The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > Superman > Man of Steel

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-26-2014, 05:00 PM   #76
MrsKent26
Whatever.
 
MrsKent26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Fortress of Solitude
Posts: 10,397
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Pleasury View Post
Oh, I know. This man comes, flies and saves everyone... and they clap and cheer??? Unrealistic!!!

People should have gone "Look! He's trying to kidnap Lois Lane as she falls from the helicopter! And now he's stealing the helicopter!" and "Booo! You saved us all from the falling plane, but you went to Krypton, so we don't care!" Alas. Where's the realism these days. Spider-man-ize Superman at once!


Right. That's what I want. Maybe I just didn't want everyone to be like cheesy cartoon characters?

Eh, whatever. It's hardly worth it with people that go nuts with hyperbole like this. Seriously, learn to handle differing opinions. You could have asked me why I think that way or you know, something reasonable.

MrsKent26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2014, 05:10 PM   #77
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,846
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsKent26 View Post


Right. That's what I want. Maybe I just didn't want everyone to be like cheesy cartoon characters?

Eh, whatever. It's hardly worth it with people that go nuts with hyperbole like this. Seriously, learn to handle differing opinions. You could have asked me why I think that way or you know, something reasonable.
Or you could have explained it. How exactly people felt artificial? Just because they cheered him after he saved their very lives?

Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2014, 06:16 PM   #78
The Batman
The Dark Knight
 
The Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 20,189
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
First, I'm not trying to undermine SMTM, it's awesome today, and was awesome back in 1978.
You could've fooled me. "STM only stands out because it was the only Superhero movie" sounds like undermining to me. Funny thing is, films like "The Dark Knight" and "The Avengers" stand out even with the market saturated with comic book films.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
Second, People are entitled to their opinions, that's the whole point of this thread. If someone likes MOS better than STM and points out bits of STM that they felt were inferior, which explains why they prefer MOS, quite frankly they're entitled to do that, and I started this thread to hear different points of view.
I know what the point of this thread was. My remark was a general comment about the behavior of some MOS defenders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
Strangely, nobody seems to berate those who say that they prefer STM and point out MOS' weaknesses to explain that opinion.
That's because most people who prefer STM don't conjure up excuses for why people like MOS. They don't try to write off people who don't prefer STM with some straw man argument. If you like MOS better, fine. But don't come in here with some argument like "People like STM because they prefer simple movies and nostalgia blah blah blah".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post

Third, in respect of you missing something, I suspect you have.
This is what you said:



Again, Superman the movie stands out, because.....there were no other superhero films being made in the 1970's. As far as campy action films, there were plenty.
And...that is a weak argument, often used to justify why MOS didn't get as good a reaction as STM. To act like any old superhero film could've came out in 1978 and "Stand out" simply undermines the hard work Donner and his cast/crew did to create a credible film.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
Again, you completely undermine your own point there by stating that MOS has a whole bunch of competition, which do similar things.
STM is certainly an exceptional film, precisely because there were no other superhero films to compare it to, and it was the first appearance of Superman on screen.
My point is not undermined, because you make the assumption that MOS could not have stood out even with a bunch of other comic book films being released. MOS' problem was not that it had a whole bunch of competition. MOS' problem, IMO is that it did not stand out from the competition. The Dark Knight Trilogy stood out, as has "The Avengers".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
Also, the "Dark Knight" analogy is a flawed one as well, Dark Knight stood out because it was a brilliantly made and acted film, but it too reflected on current trends in superhero cinema. It didn't stand out because it was doing something radically different (in fact it covered well-used ground in terms of story) and the more realistic tone of superhero films had been steadily increasing, even since the first Spider Man and Xmen films.
Um, no. First off, the Raimi Spider Man films were very light hearted in tone. Second, The Dark Knight was one of the first comic book films to transcend the conventions of the genre. Its basically a crime movie, not the typical sci fi action adventure flick that most comic book movies are. Not only that, it had a social commentary to it that most comic book movies don't, at least not at TDK's level. The only ones that come close are Singer's X-Movies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
So saying MOS isn't exceptional because its doing things other superhero films are doing, isn't really that valid an argument.
And Saying STM was only exceptional because nothing like it was out at the time is not a valid argument at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
Saying its not exceptional due to weaknesses in story, acting or execution, now that would be a fair point.
To quote someone else, "If you have that much of a problem with people's opinions, you shouldn't trouble yourself by reading this thread."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
and doesn't bear a lot of resemblance to those depicted in Avengers or Transformers.
If you say so.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
So, your argument that MOS doesn't stand out the way STM did, and using a comparison with other superhero films, is a fundamentally flawed argument.
Not really. You just don't agree with it. You say this, and then you go on...to make comparisons with other superhero films.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
Sorry, that was unnecessary sarcasm.
Something we can agree on!

