other Kryptonians. One thing that has always been a problem in Superman stories is they either, as mentioned above, weaken Supes so that enemies that wouldn't stand a chance against him in a straight fight on their best day can knock him around like a rag doll, or they make Superman so incredibly powerful that it's hard to imagine ANYONE being a challenge to him and then forgetting to match him up against a similarly powered opponent. In either case it's hard to get invested in the fights, since we all know that Superman is going to win by the end, so the former insults the audience's intelligence and the latter makes the fact that Supes is going to win blatantly obvious, and thus boring. With Zod and his cronies Superman goes up against enemies that are on his level, as all superhero (not just Superman) stories should, and made a titanic battle between evenly matched forces, which is MUCH better at creating actual tension.

HyperFreakNation:
Wait - this movie is cold, dark and gritty?

So I'm the only one who cried in that BEAUTIFUL flying scene? How about the warmth in Cavill's deliveries in "it's not an S", "thank you soldier", "you're not gonna find out where I hang my cape", or when he looks to the sun?

Zimmer's score didn't touch anyone? I'm still waiting to receive mine in the mail!
- I'm actually surprised Bob didn't mention the score in the review. Maybe it feels generic on everyone, because it reminds us of inception, dark knight-trilogy? I would imagine some would say, "well, that's the problem, Superman isn't Dark knight or inception". - honestly Superman is just one thing to me - an ideal of hope. If this OST doesn't capture that, then I don't know what does.

Yes, sorry if I come off fanboy-ish, but as I left the cinema I thought that this movie was anything BUT cold. Hell, the audience laughed at least 5 times throughout the movie.

In terms of "getting Superman" - that last scene where he's flying above the soldier while smirking off "you're not gonna find out where I hang my cape" - I could only think of how much that reminded me of the animated series. His figure, his delivery.

I guess I'm in the minority on this one. Btw, my little head can't even comprehend that anyone felt like there was "too much action" in it, as it was the best eye-candy I've ever seen.

omg, I remember that ending scene. Yes, all of your points are completely valid; the score is amazing and this movie knows where to put its jokes. Sure, it's not bright, campy, and upbeat all the time, but it's not supposed to be. This is a movie about Supes discovering himself, and he does it in a way a normal person would. He broods, yes, but you can see moments of pure joy at many points of the film.

And yeah. That scene with the drone was priceless. Whoever didn't find that funny is pretty stonefaced imo.

My biggest problem was the tone the characters set. It was not only grim, but sometimes contrary to whatever message or idea it seemed they were supposed to convey.

"Son, you are free to choose your own destiny. Now go save the world for daddy because that's why he sent you here."

I wasn't a fan of the Metropolis fight (I found the whole thing pretty nonsensical) but sweet mother of God the showdown in Smallville was the most exciting thing I've seen in a movie that I can remember.

One part that this movie those better than Superman II is Clark's reaction to the bully truck driver. Remember what Reeve did to the bully? He kicked his ass! not very noble or heroic. And what does Cavill do to the bully? Not gonna spoil it, but he certainly didn't give him a concussion.

But damn, people must be really jaded if they didn't get a sense of levity when Kal-El had a big smirk on his face the first time he learned to fly. Or if they didn't feel the warmness in him when he offered his hand to Lois while they were flying to meet Zod. Or if you didn't feel some sort of pity for him at the end when he tried to reach for Lois for comfort.

Really need to do some soul searching if those precious moments in life pass you by.

Just seen it. Really enjoyed it.

Would describe it as the film Dragonball Z deserves and should have been.

Yeah I wish he let loose once in a while too you know, dropping bad guys from a hight that won't kill them. But on the other hand breaks a few bones here and there. Or just good old fashioned rage to liven things up.

Are you f**king kidding me Bob? It's the first Superman film since that fiasco called Superman Returns. And you are not happy that it's better than the aforementioned film? Sometimes critics are just critics who are looking too hard for things.

I had my doubts of watching it but now I'm actually going. Thanks for creating a opposite motive to watch the film. You were dead wrong on that Sucker Punch flick that felt like actually being sucker punched (in a bad way). So now no force on heaven or earth will stop me from watching it.

bartholen:
So as a person who never really liked Superman, I'm going to like this more than he did? Sold. Seeing this.

Exactly.

