The Movie Megathread: We're Gonna Need A Bigger Thread
Welcome to Squees Lair. We hope you enjoy your visit.
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Okay, so Man of Steel. I'm going to try to stay out of spoiler territory, but I'm going to have to for the second half of the post.
Positives: -It is very, very well directed. The movie is gorgeous, probably the best looking movie of the year so far. It's not exactly surprising for a Snyder film to look great, but it's still worth mentioning.
-The new suit looks great. The comic book suit is great for the comics, but it just looks goofy in real life. I'm glad they went with a redesign. The Kryptonian breathing suit/armor things also look pretty great, though I wish they would have explained what they symbol on General Zod's chest was since they did it for Superman, but it isn't a big deal.
-Everything before the final fight with General Zod is pretty solid. There are lots of interesting ideas introduced that could make a very interesting Superman. These ideas are dropped pretty quickly, but I think we'll probably see them followed up on in the sequel. And there will be a sequel, obviously. Warner Bros. can't afford to milk the Batman franchise for a few years, and Green Lantern bombed.* Their only real choices are Superman and Wonder Woman, and I suppose the Flash.
- They don't dick around the audience by dragging out Superman keeping his secret identity from Lois Lane. I liked it when they did this with Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy in the Amazing Spider-Man. Maybe we just need to do away with secret identities all together. They're often just a source of pointless, meandering "drama."
- The initial scene with the World Engine is stomach churningly reminiscent of 9/11. I mean that in a good way. While it felt sort of like Snyder was trying to top the destruction of Manhattan in Watchmen, it was still a very effective scene.
Now, despite what I'm about to say, I still think the movie is worth seeing, if only for the fact that there aren't any other comic book movies coming out until Thor: The Dark World. If you don't like comic book movies, this isn't going to win you over, if you do then you'll probably enjoy it.
Negatives:
- Lois Lane and Superman have no chemistry whatsoever. They seem more like good friends then love interests. If Amy Adams hadn't been given the name Lois Lane, and were she not the only major female character aside from Faora, I wouldn't have expected a romance to develop at all.
- This is a nitpick, but I only remember them actually calling him Superman in one scene, and Superman isn't even in the scene. Come on. If you can dress Christian Bale in bat shaped armor and call him Batman with a straight face, you can call Superman fucking Superman.
- They seem to rebuild the damage the World Engine caused, which should be years of simultaneous construction efforts, in a matter of weeks. No one in Metropolis seems to care that hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people died in horrific ways right in front of them.
Okay, now for the spoilers.
Spoiler: click to toggle
- They change the way Johnathon Kent dies in the worst way possible. He goes back to save his dog from the middle of a motherfucking tornado instead of letting his invincible, super strong son do it. He then tells his son not to save him from the tornado because "the world isn't ready." And Clark doesn't save him!
I don't care how edgy or angsty you want to make Superman, he doesn't just let people die. He's Superman! What's next, is Superman going to straight up kill somebody?
- Superman straight up kills somebody. General Zod to be exact. Before anyone says anything; yes, I know Superman kills Zod in Superman II, and I know he kills Zod in the comics. Also bullshit, but at least the comic treats the event with appropriate gravity. Here, Superman snaps Zod's neck, gets sad for a bit, and then the next scene everything's fine. He doesn't show any change in his character or behavior after being forced to do something so out of character. To make it even worse, the movie falls apart after the fight with Zod starts, going through somersaults to put Superman and Zod in this position. The fight stops making sense after a certain point, and the movie doesn't recover for the rest of it's run time.
*As an aside, please give us a movie with Kyle Rainer as the Green Lantern Warner Bros. Please. I just want to see my favorite superhero on the big screen. Come on.
The World Engine was probably sustaining the increased mass. They had just activated it for a short time, and the only places we see affected are Metropolis and part of India. It probably would have taken a few weeks, maybe even months, to terraform the planet completely. Plus the World Engine was reducing gravity as well as increasing it, so we can't say for certain how it works. The core of the planet is probably only slightly denser than it used to be, based on what we've seen, so the damage was mostly short-term.