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafizbat View Post
Welcome to the Batman v Superman forums, where people will take a perfectly reasonable comment you make and twist it into something completely different to make themselves feel better.

Last edited by The Batman; 01-26-2014 at 06:23 PM.
The Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2014, 08:05 PM   #79
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,017
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
You could've fooled me. "STM only stands out because it was the only Superhero movie" sounds like undermining to me. Funny thing is, films like "The Dark Knight" and "The Avengers" stand out even with the market saturated with comic book films.
If you'd bothered to actually read my reply you wouldn't need to consider yourself fooled.


Quote:
I know what the point of this thread was. My remark was a general comment about the behavior of some MOS defenders.
Clearly you don't. The point was to share your own opinions about which you prefer and why, not to attack those of others. Believe it or not it is possible to hold an opinion of your own while respect those of other people.

Quote:
That's because most people who prefer STM don't conjure up excuses for why people like MOS. They don't try to write off people who don't prefer STM with some straw man argument. If you like MOS better, fine. But don't come in here with some argument like "People like STM because they prefer simple movies and nostalgia blah blah blah".
First, that's not an argument that I've made. I seriously doubt you actually read my reply - which is disappointing, as it makes me less likely to take what you have to say seriously.

Generally I have a pretty open mind, so if you're right about something, I'll admit it. But, if you just write back without reading my response, well....

Second, if someone opined that people prefer STM is better because people prefer simple movies, what's wrong with that -if it's an opinion ? The point of the thread wasn't to convince everyone else that you're right, just to share what you think.

Quote:
And...that is a weak argument, often used to justify why MOS didn't get as good a reaction as STM. To act like any old superhero film could've came out in 1978 and "Stand out" simply undermines the hard work Donner and his cast/crew did to create a credible film.
You really didn't read what I wrote did you ? Here it is again, just for you.

Quote:
Back to STM for a moment, and what made it exceptional.
Now I would go one further to say it was exceptional because it was a great movie, compared to other movies made at that time as a whole, in terms of its production values, its acting and because it jump started a new genre of cinema- the Super-hero film (because, again the superhero film genre didn't really exist. Okay, there was the Batman film from the late 1960's and the Saturday serials but these don't begin to compare to STM in terms of scope - in fact STM is much more serious and realistic than the 60's Batman movie, interesting how that trend continued ).

Also, there was an enthralling performance from Christopher Reeve (RIP) as the Man of Steel, so much so that no matter how rubbish the films became (Quest for Peace !) he was still great, and no one could detract from his portrayal of Krypton's last son.

STM has gone one to become, IMO, a timeless classic (even though I don't like the end) and a critical consensus backs that up. Will MOS achieve that ? Probably not, although for me personally, it's gone into my list of favourites.
I actually do believe that STM was an exceptional film, for lots of reasons, but one of them has to be that it was the first credible outing of a superhero on the big screen.

Quote:
MOS' problem was not that it had a whole bunch of competition. MOS' problem, IMO is that it did not stand out from the competition. The Dark Knight Trilogy stood out, as has "The Avengers".
[quote]

I'm the first person to admit that MOS did not achieve the same success of Dark Knight or Avengers, which is disappointing. In fact I think I've already said that in this thread. As for Dark Knight, I can see why, Avengers not so much - but that's just my personal reaction to the film - IMO Iron Man was a much, much better movie, it managed to balance action, excitement and real character development.

Anyway, while I loved MOS, I still see it as a missed opportunity.

As far as the alien invasion in Avengers went, it seemed pretty different to me, what with hundreds of alien soldiers flying around the city, and of course the huge mechanical flying whale things, as opposed to one big spaceship pulverizing the city. If anything, MOS was more reminiscent of Independence Day. So, yes, I do say the two were qualitatively different.
Again, a classic Superman story-line, and given that he's an alien himself,
I find it hard to accept a criticism of MOS based on the fact it contained an alien invasion.
There are plenty of other things to criticise, but hey if it bugged you that much, fair enough.