I dislike the original Superman, and it's very obvious that Nolan and the rest really don't care for him. That's good. Non-fans are the people to turn to when you're rebooting a franchise, because they will fix the biggest issues with the characters and stories that fans will gloss over in favor of making stupid shoutouts and references.

Here's the thing Bob: It had a lot of smiles and cheers. You were just too busy focusing on the fact that it was made by people you don't like and aping off a film you didn't like, so you couldn't be bothered to see them. When he first flies, when he is being interviewed, when he meets with his mother, when he chats with the military, he's obviously having fun. Yes, there's a lot of talk of responsibility and duty, but what are you going to expect? He's fucking Superman. He's carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders because he needs to be a better example to us humans.

This film was great, and I'm proud to say it made Superman cool again.

Please Answer: Do you prefer College or Professional football?

Screw you Captcha, I'm a rugby sort of guy.

GestaltEsper:
I find it hilarious that people are busting Bob's balls when he said that it's a good movie.

Either we're angry that he said it rather backhandedly, or we're just finding excuses to bitch about him now. I think I'm in both camps, as much as I hate to admit it.

immortalfrieza:
snip

You really need to watch Superman VS The Elite, it sounds like it's exactly the Superman movie you want to see, no Superman Origin story, no ridiculous sacrifices, a good reason for the romance between Lois and Clark (they're married) no de-powering of superman, no Kryptonite, no campy superman (they even make a few quick jokes at the campy versions), and if you like what superman stands for, I guarantee at a point you won't be rooting for him. It's an interesting film.

SixShooter:
The movie was amazing. Ignore Bob on this, he's simply continuing his jihad against Nolan.

He is being willfully obtuse in summarizing the movie:

"Brooding teenager?" - No. Demigod that's aware of his powers, and is grappling with an identity crisis in superbly acted scenes.

"Chemistry"- I don't think this word means what Bob thinks it means. I hate to border on the personal...but I hope people are aware that people don't have to be in full romantic love to kiss right? Besides being too very attractive individuals, the enormity of the situation (LITERALLY SAVING THE WORLD) makes it a powerful moment.

"Derrrp I dun get the eugenics derrrp I hate when Nolan explains stuffz to meh" - This point is just repeatedly demonstrating that Nolan and crew play this game at a much higher level than Bob can be counted on to comprehend.

The entire eugenics angle was a reference to Plato's republic (Young Clark is even shown reading it). It famously argues for a deterministic, fascist, absolutist world as a form of utopia, where your role is predetermined to be either a warrior, a worker, or a philosopher (3, as reflected in the noble lie of 3 kinds of 'inherent worth', 3 parts of your mind, and the 3 levels of humanity raised in a hierarchy from your head, to your heart, to your appetites).

Plato's world, as did Krypton, offered Utopia in exchange for an explicit rejection of democracy. Nolan who never hides his left wing politics from his work, rejects this view, in has Kal-El "take a leap of faith" with humanity. Superman is clear that "you will never control me", and rejects hierarchy.

For reviewers like Bob, who have a far more authoritarian politics (his support for drone bombings and defense of the CIA), this message is a problem, so of course, it gets ignored in his review.

As was pointed out earlier, Plato's determinism also explained the storylines. Zod did what he did, because that's what he was supposed to do, and ultimately, the authoritarian scheme failed because Superman was a wrench in the machine, an unplanned contingency, an unknown unknown - the deathknell of all authoritarian power grabs.

It's a great combination of efficient story telling, and substance.

__________

The rest of Bob's criticisms are pure weaksauce. The film features plenty of well timed levity, plenty of the Superman universe (lexcorp). It's an amazing spectacle, and THE movie of the Summer.

THIS.

Bob, you're way off here. It's strange how you seem to just hate on some movies just to hate on them. IM3 was a disgusting pile of trash, but you gave it a pass. Man Of Steel is very well done, yet you pick it to death.

I just know I never want to see or even think about IM3 again, but I can't wait to see (and eventually own) Man Of Steel.

Varya:
When you mentioned "his two dads" I immediately thought of a Superman sitcom, wherin Clark Kent goes to journalism school, and his two gay dads Jonathan and Jor constantly try and control his daily life in various ways, embarrasing him infront of his crush LL (dependent on which season, it's a new LL, when Lex is introduced, Clark goes through a crisis, trying to figure out if he is gay, or his dads just have too much influence on him)

Anyhow, too bad about the movie, but I'll try and go see it anyway.