Okay, so Man of Steel. I'm going to try to stay out of spoiler territory, but I'm going to have to for the second half of the post.
Positives: -It is very, very well directed. The movie is gorgeous, probably the best looking movie of the year so far. It's not exactly surprising for a Snyder film to look great, but it's still worth mentioning.
-The new suit looks great. The comic book suit is great for the comics, but it just looks goofy in real life. I'm glad they went with a redesign. The Kryptonian breathing suit/armor things also look pretty great, though I wish they would have explained what they symbol on General Zod's chest was since they did it for Superman, but it isn't a big deal.
-Everything before the final fight with General Zod is pretty solid. There are lots of interesting ideas introduced that could make a very interesting Superman. These ideas are dropped pretty quickly, but I think we'll probably see them followed up on in the sequel. And there will be a sequel, obviously. Warner Bros. can't afford to milk the Batman franchise for a few years, and Green Lantern bombed.* Their only real choices are Superman and Wonder Woman, and I suppose the Flash.
- They don't dick around the audience by dragging out Superman keeping his secret identity from Lois Lane. I liked it when they did this with Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy in the Amazing Spider-Man. Maybe we just need to do away with secret identities all together. They're often just a source of pointless, meandering "drama."
- The initial scene with the World Engine is stomach churningly reminiscent of 9/11. I mean that in a good way. While it felt sort of like Snyder was trying to top the destruction of Manhattan in Watchmen, it was still a very effective scene.
Now, despite what I'm about to say, I still think the movie is worth seeing, if only for the fact that there aren't any other comic book movies coming out until Thor: The Dark World. If you don't like comic book movies, this isn't going to win you over, if you do then you'll probably enjoy it.
Negatives:
- Lois Lane and Superman have no chemistry whatsoever. They seem more like good friends then love interests. If Amy Adams hadn't been given the name Lois Lane, and were she not the only major female character aside from Faora, I wouldn't have expected a romance to develop at all.
- This is a nitpick, but I only remember them actually calling him Superman in one scene, and Superman isn't even in the scene. Come on. If you can dress Christian Bale in bat shaped armor and call him Batman with a straight face, you can call Superman fucking Superman.
- They seem to rebuild the damage the World Engine caused, which should be years of simultaneous construction efforts, in a matter of weeks. No one in Metropolis seems to care that hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people died in horrific ways right in front of them.
Okay, now for the spoilers.
Spoiler: click to toggle
- They change the way Johnathon Kent dies in the worst way possible. He goes back to save his dog from the middle of a motherfucking tornado instead of letting his invincible, super strong son do it. He then tells his son not to save him from the tornado because "the world isn't ready." And Clark doesn't save him!
I don't care how edgy or angsty you want to make Superman, he doesn't just let people die. He's Superman! What's next, is Superman going to straight up kill somebody?
- Superman straight up kills somebody. General Zod to be exact. Before anyone says anything; yes, I know Superman kills Zod in Superman II, and I know he kills Zod in the comics. Also bullshit, but at least the comic treats the event with appropriate gravity. Here, Superman snaps Zod's neck, gets sad for a bit, and then the next scene everything's fine. He doesn't show any change in his character or behavior after being forced to do something so out of character. To make it even worse, the movie falls apart after the fight with Zod starts, going through somersaults to put Superman and Zod in this position. The fight stops making sense after a certain point, and the movie doesn't recover for the rest of it's run time.
*As an aside, please give us a movie with Kyle Rainer as the Green Lantern Warner Bros. Please. I just want to see my favorite superhero on the big screen. Come on.
I want to address some of your negatives here.
I do agree with the Lois/Superman thing, I feel like they could have held that off until the second film, as it did feel a little forced.
I didn't actually mind that hardly anyone called him Superman, it's not like he proclaimed that was his name to begin with. Some people thought up the nickname, and it will inevitably grow from there so everyone uses it. With Batman, literally the first thing Bale said as Batman was "I'm Batman". Superman never did that, neither did we need him too. Personally, it would have felt a bit cheesy if he had refered to himself as Superman.