Quote:
To quote someone else, "If you have that much of a problem with people's opinions, you shouldn't trouble yourself by reading this thread."
I don't have a problem with reading other people's opinions, even yours.
So why don't you stop slagging off other people and their opinions, and just state which film you preferred and why.

Batmannerism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2014, 10:31 PM   #80
The Batman
The Dark Knight
 
The Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 20,189
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
I seriously doubt you actually read my reply - which is disappointing, as it makes me less likely to take what you have to say seriously.

Honestly, I couldn't care less whether or not you take what I say seriously. I do not live for the approval of strangers on the internet.

If it seems like I'm not reading your reply, it probably has something to do with the seeming condensation of your posts and the fact they've become a chore for me to read.

I mean, its ok for you to dissect what other people say...but everyone else is limited to posting their opinion?

Ok.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafizbat View Post
Welcome to the Batman v Superman forums, where people will take a perfectly reasonable comment you make and twist it into something completely different to make themselves feel better.

Last edited by The Batman; 01-26-2014 at 10:44 PM.
The Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 02:36 AM   #81
sf2
Side-Kick
 
sf2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,991
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Why there are so much troubles in the world?
people look for argument and fight

__________________
“Everything you can imagine is real.”
― Pablo Picasso
sf2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 02:57 AM   #82
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,017
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
Honestly, I couldn't care less whether or not you take what I say seriously. I do not live for the approval of strangers on the internet.
Comments like that kind of guarantee that I can't take you seriously, because if you really didn't care what us strangers think, you wouldn't
bother posting and you certainly wouldn't reply to our posts.


Quote:
If it seems like I'm not reading your reply, it probably has something to do with the seeming condensation of your posts and the fact they've become a chore for me to read.
Regardless, you still keep replying. If it's such a chore, perhaps you should find something better to do with your time.

At least I've done you the courtesy of reading your posts before
replying to them. If you don't read something and then reply to it, that
alone undermines the credibility of what you say. That's disappointing, as you actually had a some valid points a couple of posts back, which would have been worth talking about.

Quote:
I mean, its ok for you to dissect what other people say...but everyone else is limited to posting their opinion?
First, I respect everyone's opinion, even yours. In fact there are a bunch of times I actually agreed with you.

And second that's a bit rich coming from you. Have you read your own posts ? Go back and check out 1:16pm today, when it comes to dissecting what people say you take the cake (and that's not including your dissection with Blue Earth).

Anyway, I get the feeling our conversation has gone far off the original topic of the thread. But, thanks for sharing your opinions. Again, believe it or not I actually agreed with some of your points on STM and its lasting impact. Best of luck to you.


Batmannerism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 03:00 AM   #83
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,017
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sf2 View Post
Why there are so much troubles in the world?
people look for argument and fight
Good point. Time for a laugh.

Watch this, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPZW8_ID-l4

Enjoy !


Batmannerism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 03:48 AM   #84
KRYPTON INC.
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Brooklyn, NYC
Posts: 12,349
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

I love both, but even if I didn't, even if I felt the need to COMPARE the film I did like to the other, I don't think it would rise to the level of berating one over the other (and let's be honest, by implication, when we do that we are berating the opinions, tastes and intelligence of the people who like the things we ourselves do not).

Grab a Coke and a Smile people and chill is what I say.

__________________
My father. 1946-2014

He truly proved that every person has the potential to be a force for good in this life. So anyone that reads this, do me a favor... Call your parents.
KRYPTON INC. is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 05:13 AM   #85
sf2
Side-Kick
 
sf2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,991
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Btw, back to the title and question of the thread? Was the world ready?
We still have no idea after watching MOS. I think that is why or part of the reasons they hate it. It didn't give an answer to its main theme. Not even a glimpse.

__________________
“Everything you can imagine is real.”
― Pablo Picasso
sf2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 05:15 AM   #86
Lord
All Mighty
 
Lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 12,913
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluearth View Post
There was no story in Gravity. When I left the theater it came upon me all I had watched for the last 90 minutes was empty special effects which led to a predictable ending. Man of Steel failed at telling a taut hero origin story? Well, thats your opinion.
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.