Nice.... I remember that show too.

I also find it amusing that he has two dads that are both expert archers in previous lives ;)

I saw it this week and yeah totally 10/10 and totally not superman. It's spawn. If I'm spoiling a bit sorry but superman basically kills everyone and is ultimately responsible for the deaths of millions while basically saving about 10 people throughout the movie. It's not bad, great actually, but it's your 21st century superman who I honestly do not enjoy. They've run out of things to do with superman so every issue is who is superman beating up this week? Overall I loved the movie and would see it several more times, but there's something that irks me lately about how people are becoming disaffected by violence and reveling in it of late.

As a side minor point I enjoyed that line when questioning the safety of America, "I grew up in Kansas, I'm as American as you're going to get"... played by an Englishman.

Well I enjoyed it, but then again I never really liked Superman comics and I have a Dragon Ball Z avatar, so there you go :P

immortalfrieza:

Last, and I think the best, they had Superman go up against other Kryptonians. One thing that has always been a problem in Superman stories is they either, as mentioned above, weaken Supes so that enemies that wouldn't stand a chance against him in a straight fight on their best day can knock him around like a rag doll, or they make Superman so incredibly powerful that it's hard to imagine ANYONE being a challenge to him and then forgetting to match him up against a similarly powered opponent. In either case it's hard to get invested in the fights, since we all know that Superman is going to win by the end, so the former insults the audience's intelligence and the latter makes the fact that Supes is going to win blatantly obvious, and thus boring. With Zod and his cronies Superman goes up against enemies that are on his level, as all superhero (not just Superman) stories should, and made a titanic battle between evenly matched forces, which is MUCH better at creating actual tension.

And herin lies the problem. What are they going to do with the next movie? We've laid the groundwork as to what it takes to fight Superman. How can you up the stakes?

Makabriel:

And herin lies the problem. What are they going to do with the next movie? We've laid the groundwork as to what it takes to fight Superman. How can you up the stakes?

You don't really NEED to up the stakes for it to work. As long as the next villain is just about as strong and threatening as Zod and his crew then it'll work. One doesn't need to ramp up the villain threat every single movie in order for it to be worthwhile. Besides, there are villains like Darkseid who are just as strong as Superman and have entire armies at their disposal they can use if it's really necessary.

After seeing this movie I have one thing to say. I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. I saw all the bad reviews before I went to see it having bought my ticket before the reviews came out and then, after seeing it, was completely confused as to why it had so many bad reviews. It has a good story with intelligently written characters that actually feel real. The MacGuffin, called a codex, isn't really that hard to understand, they breed their offspring to genetically fit a predetermined place in their society. That means that they have to have a blueprint for what to put into each of these offspring so that they will fit in their place. The MacGuffin is that blueprint. It really shouldn't be that much of a tax on your intellect to figure that out.

In many of the reviews, including this one, I found the common thread of "joylessness". It seems like all the critics were really hoping for Otis and the campy villains that shared that space. Zod is actually given a reason for what he does that makes sense as opposed to the "'cause I'm the badguy" reason that he had in the Donner flick. The last reboot was so bad because they were trying to mimic the Donner film and this one goes nowhere near that. This is a wholly unique take and it's the best one I've seen so far. All of these qualms seem more like "but Superman is supposed to be the happy one," whining rather that an honest look at the movie itself such as the Superman/ Batman inequality image you showed.

Superman is the last survivor of his entire species which is probably a little worse than just losing your parents. He has to struggle with the fact that his abilities could have serious negative effects on the human population. He gets bullied but can't fight back because he would probably kill the kid without even meaning to. Some would make him a god while others would make him the devil. Governments would know that he was completely untouchable and therefore a threat to their entire position. How does he control his own nature and avoid abusing the power that he has? These are questions treated in the movie and they aren't things that lend themselves to levity. Why should they not be asked just so you could stroke your nostalgia a little?

This isn't really for people that don't get or don't like Superman but for people who want a little more from a character than "I'm good because... Superman".