I didn't actually realise that point, it was rebuilt awfully quickly. I expect the repercussions of Metropolises destruction will be highlighted in the next film, as there wasn't really time to explore that in-depth by the end.
Spoiler: click to toggle
I love the way John Kent died! (Sounds a bit malicious, but whatever) John didn't want Clark to have to reveal his powers at that moment, and sacrificed himself to postpone the moment when his powers would be revealed, so they would be revealed at the right time. Not just when it suited John. You could tell at the beginning of that scene that Clark wasn't the noble person he would become, so there's no telling how he would have coped had his powers been revealed. Plus, it gave Clark a real reason to make sure he never let anyone else die because of him, not just because it's the "Superman thing to do".
Yeah, Superman kills Zod. Because he didn't want innocent people to die because he failed to act. It show's his human traits, etc etc. But I wouldn't be surprised if the significance of that decision made itself more apparent in the second film. They had to wrap the film up somehow, and having it end on a sad, depressed Superman just because he killed a genocidal maniac would have been a much worse ending.
When commenting on the fight, do you mean the actual combat, or Zod's ability to adapt to Earths atmosphere?
The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent. -Carl Sagan
Posts:
4,361
Group:
Members
Member
#273
Joined:
Mar 7, 2012
I thought the movie was great for a simple superhero, action, save-the-day film. I would recommend that superhero fans see it, but I myself don't have an interest in seeing it again. I'll probably catch the sequel. Although the main thing that bothered me was that Zod had a really, really good setup, and the potential was kind of wasted. The character was a good idea, but as the movie progressed he just shaped into the typical destroy the world super villain.
I love the way John Kent died! (Sounds a bit malicious, but whatever) John didn't want Clark to have to reveal his powers at that moment, and sacrificed himself to postpone the moment when his powers would be revealed, so they would be revealed at the right time. Not just when it suited John. You could tell at the beginning of that scene that Clark wasn't the noble person he would become, so there's no telling how he would have coped had his powers been revealed. Plus, it gave Clark a real reason to make sure he never let anyone else die because of him, not just because it's the "Superman thing to do".
Yeah, Superman kills Zod. Because he didn't want innocent people to die because he failed to act. It show's his human traits, etc etc. But I wouldn't be surprised if the significance of that decision made itself more apparent in the second film. They had to wrap the film up somehow, and having it end on a sad, depressed Superman just because he killed a genocidal maniac would have been a much worse ending.
When commenting on the fight, do you mean the actual combat, or Zod's ability to adapt to Earths atmosphere?
He shouldn't be calling himself Superman, no, but that it's barely said at all in the movie is what bothers me. Like I said, it's just a nit-pick.
True. For instance, they didn't really explore the consequences of a major battle happening in New York City in The Avengers and Iron Man 3 was pretty much all about that, but the Marvel Cinematic Universe has the advantage of being able to release a few movies every year. Man of Steel Rises is at least a couple of years off, and that's the best case scenario. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they just brush off the consequences by doing a time skip.
Spoiler: click to toggle
I really have to disagree. I'm not the biggest Superman fan, I tend to prefer the Green Lanterns, Flashes, Nightwing, and Aquaman. I haven't read many Superman comics. So my main understanding of Johnathon Kent comes from the Smallville show. When he died there Clark learned the very important lesson that, being an incredibly powerful superhuman he can save anyone (except people who have heart attacks), but he can't save everyone.
Here it seems like a very senseless sacrifice, and it still strikes me as selfish that he'd rather leave his wife a widow and his son fatherless just because he doesn't trust people. And still; why didn't he just let Clark get the god damned dog? Worst case scenario is that Clark miraculously survives the tornado, which is hardly as implausible as pushing a school bus out of a lake. There's no reason not to let Clark do it, and every reason not to do it himself. Even if it isn't bad, I still think it's a very inferior way of handling his death.