Quote:
Again, there is no story in Gravity. Its a minimalist survival film, like All is Lost. Because there is no story the film had no weight to me. Sunshine (2007) was something of a survival movie in space, but its story is what gave the film weight and made every action and outcome worth something. If Sandra Bullock's character perished, what would change, what would be different, who would care? She was disposable. Thats why a story is needed. Theres a weak attempt involving
Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:
her child
to get you to care about whether or not she makes it, but it falls flat.
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.

Quote:
Are we really putting all the worth of a film on the shoulder of its special effects because they felt new and different? Funny how critics are so quick to dismiss special effects in super hero or sci-fi films as mindless while refusing to credit them for improving the film, yet they praise Gravity in large part due to its special effects. Maybe they're relieved they finally got a film with special effects they could publicly praise without feeling guilty because it doesnt feature super heroes or Transformers?
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.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by childeroland View Post
Plenty of male-led action films fail, yet the actors' gender is not blamed. Why should it be different for women? Especially since far more male-led action films are made than female-led action films?
Lord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 07:21 AM   #87
bluearth
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 253
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
Old 01-27-2014, 08:09 AM   #88
The Batman
The Dark Knight
 
The Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 20,189
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluearth View Post
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 bluearth View Post
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.
I love how people like Batmannerism criticize me for "Slagging off fan opinions", but people get to tell me "I hope you don't seriously believe that". I don't lose any cred saying my opinion, especially if you're the one deciding what's credible to say. You, like me, are an internet fanboy giving an opinion at the end of the day. You're no specialist and neither am I.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bluearth View Post
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?
Maybe, but not to the extent MOS was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluearth View Post
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? I
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.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bluearth View Post
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.

....Ok, I'm done.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafizbat View Post
Welcome to the Batman v Superman forums, where people will take a perfectly reasonable comment you make and twist it into something completely different to make themselves feel better.
The Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 09:03 AM   #89
Lord
All Mighty
 
Lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 12,913
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluearth View Post
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.
The original cut of Blade Runner was objectivelly boring and weak due to studio interference, it was only when the Director started to be able to show his original vision that critics started to change their minds, a similar thing happened with Kingdom of Heaven, where the original version was panned, while the director's cut is very praised.

The Man of Steel is medíocre all around, the style of conveying emotion Snyder uses is what i like to call bulls***g, and he's not the only one to use it, Michael Bay does the same and Christopher Nolan can sometimes fall into this territory. Now what is this bulls***g i'm talking about? It's the use of a strong musical theme in the background, while the plot in the form of a character tells you how he is feeling, or the director spoon feeds you this in another way, like flashback and etc.

I see this style used a lot in anime and filmmakers like Zack Snyder have started to incorporate it, the problem is that this way the film is telling you how you should be feeling, instead of letting the plot develop the characters properly and therefore making the connection actually matter. This technique can easily make people confuse an actually well development and characters with shallow emotion, making films like Armageddon be sometimes known for having people cry, even though the plot and characters weren't exactly well constructed.

Needless to say, bulls****g emotion make amazing trailer shots or great scenes to see alone, but when viewed in the whole structure, they fall apart.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by childeroland View Post
Plenty of male-led action films fail, yet the actors' gender is not blamed. Why should it be different for women? Especially since far more male-led action films are made than female-led action films?

Last edited by Lord; 01-27-2014 at 09:07 AM.
Lord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 02:59 PM   #90
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,017
Thumbs up Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KRYPTON INC. View Post
I love both, but even if I didn't, even if I felt the need to COMPARE the film I did like to the other, I don't think it would rise to the level of berating one over the other (and let's be honest, by implication, when we do that we are berating the opinions, tastes and intelligence of the people who like the things we ourselves do not).

Grab a Coke and a Smile people and chill is what I say.
That's probably the most sensible thing anyone's said in a while.
Good call.


Batmannerism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 06:03 PM   #91
Skrilla31
Side-Kick
 
Skrilla31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 807
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluearth View Post
Man of Steel is on the same level as Thor, Captain America, the Iron Man sequels etc? I hope you dont seriously believe that.
Personally I thought it was much worse. In fact the moment MOS ended I was quite confident it was the worst movie I had seen in the theater all year. And mind you this was only about a week or so after baring witness to such timeless classics as After Earth and The Purge. Granted this is just one man's opinion and you don't necessarily have to agree with me, but yes... I do seriously believe that.