I agree with Hellfireboy, I don't get this review or the others that call the movie "joyless." I feel like half these reviews are just quoting and agreeing with each other without actually having seen the film. It's like they watched a bunch of trailers half-asleep, read some reviews, and pretended they saw the whole thing by writing a bunch of stuff that ultimately is vague and just echoes what other vague things other writers wrote.

There are definitely aspects of the film where things are to be taken seriously -- but really, what the movie takes seriously is the idea that this man, Kal/Clark, realizes he's unique on earth, with special gifts, and is trying to figure out who he is. The iconic, classic heroic journey to self-discovery might by highly mythologized in Superman, but it's a story worth telling over and over and the movie does it right. And it does need to be serious to an extent to be told well. The elements of Superman's backstory ARE serious--it begins with the death of an entire planet and its people. It's been like that since his inception. Are we supposed to make light of that? Are we supposed to not think about what kind of impact that might have on the story of that world's last son?

At the same time, I don't feel the movie overburdened itself with "grimness" -- to me it utterly avoided the "Grimdarkness" I was afraid it would fall prey to. Just because a movie makes appropriate moments serious does not mean it is wallowing in "grimness." There is some great dialogue, and as for humor, many lines throughout the film that made the entire (very large) audience I was in laugh out loud several times. This isn't the best example but off the top of my head, for example Lois's answering Superman's explanation of the "symbol of hope" on his shirt. "Well, here it's an S." Lots of cute moments too--many of them with Pete Ross, Clark's glasses showing up halfway through, and so on.

I also loved the kindness and compassion Clark had (and I loved how much it caused him pain to do what he had to do at the end in the final battle), and I loved that it was shown that he WORKED to develop that kindness within himself. I loved that they did not make him some same-old vengeance driven superhero all the cool kids like to watch. I loved the warmth in Ma and Pa, in Jor and Lara. I loved the teamwork and regard for each other--complete with teasing--that the Daily Planet had, who were far more than just a "requisite" b-plot, they were real characters, and I remember holding my breath as Perry and his team tried to save the trapped intern as much as when Superman was trying to shut down the doomsday device. Skip through the special effects moments, and much of the movie is very much about the bonds of family, and what constitutes a family (e.g., Superman's birth family, his adoptive family, Lois's "family" of co-workers at the Daily Planet; even Zod and Jor had an "estranged brother" feel to their conflict even though they were not related). They told this story well, and telling a story well about families requires a deep understanding of warmth and joy...

... which leads me to think that the movie's writers have a much better sense of these things than MovieBob and the other hater-reviewers ever will.

I don't really get what MovieBob wanted or expected out of the film in lieu of what was produced. Slapstick? Luthor in a toupee dating Parker Posey? Out of place antics by Richard Pryor? 1940s gags about women in the workplace at Lois's expense?

I wasn't going into Man of Steel expecting comedy or tomfoolery. I went in to see a retelling of the classic heroic epic. I got that and then some, with a story of a good heroic man with a lot of self-exploration and heart -- yeah, some of it occasionally got drowned out by the over-long fight sequences that dragged out toward the end, but you can't have a movie like this without gratuitous explosions these days. Even with the fairly minor issues the movie had, they must have done something right, because I left leaving the theater not only grinning, but feeling like I could fly.

No way, Nolan was attached to a comicbook movie that's ashamed of being a comicbook movie? Hmmm...

piscian:
If I'm spoiling a bit sorry but superman basically kills everyone and is ultimately responsible for the deaths of millions while basically saving about 10 people throughout the movie.

Um, this is why the movie is getting weird reviews. People like this guy see the movie but they don't WATCH IT OR PAY ANY ATTENTION TO WHAT IS GOING ON.

You say Superman killed millions?? You wanna back that up?? No, because you can't. Who was it that came here with the intention of genocide?? Zod. Who was it that made the call to put the World Engine on right top of Metropolis? Zod. Was it Superman?? No, it wasn't, SO HOW CAN YOU HOLD HIM RESPONSIBLE???

Superman actually SAVED BILLIONS by coming out on top in the end.

How can anyone say they watched the movie yet come to such ridiculous conclusions?? It's like saying Bambi is responsible for his mother's death.

So basically this movie is everything Bob claimed Amazing Spider-Man was going to be, but kinda wasn't. It's needlessly grim, it's Batman Begins for Superman, it's misguided in the changes, which include the entire motivation for the main character, but then overexposes on the minutia...