I was talking about the actual events of the fight scene. The smash each other through sky-scrapers at mach 12, only to end up in some random lobby. Then instead of making a bee line for the door, the bystanders huddle in a corner, all but screaming "Hit me with your laser vision Zod!" Then Zod tries to fry them with his laser vision, but instead of simply twitching his eyes to kill them, he struggles to twist his entire face towards them while in a choke-hold. It only existed to force Superman to kill, and it still ignores the fact that Superman can fly. The entire sequence just screams "contrived" to me.
These are really the only sticking points for me. Otherwise the movie is very well done. Most of the criticisms I've seen were either pointless nitpicks or "It's like Batman" complaints that pop up every time a super hero movie tries to take itself any more seriously than the Avengers, as if being like Batman Begins is in any way a bad thing. In the worst review I've seen, the reviewer seems to be under the impression that Superman II was the first time Zod appeared. It's like that Wall Street Journal review of Borderlands 2 in how badly it misses both basic facts as well as what consumers are actually interested in. But I digress; the fact that Superman Returns has a higher Rotten Tomatoes score than this movie says a lot more than I ever could about how competently critics review Superman movies.
It's not exactly a feature film, but I was watching a video recently that reminded me of a short film I saw a few years ago. It's called Suckerpunch. It stars the guys from BriTANick. It's pretty funny, and definitely worth a watch if you haven't seen it yet.
The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent. -Carl Sagan
Posts:
4,361
Group:
Members
Member
#273
Joined:
Mar 7, 2012
Himmelgeher
Jun 17 2013, 04:37 AM
Spoiler: click to toggle
I really have to disagree. I'm not the biggest Superman fan, I tend to prefer the Green Lanterns, Flashes, Nightwing, and Aquaman. I haven't read many Superman comics. So my main understanding of Johnathon Kent comes from the Smallville show. When he died there Clark learned the very important lesson that, being an incredibly powerful superhuman he can save anyone (except people who have heart attacks), but he can't save everyone.
Here it seems like a very senseless sacrifice, and it still strikes me as selfish that he'd rather leave his wife a widow and his son fatherless just because he doesn't trust people. And still; why didn't he just let Clark get the god damned dog? Worst case scenario is that Clark miraculously survives the tornado, which is hardly as implausible as pushing a school bus out of a lake. There's no reason not to let Clark do it, and every reason not to do it himself. Even if it isn't bad, I still think it's a very inferior way of handling his death.
I was talking about the actual events of the fight scene. The smash each other through sky-scrapers at mach 12, only to end up in some random lobby. Then instead of making a bee line for the door, the bystanders huddle in a corner, all but screaming "Hit me with your laser vision Zod!" Then Zod tries to fry them with his laser vision, but instead of simply twitching his eyes to kill them, he struggles to twist his entire face towards them while in a choke-hold. It only existed to force Superman to kill, and it still ignores the fact that Superman can fly. The entire sequence just screams "contrived" to me.
Can't agree with this more. And I despise Rotten Tomatoes. Terrible reviews.
Aside from my previous comment, the only real thing I didn't like was how his childhood was told with flashbacks. I thought there would be more of him growing up at the beginning, not just "Hey I'm all grown up and I have superpowers."
I love the way John Kent died! (Sounds a bit malicious, but whatever) John didn't want Clark to have to reveal his powers at that moment, and sacrificed himself to postpone the moment when his powers would be revealed, so they would be revealed at the right time. Not just when it suited John. You could tell at the beginning of that scene that Clark wasn't the noble person he would become, so there's no telling how he would have coped had his powers been revealed. Plus, it gave Clark a real reason to make sure he never let anyone else die because of him, not just because it's the "Superman thing to do".
Yeah, Superman kills Zod. Because he didn't want innocent people to die because he failed to act. It show's his human traits, etc etc. But I wouldn't be surprised if the significance of that decision made itself more apparent in the second film. They had to wrap the film up somehow, and having it end on a sad, depressed Superman just because he killed a genocidal maniac would have been a much worse ending.