Now if we are to place it within the pantheon of superhero flicks? That's tough for a variety of reasons. The bad movies usually tend to be forgotten altogether. People still talk about Superman and Superman II but no one really ever talks about Superman III and Superman IV. I mean yea they happened, and people kinda remember them... but they've definitely exited the public consciousness. For god sakes Brian Singer treated them like they didn't even exist when he made Superman Returns.

The same thing will inevitably happen to Iron Man 2 and Iron Man 3. We'll always remember the first Iron Man but those two don't stand a chance in hell. They're like the Robocop sequels.

Thor wasn't any good either but it was just good enough to keep people along for the ride until Avengers which was the real prize. Plus it's the movie that first introduced Thor to the world, so no matter how bad it is that's gonna count for something. No one knew where Thor came from until they saw that movie and now he's closer to a household name than he ever was. The same goes for Captain America.

Where does Man Of Steel lie? How will it be remembered? Time will tell I think. I know that The Dark Knight definitely did wonders for the reputation of Batman Begins, so who knows what lies in store and what kind of retroactive effect the Man Of Steel sequel is going to have on it's predecessor. It may have some, it may not have any. But right now I'd wager to think that Man Of Steel will be largely forgotten. Call me crazy and call me delusional if it makes you feel better, but I just don't believe this movie will go down as a classic Superman movie in the years to come. It may roll off the tip of people's tongues for awhile, especially considering it will still be sort of fresh in everyone's mind... and it certainly won't die the quick death that Superman Returns did... but you watch, 15-20 years now when you hear someone talking about Superman I bet you there's a good chance they will have learned what they did about the character after having watched Superman The Movie... not Man Of Steel.

And you know what? That makes me both happy and sad. Happy because I believe that Superman '78 truly is a wonderful movie that should be handed down for generations, but sad because I think it partly keeps the character grounded in the past.

Skrilla31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 06:50 PM   #92
The Batman
The Dark Knight
 
The Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 20,189
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

I think Snyder's Superman franchise will be remembered more for Clark's teamups with Batman and the rest of the JLA.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafizbat View Post
Welcome to the Batman v Superman forums, where people will take a perfectly reasonable comment you make and twist it into something completely different to make themselves feel better.
The Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 07:25 PM   #93
FeedOnATreeFrog
A Metal Gear reference
 
FeedOnATreeFrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,067
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

^^^Yes. Being part of this franchise will make it more remembered.

Plus, for a lot of people, this is the first Superman origin story (or movie) they've seen and the only Superman origin they will ever see (for quite some time at least); so I think there's something to be said about that.

FeedOnATreeFrog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 07:31 PM   #94
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,017
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
I love how people like Batmannerism criticize me for "Slagging off fan opinions", but people get to tell me "I hope you don't seriously believe that". I don't lose any cred saying my opinion, especially if you're the one deciding what's credible to say. You, like me, are an internet fanboy giving an opinion at the end of the day. You're no specialist and neither am I.
That's true, you don't lose any cred expressing your opinion. I have
said a bunch of times that I actually respect your opinion, and there
are a few things that we agree on re STM vs MOS. Also, I think you're right about Dark Knight transcending the genre -which it certainly did
in it's appeal to the wider public.

What does lose you credibility is when you make statements like the one above.

You're absolutely right, I've asked you not to slag off people's opinions,
but the person who's criticizing yours, isn't me.

That's kind of like getting hit with a snowball by person A, and complaining that person b's telling people not to throw snowballs. There's a certain lack of logic there.

But let's move on.

I think you may very well be right that Snyder's contribution to Superman movies, might be best remembered for putting Supes and Bats together in one movie - now that hasn't been done before (not live action anyway). (of course, as an MOS fan, for me it'll be Snyder's work on MOS, but I can accept that that sentiment isn't universal)

Putting the two together is bold, but I think also has a lot of potential to go wrong. Although having said that, they have MOS to draw on as a basis for comparison, but also to learn from:

a) MOS broke some ground with the public, so that people will have some idea of what to expect from BM/SM, in terms of its tone. As such, people won't compare it to STM (because I still believe a lot of critics based their views of what Superman on film should be like, based on STM).
Instead, people will compare BM/SM to MOS, which can only help it.
(In hindsight, Iron Man 2 wasn't probably that bad, but in comparison to Iron Man, which was amazing, it sucked, IMO.
I guess that cuts two ways, I enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness more than Star Trek, and Thor The DArk World, more than Thor, but there are plenty of folks who see it the other way.