...also, it kinda bothers me that they copped out on the "no kryptonite" rule. That was lame.

If anything, it reminds me of Dark Knight Rises a lot. Half of it makes no sense, but it's not annoying while you're watching, it just gradually hits you with the amount of belated payload of dumb after the fact until you can't even remember the cool parts.

Noelveiga:
So basically this movie is everything Bob claimed Amazing Spider-Man was going to be, but kinda wasn't. It's needlessly grim, it's Batman Begins for Superman, it's misguided in the changes, which include the entire motivation for the main character, but then overexposes on the minutia...

...also, it kinda bothers me that they copped out on the "no kryptonite" rule. That was lame.

If anything, it reminds me of Dark Knight Rises a lot. Half of it makes no sense, but it's not annoying while you're watching, it just gradually hits you with the amount of belated payload of dumb after the fact until you can't even remember the cool parts.

Actually, that's starting to happen to me too. I came out sorta liking it with the few problems I had, but the more I start really thinking about it, the more I'm really starting to hate this movie...

The Dubya:

Actually, that's starting to happen to me too. I came out sorta liking it with the few problems I had, but the more I start really thinking about it, the more I'm really starting to hate this movie...

Yep. And it's exactly the same arc I had with Dark Knight Rises. Things seemed more nonsensical in retrospect there as well.

mrhumble1:

piscian:
If I'm spoiling a bit sorry but superman basically kills everyone and is ultimately responsible for the deaths of millions while basically saving about 10 people throughout the movie.

Um, this is why the movie is getting weird reviews. People like this guy see the movie but they don't WATCH IT OR PAY ANY ATTENTION TO WHAT IS GOING ON.

You say Superman killed millions?? You wanna back that up?? No, because you can't. Who was it that came here with the intention of genocide?? Zod. Who was it that made the call to put the World Engine on right top of Metropolis? Zod. Was it Superman?? No, it wasn't, SO HOW CAN YOU HOLD HIM RESPONSIBLE???

Superman actually SAVED BILLIONS by coming out on top in the end.

How can anyone say they watched the movie yet come to such ridiculous conclusions?? It's like saying Bambi is responsible for his mother's death.

No, it's not. Superman spent 90% of his (waaaay too long) boss fight with Zod slamming him through buildings in an incredibly densely populated city. We may not have seen any people in those buildings, but logically, they had to have been there or near there- it's not like New York Metropolis had any time to evacuate. To put this in perspective: 9/11 consisted of two hits to the tops of two buildings, and there were around 3,000 deaths. Superman slammed Zod through at least six buildings; that's 9,000 or more deaths on his shoulders. He didn't even seem to care about the people in the city or the irreplaceable architectural landmarks being destroyed (cough Grand Central cough).

Not only did he make no effort to draw Zod away from the city, he was actively destroying it himself. I actually found the part where he's trying to stop Zod's laser vision from hitting that family kind of laughable- he was fine with letting Zod bring the roof down and kill them and anyone else trapped in there, but killing them directly was horribly inhumane.

Hito-Chan:
snip

Supes wasn't f#$@ing around with Zod, he couldn't afford to, he had to throw everything he had to stop Zod. If Zod wasn't stopped, the entire planet was screwed, if a few people end up dead, so what? What difference does it make? Besides, most of the buildings around the World Engine were already evactuated, and quite a bit of the wreckage was actually Zod's fault anyway.

It is funny ho Bob manages to put the blame all on Nolan and Goyer and not Snyder. Even as a director often has the main control over a film. Even if it is a lame script, a good director can overcome it.

I caught the movie sunday.

and.... it was as good as a super man movie could be.
So yeah bob might have a point. It was a movie for people like us who only bought the comic to watch super man die or get smacked up my Lobo.

the unimportant characters remain unimportant in this movie.

go watch transformers by michael bay to see what happens when you give filler characters to much air time.

this doesn't happen here. Were they suppose to get more time? Do i just no get that?

Hay if liking this movie makes me a moron, fine with me ^^

immortalfrieza:

Hito-Chan:
snip

Supes wasn't f#$@ing around with Zod, he couldn't afford to, he had to throw everything he had to stop Zod. If Zod wasn't stopped, the entire planet was screwed, if a few people end up dead, so what? What difference does it make? Besides, most of the buildings around the World Engine were already evactuated, and quite a bit of the wreckage was actually Zod's fault anyway.