When commenting on the fight, do you mean the actual combat, or Zod's ability to adapt to Earths atmosphere?
He shouldn't be calling himself Superman, no, but that it's barely said at all in the movie is what bothers me. Like I said, it's just a nit-pick.
True. For instance, they didn't really explore the consequences of a major battle happening in New York City in The Avengers and Iron Man 3 was pretty much all about that, but the Marvel Cinematic Universe has the advantage of being able to release a few movies every year. Man of Steel Rises is at least a couple of years off, and that's the best case scenario. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they just brush off the consequences by doing a time skip.
Spoiler: click to toggle
I really have to disagree. I'm not the biggest Superman fan, I tend to prefer the Green Lanterns, Flashes, Nightwing, and Aquaman. I haven't read many Superman comics. So my main understanding of Johnathon Kent comes from the Smallville show. When he died there Clark learned the very important lesson that, being an incredibly powerful superhuman he can save anyone (except people who have heart attacks), but he can't save everyone.
Here it seems like a very senseless sacrifice, and it still strikes me as selfish that he'd rather leave his wife a widow and his son fatherless just because he doesn't trust people. And still; why didn't he just let Clark get the god damned dog? Worst case scenario is that Clark miraculously survives the tornado, which is hardly as implausible as pushing a school bus out of a lake. There's no reason not to let Clark do it, and every reason not to do it himself. Even if it isn't bad, I still think it's a very inferior way of handling his death.
I was talking about the actual events of the fight scene. The smash each other through sky-scrapers at mach 12, only to end up in some random lobby. Then instead of making a bee line for the door, the bystanders huddle in a corner, all but screaming "Hit me with your laser vision Zod!" Then Zod tries to fry them with his laser vision, but instead of simply twitching his eyes to kill them, he struggles to twist his entire face towards them while in a choke-hold. It only existed to force Superman to kill, and it still ignores the fact that Superman can fly. The entire sequence just screams "contrived" to me.
These are really the only sticking points for me. Otherwise the movie is very well done. Most of the criticisms I've seen were either pointless nitpicks or "It's like Batman" complaints that pop up every time a super hero movie tries to take itself any more seriously than the Avengers, as if being like Batman Begins is in any way a bad thing. In the worst review I've seen, the reviewer seems to be under the impression that Superman II was the first time Zod appeared. It's like that Wall Street Journal review of Borderlands 2 in how badly it misses both basic facts as well as what consumers are actually interested in. But I digress; the fact that Superman Returns has a higher Rotten Tomatoes score than this movie says a lot more than I ever could about how competently critics review Superman movies.
It's not exactly a feature film, but I was watching a video recently that reminded me of a short film I saw a few years ago. It's called Suckerpunch. It stars the guys from BriTANick. It's pretty funny, and definitely worth a watch if you haven't seen it yet.
Yeah, it is kind of speculation as to what will happen with the whole "Metropolis was turned inside out" thing. It's difficult to really have a discussion on it without knowing how it will affect the second film.
Spoiler: click to toggle
The guy sacrificed his life to protect his "son". Had his son been discovered, there's every possibility that the human race would have turned on him. As it happens, they were only willing to trust him after he beat down Zod and his henchmen in Smallville. Had there been no alien invasion that needed Superman, who knows what humanity would have done? John Kent had to sacrifice himself, and it gave Clark the motivation to never just stand by and let people die again (See Oil Plant Scene for example )
The actual fighting was pretty cool, actually very cool, but I can see your points about everything that happened in the museum thing. Though I still felt that forcing Superman to kill was a good call, no matter how contrived the scene had to be. And in all fairness, I could imagine someone being able to make a much more contrived scene than the one in the film
I originally was quite irritated at the negative reviews. I guess though you're fighting an uphill struggle when you've got so much CGI in a film (In my experience, loads of film critics feel themselves too good for CGI), and saying that I still have faith for the next few MoS films. After all, Batman Begins wasn't given flawless ratings across the board, but the Dark Knight came along, and we all know what happened frmo there