Some have claimed critics didn't compare the two films, or found MOS wanting because it wasn't like MOS - I'm not convinced, partially because going into MOS, I based my own views around what Superman on film should be like on STM, which suggests that others might too- although I doubt they'd be as biased as me.
But, also many reviews refer to STM and the Donner films in passing, so you know its in the back of their minds.

b) Perhaps, having learned from MOS, some subtle adjustments might be made that can make BM/SM both a wider success but also keep faith with the fans (as there are plenty of people on this forum who think it was an amazing film as it is, myself included). There are a bunch of subtle differences between Batman Begins (which was a good movie) and Dark Knight (which was a great movie), clearly Nolan learned something and made some adjustments. I haven't heard many Batman fans say
that Batman Begins was a better film (although I'm sure there are some that feel that way, more power to them).
So I think it is possible to make the next appearance of Superman a stunning success (maybe even in the same order as Avengers or Dark Knight, in terms of public reception), will it ever reach the status of STM ?

hmmmmm I'll wait till I see it, but that's a pretty enormous ask. Still, if I enjoy it as much as MOS, then really it doesn't matter.

peace out super-fans !


Batmannerism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 07:55 PM   #95
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,017
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skrilla31 View Post
Personally I thought it was much worse. In fact the moment MOS ended I was quite confident it was the worst movie I had seen in the theater all year. And mind you this was only about a week or so after baring witness to such timeless classics as After Earth and The Purge. Granted this is just one man's opinion and you don't necessarily have to agree with me, but yes... I do seriously believe that.

Now if we are to place it within the pantheon of superhero flicks? That's tough for a variety of reasons. The bad movies usually tend to be forgotten altogether. People still talk about Superman and Superman II but no one really ever talks about Superman III and Superman IV. I mean yea they happened, and people kinda remember them... but they've definitely exited the public consciousness. For god sakes Brian Singer treated them like they didn't even exist when he made Superman Returns.

The same thing will inevitably happen to Iron Man 2 and Iron Man 3. We'll always remember the first Iron Man but those two don't stand a chance in hell. They're like the Robocop sequels.

Thor wasn't any good either but it was just good enough to keep people along for the ride until Avengers which was the real prize. Plus it's the movie that first introduced Thor to the world, so no matter how bad it is that's gonna count for something. No one knew where Thor came from until they saw that movie and now he's closer to a household name than he ever was. The same goes for Captain America.

Where does Man Of Steel lie? How will it be remembered? Time will tell I think. I know that The Dark Knight definitely did wonders for the reputation of Batman Begins, so who knows what lies in store and what kind of retroactive effect the Man Of Steel sequel is going to have on it's predecessor. It may have some, it may not have any. But right now I'd wager to think that Man Of Steel will be largely forgotten. Call me crazy and call me delusional if it makes you feel better, but I just don't believe this movie will go down as a classic Superman movie in the years to come. It may roll off the tip of people's tongues for awhile, especially considering it will still be sort of fresh in everyone's mind... and it certainly won't die the quick death that Superman Returns did... but you watch, 15-20 years now when you hear someone talking about Superman I bet you there's a good chance they will have learned what they did about the character after having watched Superman The Movie... not Man Of Steel.

And you know what? That makes me both happy and sad. Happy because I believe that Superman '78 truly is a wonderful movie that should be handed down for generations, but sad because I think it partly keeps the character grounded in the past.

Dude, agree to disagree on MOS. Wow you must have really hated it if you found it worse than After Earth, which IMO is the worst movie made this century. But hey, fair enough I respect your opinion.

(Do you think it's fair to say that generally people either loved it, or hated it ? With those who were in the middle being the minority )

I enjoyed your comment about MOS' longevity. We really will have to wait and find out. Apparently it's doing very well in DVD sales -and some movies do become cult classics after they've left the cinema.
I think a big factor in MOS' longevity (beyond fans like myself....and let's face it, my tastes are pretty suspect, as I really enjoyed Speed Racer) as you said, will be the subsequent films.

Of course, in 15 years we might have an entirely different iteration of Superman (although Henry Cavill's only 30, so conceivably he could play Superman for quite some time).

Great ending to your post, very poetic. Who knows, maybe people like to remember Superman that way ? The way he was in 1978.
However, Superman's always been around, outside of the comic books, in fact there's been a Superman-based TV series or set of films pretty much continuously since STM (and of course the TV shows long before that).