Except he doesn't keep the fight in that part of the city.

But even in the Smallville fight Superman tells everyone to stay inside their houses. Then when a tanker truck is thrown right at him Superman DODGES IT!!! It then slams into buildings and destroys them.

This is the part where I realized they completely missed Supermans character. Superman would have jumped right in front of that to save lives. I mean that's standard super hero stuff.

Then the end.. ZOD WINS!!. Zod says "You have to kill me" what does superman do????
He could have found a way to send him back to the negative zone or put him in some type of stasis or freezing.

Zod even talks about how Superman's compasion is his weakness yet he really isn't that compasionate. Why not have that play in the fights more?

Hito-Chan:

mrhumble1:

piscian:
If I'm spoiling a bit sorry but superman basically kills everyone and is ultimately responsible for the deaths of millions while basically saving about 10 people throughout the movie.

Um, this is why the movie is getting weird reviews. People like this guy see the movie but they don't WATCH IT OR PAY ANY ATTENTION TO WHAT IS GOING ON.

You say Superman killed millions?? You wanna back that up?? No, because you can't. Who was it that came here with the intention of genocide?? Zod. Who was it that made the call to put the World Engine on right top of Metropolis? Zod. Was it Superman?? No, it wasn't, SO HOW CAN YOU HOLD HIM RESPONSIBLE???

Superman actually SAVED BILLIONS by coming out on top in the end.

How can anyone say they watched the movie yet come to such ridiculous conclusions?? It's like saying Bambi is responsible for his mother's death.

No, it's not. Superman spent 90% of his (waaaay too long) boss fight with Zod slamming him through buildings in an incredibly densely populated city. We may not have seen any people in those buildings, but logically, they had to have been there or near there- it's not like New York Metropolis had any time to evacuate. To put this in perspective: 9/11 consisted of two hits to the tops of two buildings, and there were around 3,000 deaths. Superman slammed Zod through at least six buildings; that's 9,000 or more deaths on his shoulders. He didn't even seem to care about the people in the city or the irreplaceable architectural landmarks being destroyed (cough Grand Central cough).

Not only did he make no effort to draw Zod away from the city, he was actively destroying it himself. I actually found the part where he's trying to stop Zod's laser vision from hitting that family kind of laughable- he was fine with letting Zod bring the roof down and kill them and anyone else trapped in there, but killing them directly was horribly inhumane.

I can't believe I have to state the obvious but I guess some people just don't like to use their brains.

What do you suggest Superman could have done?? He was up against someone as strong and as destructive as he is and who wanted to murder as many humans as possible. Should Superman have said "Oh please Mr Evil Genocidal Murderer, please come over to this remote desert and fight me so nobody gets hurt!" Zod's goal at that point was not to kill Supes. What he wanted to do is kill humans and create as much destruction as possible. Do you really think he would have followed Superman somewhere?? Do you think Superman could have just grabbed him and taken him wherever he wanted??

Also, and this is the most important point of all, Superman was not responsible for ANY OF THIS. All of the responsibility is on Zod's shoulders because he is the one who initiated all of the conflict. Superman is only one guy and up against a lot of tech and many other super-beings. He got some help from the military, sure, but that was necessary because he was on the other side of the planet stopping the other World Engine. Did Superman choose this?? NO, he didn't. He did the best he could with what he had.

immortalfrieza:

Hito-Chan:
snip

Supes wasn't f#$@ing around with Zod, he couldn't afford to, he had to throw everything he had to stop Zod. If Zod wasn't stopped, the entire planet was screwed, if a few people end up dead, so what? What difference does it make? Besides, most of the buildings around the World Engine were already evactuated, and quite a bit of the wreckage was actually Zod's fault anyway.

Agreed.

mrhumble1:

I can't believe I have to state the obvious but I guess some people just don't like to use their brains.

What do you suggest Superman could have done?? He was up against someone as strong and as destructive as he is and who wanted to murder as many humans as possible. Should Superman have said "Oh please Mr Evil Genocidal Murderer, please come over to this remote desert and fight me so nobody gets hurt!" Zod's goal at that point was not to kill Supes. What he wanted to do is kill humans and create as much destruction as possible. Do you really think he would have followed Superman somewhere?? Do you think Superman could have just grabbed him and taken him wherever he wanted??

