View Single Post
Old 01-27-2014, 08:21 AM   #87
bluearth
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 257
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman
That's the thing...we aren't talking about "What's closer to the truth". Its not factual to say its a generic superhero film, and it ain't factual to say its a piece of brilliant cinema. The closest thing to fact is that this movie has had a divisive response among its viewers.
Who or what decides its brilliant or generic? Blade Runner was panned by critics at its release but developed a cult following, like what Man of Steel is doing now. Now critics say Blade Runner is the greatest. Its very possible films can be misunderstood at their release, especially for something as different as Man of Steel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman
It sure as hell dosen't stand out compared to "The Avengers" or "Iron Man 1". At best, its on the same level as the rest of the Marvel films. That's not standing out. That's fitting in, and that's a problem not just with MOS, but with Superman's current status in general.

Your problem is that you have black/white thinking. You assume that if it isn't like TDK in tone, it must be like the Marvel Films. You probably assume that the latter is what people wanted from this film.
Man of Steel is on the same level as Thor, Captain America, the Iron Man sequels etc? I hope you dont seriously believe that. Reminds me of how Richard Roeper bashed Man of Steel but praised Iron Man 3 as one of the best comic book films ever. You lose a whole lot of cred saying stuff like that. Anyways I meant standing out in the sense its not loaded with comedy and a general lack of serious seen in recent Marvel films.

I did feel Iron Man 3 had a really solid tone to the film until the awful twist. Everything to me doesnt have to be Man of Steel realism/seriousness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman
Did Goyer himself not describe this as a first contact film? Did this film not include an invasion from alien people?

Once again, you show a narrow view of things. Next you're going to tell me that TDK isnt a crime film because mobsters aren't getting whacked within 20 minutes.
Zod's goal was either to have everybody on Earth kneel before him, or take it over for his people. By painting with a broad brush, couldn't Superman II be considered an alien invasion film? The only redundancy I felt with the hostile takeover was the destruction of urban property, something I had already seen in Star Trek Into Darkness earlier in the summer. It was a bad deja vu moment but 'alien invasion' never crossed my mind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman
1. The first Big Screen meeting of the two biggest Superheroes
2. The First big screen appearance of the biggest female Superhero.
3. Ben Affleck is playing Batman.

In a word...yes. No one's really talking about MOS.
Nobody knows the film will be made by the same team that made Man of Steel? If the Goyer/Snyder combo is so terribly flawed, why get excited at all for this film? Im not that excited for Star Wras Episode VII because I think JJ Abrams is a very medicore director without any personal style or flare. And didnt most people hate the Affleck casting? And Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman? What would the hype level be at if lets say fan favorites Karl Urban and Jamie Alexander got the roles?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman
Except Batman Begins was better received, both by the critics and among fans. The only area where MOS did better was BO, and Batman Begins didnt have the benefit of higher ticket prices, 3D ticket sales, and a massive push from WB marketing.
Coming after Batman and Robin, its not that hard to get received better. Man of Steel is in alot of Comic Book film fan's top 5 lists even #1. I think Batman Begins would struggle to make many top 5 lists. Many critics see anything Nolan directs as gold, as evident by all of his movies being in the IMDB top 250, some of them, such as The Prestige, being absurdly overrated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman
This dosen't make sense. There were four movies after STM and before MOS, as well as 3 Live Action TV Shows, and 2 Cartoons. There was plenty to compare STM to. Once again, MOS defenders try to conjure up straw man arguments to justify divisive response.

Or maybe for some people, Zack Snyder is a good visual director with flawed storytelling skills.
Yes, those bad Superman III and IV films just made people like the first film that much more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord View Post
And the opinion of a lot of people too, and there were various problems with the pacing. And empty special effects? You must be kidding, the effects were there for a reason, the entire film was strong due to good coordination between cinematic techniques and script, it wasn't gratuitous, that is strictly a word to describe Zack Snyder's style of directing. It seems like you went to watch Gravity expecting something else, something a bit more generic i believe.

Never watched Sunshine, so i can't talk about that, but Gravity was not an empty film, it was an experience first and foremost, its plot didn't involve gratuitous moments or used film techniques that were not fitting, unlike The Man of Steel, which used shaky cam in still and quiet scenes. The film was also strongly told, without weird moments, unlike in MoS, when Clark and Lois kiss in the middle of destroyed debree and human ashes flying around.

You're completelly missing the point, i enjoy the action the Transformers 3 a lot, but are you actually trying to put those film on the same level as Gravity? SERIOUSLY? Does Gravity have any of those dumb dumb moments or tasteless comedy? Critics have no problem with special effects, unless they're just gratuitous and are too exagerated and make the film harder to follow for those who are older and have less attention span for those type of scenes.

Critics don't just evaluate just the special effects, they evaluate the whole structure. In Gravity they are absolutelly necessary, another director could have exagerated it even more and made it more Hollywoodish than it already was, but Alfonso was not like that, he had control. The problem is that in many of the blockbusters the critics b*** about the action is exagerated and sometimes unecessary, once again, it's gratuitous.
Just wanted to let you know I read this. I dont really have a response which would further the topic at hand, so I'll let you have the last word.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism
deconstruct or do whatever kind of analysis of the film, but that feeling
alone makes it great, IMO, if a movie makes you feel genuinely like a kid again, then it's got to be great. I kind of feel sorry for people who didn't get the same thrill.
Before Man of Steel, the last time a film made me feel this way was The Lord of the Rings way back in 2001. Just seeing Superman fight inside a restaurant, or the way he walks in front of the soldiers after the Smallville fight...just so many wow or goosebump moments which render what little faults there are mute

bluearth is offline   Reply With Quote