Were any of them as good as STM, IMO no, not even close? As for myself, if I'm around in 20 years, I'll probably still be watching MOS (maybe me and the MOS fans on this thread will be the only ones, as you say, time will tell) but I'd be very pleased to think that STM was still relevant, even in 2034 and beyond.

Batmannerism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 08:05 PM   #96
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,846
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
I think Snyder's Superman franchise will be remembered more for Clark's teamups with Batman and the rest of the JLA.
Yeah. All points out this "sequel" will be a Justice League Assemble movie more than Man of Steel sequel. I wonder why they felt they needed to bring back Batman himself (a character that will bring attention no matter what) and Wonder Woman (who also will bring a lot of interest as it's her first time on the big screen) and didn't think Superman was enough.

Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 08:18 PM   #97
The Batman
The Dark Knight
 
The Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 20,189
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Honestly, I think they're mainly trying to cash in on The Avengers' craze. And WB wont spend most of their time making CBM's, so they've decided it'll just be one big franchise.

However, had MOS been more of an absolute home run, they may've reconsidered their current approach.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafizbat View Post
Welcome to the Batman v Superman forums, where people will take a perfectly reasonable comment you make and twist it into something completely different to make themselves feel better.
The Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 08:25 PM   #98
FeedOnATreeFrog
A Metal Gear reference
 
FeedOnATreeFrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,067
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

It's not rocket science.

The reason they want a team up is because they can make for awesome movies and can absolute money-makers. It's the same reason Marvel made The Avengers.

FeedOnATreeFrog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 08:58 PM   #99
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,846
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeedOnATreeFrog View Post
It's not rocket science.

The reason they want a team up is because they can make for awesome movies and can absolute money-makers. It's the same reason Marvel made The Avengers.
So let them make their "JLA" movie. Great. But to have Superman as 'one of the superheroes' in his own sequel? Why? I don't remember any a-list superhero having a superhero co-star, let alone two, in his own sequel.

Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 08:58 PM   #100
bluearth
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 253
Default Re: Superman TM 1978 vs Man of Steel 2013, was the world ready, what do you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
I love how people like Batmannerism criticize me for "Slagging off fan opinions", but people get to tell me "I hope you don't seriously believe that". I don't lose any cred saying my opinion, especially if you're the one deciding what's credible to say. You, like me, are an internet fanboy giving an opinion at the end of the day. You're no specialist and neither am I.
The problem is, if we decided to put the films I mentioned under the same microscope Man of Steel endured, what would we see? Besides, my losing cred comment was directed towards Richard Roeper, who is suppose to be a 'top critic' who talked down Man of Steel for not being funny enough but propped up Iron Man for being funny.

Maybe my comments to you were a little out of line. I just cant see how anyone would group Man of Steel with those particular films. It just seems some people tend to want or expect safe, formulaic films. To this day Im shocked Captain America is sitting at 79% on Rotten Tomatoes. Weak Villain, a story that features a bizarre mixture of realism and fantasy (just what in the world were those Nazi tanks ), weak showdown with the villain at the end, and more. Iron Man 2 and 3 both suffered similar issues, weak villains, and disappointing showdowns with the bad guy. And spouting off quips mere seconds after a tragedy? Thor 2? Again, same issue, weak villain whose sidekicks looked like cosplayers and they got outsmarted by yuppies. But they're suppose to be older then the Universe? Oh and Thor hangs his hammer on a coat rack but the Hulk can't pick it up? I could go on and on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord View Post
The original cut of Blade Runner was objectivelly boring and weak due to studio interference, it was only when the Director started to be able to show his original vision that critics started to change their minds, a similar thing happened with Kingdom of Heaven, where the original version was panned, while the director's cut is very praised.

The Man of Steel is medíocre all around, the style of conveying emotion Snyder uses is what i like to call bulls***g, and he's not the only one to use it, Michael Bay does the same and Christopher Nolan can sometimes fall into this territory. Now what is this bulls***g i'm talking about? It's the use of a strong musical theme in the background, while the plot in the form of a character tells you how he is feeling, or the director spoon feeds you this in another way, like flashback and etc.

I see this style used a lot in anime and filmmakers like Zack Snyder have started to incorporate it, the problem is that this way the film is telling you how you should be feeling, instead of letting the plot develop the characters properly and therefore making the connection actually matter. This technique can easily make people confuse an actually well development and characters with shallow emotion, making films like Armageddon be sometimes known for having people cry, even though the plot and characters weren't exactly well constructed.