Also, and this is the most important point of all, Superman was not responsible for ANY OF THIS. All of the responsibility is on Zod's shoulders because he is the one who initiated all of the conflict. Superman is only one guy and up against a lot of tech and many other super-beings. He got some help from the military, sure, but that was necessary because he was on the other side of the planet stopping the other World Engine. Did Superman choose this?? NO, he didn't. He did the best he could with what he had.

.

Look at the Avengers fight at the end. There you have them actually making efforts to save people. Or even the old superman films. The one thing they got right was Superman constantly having to stop fighting to save people. Or risking himself to save people.

Superman could still have not killed Zod. There are ways of stoping homicidal super men with out killing them. SEE AVENGERS. Like Bob said what happens in the next superman when he faces someone who wants to wipe out all life on earth?
See my above post on the Smallville fight

Honestly I am still raging way to much right now to properly articulate why I ffffucking haaaate this movie. I'm not even a comic book fan I have read Red Son and Kindome Come that's it that's...okay I read those 90's Superman is dead stories in 07 too but I am no way a hard cor comic fan. I am however a hardcore Superman MOVIE fan and fuck.... That was Mass Effect with a Red CAPE!

That movie is just so cold and he's right there is no chemistry between Louis or Superman or anyone really!
And Dear god it is such a disjointed broken mess that everything just feels bum rushed.

*calms down*

That. Was. Not. A. Superman movie.
To this day my favourite Superman movie and secretly one of my favourite movies is still yeah I'm saying it Superman Returns. That was a hell of a beautiful movie. So full of heart...I'm gonna have to watch it now just to get rid of the horrible taste in my mouth that this movie has left.

EDIT: I still think I need to let my mind settle and just take some time to think over it. Maybe like the Avengers I'll actually like this movie some day.

Bob, I pretty much agree with you on this movie. This is an imperfect movie... and some people can't seem to deal with that.

It wasn't a bad movie, but it wasn't the best, either. Bob said that. Yet apparently SOME fans (not all) take offense when someone even says that much.

Seriously, I've been looking at comment sections for various reviewers and over and over I'm seeing the usual "What's wrong with critics? Don't they like movies?" (often in far more uglier tones). What irks me the most is the absolute juvenile approach they take. Man of Steel has become the Transformers II of this summer, defended by people who seem to think that all a movie needs is a roller-coaster-ride mentality.

So folks, here's the truth: Man of Steel has flaws. Whether or not you think the flaws overshadow the good is a matter of opinion, but people like Bob (and me) are going to point them out. Because they're there, and no amount of cheerleading is going to change that.

RTK1576:
Bob, I pretty much agree with you on this movie. This is an imperfect movie... and some people can't seem to deal with that.

It wasn't a bad movie, but it wasn't the best, either. Bob said that. Yet apparently SOME fans (not all) take offense when someone even says that much.

Seriously, I've been looking at comment sections for various reviewers and over and over I'm seeing the usual "What's wrong with critics? Don't they like movies?" (often in far more uglier tones). What irks me the most is the absolute juvenile approach they take. Man of Steel has become the Transformers II of this summer, defended by people who seem to think that all a movie needs is a roller-coaster-ride mentality.

So folks, here's the truth: Man of Steel has flaws. Whether or not you think the flaws overshadow the good is a matter of opinion, but people like Bob (and me) are going to point them out. Because they're there, and no amount of cheerleading is going to change that.

You know, the same thing happened when that poop stain, The Dark Knight Rises, came out. It was rightfully criticized for being a bloated mess of a movie, but not necessarily a bad one. The fanboys went on an apeshit jihad and accused anyone not liking their little treasure of having no taste and of not being able to "understand" what Nolan was trying to do; ironically, it was those same fanboys who eventually got the commenting system over at Rotten Toamatoes shut down because of their toxic reaction to less-than-stellar reviews of TDKR. I'm seeing a similar reaction from folks here.

To paraphrase the guys over at Red Letter Media: "The Man of Steel was made to sell its own trailers". I think that's a perfect summation of MoS. All spectacle, no soul.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here