Needless to say, bulls****g emotion make amazing trailer shots or great scenes to see alone, but when viewed in the whole structure, they fall apart.
So critics are always right, lol. Critics, and even the audience, routinely get it wrong. Fast & Furious 6 (I liked Fast 5) is objectively a poor, generic and lazy film, yet it was received pretty well by critics and the audience.

Did Disney's 'Up' ever get criticized for 'bulls****g' as you call it? Thats probably the worst offender, yet critics and the audience swallowed it whole without chewing.

Zack Snyder could be compared to the late Michael Crichton. Crichton always got criticized for apparently weak characters in his books, yet the rest of what he did was so fantastic people could easily overlook it. Snyder is similar, though I feel his films are way more emotional and character driven then Crichton's books.

Very few films approach perfection...I could perhaps name just 5, if that. I just find it interesting films like Avatar can get so much praise for their visuals and despite a weak story and characters still get received well critically, but Zack Snyder is continually bashed for his visuals and story and characters. He gets no credit for anything. This is why I feel Snyder has a stigma to him now, an undeserved one, and anything he puts out will be looked at with a critical eye instead of a welcoming one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skrilla31 View Post
Personally I thought it was much worse. In fact the moment MOS ended I was quite confident it was the worst movie I had seen in the theater all year. And mind you this was only about a week or so after baring witness to such timeless classics as After Earth and The Purge. Granted this is just one man's opinion and you don't necessarily have to agree with me, but yes... I do seriously believe that.

Now if we are to place it within the pantheon of superhero flicks? That's tough for a variety of reasons. The bad movies usually tend to be forgotten altogether. People still talk about Superman and Superman II but no one really ever talks about Superman III and Superman IV. I mean yea they happened, and people kinda remember them... but they've definitely exited the public consciousness. For god sakes Brian Singer treated them like they didn't even exist when he made Superman Returns.

The same thing will inevitably happen to Iron Man 2 and Iron Man 3. We'll always remember the first Iron Man but those two don't stand a chance in hell. They're like the Robocop sequels.

Thor wasn't any good either but it was just good enough to keep people along for the ride until Avengers which was the real prize. Plus it's the movie that first introduced Thor to the world, so no matter how bad it is that's gonna count for something. No one knew where Thor came from until they saw that movie and now he's closer to a household name than he ever was. The same goes for Captain America.

Where does Man Of Steel lie? How will it be remembered? Time will tell I think. I know that The Dark Knight definitely did wonders for the reputation of Batman Begins, so who knows what lies in store and what kind of retroactive effect the Man Of Steel sequel is going to have on it's predecessor. It may have some, it may not have any. But right now I'd wager to think that Man Of Steel will be largely forgotten. Call me crazy and call me delusional if it makes you feel better, but I just don't believe this movie will go down as a classic Superman movie in the years to come. It may roll off the tip of people's tongues for awhile, especially considering it will still be sort of fresh in everyone's mind... and it certainly won't die the quick death that Superman Returns did... but you watch, 15-20 years now when you hear someone talking about Superman I bet you there's a good chance they will have learned what they did about the character after having watched Superman The Movie... not Man Of Steel.

And you know what? That makes me both happy and sad. Happy because I believe that Superman '78 truly is a wonderful movie that should be handed down for generations, but sad because I think it partly keeps the character grounded in the past.
I disagree, theres no way Superman the Movie will be remembered as the definitive Superman 20 years from now instead of Man of Steel. The new generation grew up on Dragon Ball Z, Transformers, etc. When they get a chance to see Superman the Movie I think they'll find it extremely boring. Superman doesnt punch or fight anything, except a goofy old bald man with even goofier sidekicks. No cool spacecrafts or sci-fi. No good looking women like Amy Adams or Antje Traue, only a smoking Margot Kidder. Jor-El is a stiff compared to Crowe's version who literally kicks butt. Superman the Movie has no chance to be remembered more then Man of Steel. And when they see Superman II which is more like Man of Steel...nail in coffin.

bluearth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:59 PM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"
Contact Us - Mobile - SuperHeroHype - ComingSoon.net - Shock Till You Drop - Lost Password - Clear Cookies - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - AdChoices


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.