Ben Affleck IS Batman!! - Part 8

[Rowsdower!]

Originally Posted by spider-neil

The problem is people have their preconceived ideas of what Supeman should be (like they do with iconic characters like Spider-man Batman, Bond etc) and when that characters doesn't act like the character they have in their head they are going to have problems. Personally I got over the problems when I said this is Superman one year into his career.

Exactly. Goyer even said that he's not "fully formed" in MOS (a point that I figured would be obvious to audiences, given that he doesn't even adopt the Daily Planet Clark Kent persona until the very, very end) but if people are determined to b**ch, I've found there's no way to stop it.

[roach]

Originally Posted by spider-neil

The problem is people have their preconceived ideas of what Supeman should be (like they do with iconic characters like Spider-man Batman, Bond etc) and when that characters doesn't act like the character they have in their head they are going to have problems. Personally I got over the problems when I said this is Superman one year into his career.

thats exactly what Jake Gyllenhaal said on The Daily Show when he was asked about Ben Affleck being cast as Batman

[smashmode]

Originally Posted by TheNextNolan22

But was Adkins the star of Zero Dark Thirty? I honestly forgot he was even in it. To be honest, I don't even remember seeing him.

He had one throw away line, if that.

[spider-neil]

Hey, I'm the same. I had huge problems with Casino Royale but again, it's Bond one year into his career. I won't lie though, I enjoyment of Skyfall was exponentially better than CR purely because Bond 'acted' like Bond and I suspect my enjoyment of MoS 2 will increase if Supeman acts more like Superman (at least the version of Superman I have in my head).

[Rowsdower!]

Hey guys, can we stop talking about Scott Adkins? I don't care if you like him or not... as far as we know, he doesn't have jack sh** to do with this movie so enough already.

[Rowsdower!]

Originally Posted by spider-neil

Hey, I'm the same. I had huge problems with Casino Royale but again, it's Bond one year into his career. I won't lie though, I enjoyment of Skyfall was exponentially better than CR purely because Bond 'acted' like Bond and I suspect my enjoyment of MoS 2 will increase if Supeman acts more like Superman (at least the version of Superman I have in my head).

Well, obviously you want the character to develop as time passes and become the iconic version we all know as the definitive one. If he stays in the same place, then that's a failure on the part of the writers.

[John-An]

Originally Posted by TheFlamingCoco

Keyser Soze And so with Man of Steel, which adopted the gloomy aesthetic of the Nolan Batman films while being more blockbustery fare, managed to both alienate the Marvel crowd and disappoint the DC crowd who went in expecting something spectacular and transcendent. If you go into a movie expecting a good middle-of-the-road film and get a good middle-of-the-road film, you'll leave happy. If you go in expecting the greatest film of the year and one of the all-time definitive superhero films and you get a good middle-of-the-road film, it'll feel like a letdown. That's the thing. It always feels like it HAS to be an either/or. Either create a deep and serious CBM or a light and "fun" one. Either create a realistic superhero movie or lose all grounding of reality.

As for MOS, it wasn't as good as it needed to be, but a lot better than it gets credit for IMHO.

If they make a more slow-paced, thoughtful sequel, I think it could be one of the better movies in the genre.

slow paced I agree but more thoughtful I don't think so.. the one that we want is an stablished superman working and doing his job...
MOS was the good that needed to be, actually IMO exceed my expectations...

@keyzer Soze. people actually complaining it wasn't fun that was drama and too serious.. so you're totally wrong IMO. Again depending on the point where you see the movie is your judge and many have misconceptions already made on their minds... it wasn't middle of the road film.. IMO the movie had only made me wanting for more and more and more that's smth different.. but the realistic way they go and put superman his BIG BALLS AGAIN as in the comics (not new 52) that's smth some people don't get it... and for example compairing to Iron man 1 (they only needed to focus on Tony Stark (which is only the character developed) how they are gonna make MOS and at least 5 important character developing the way some people want without rest Superman presence.. what MOS has is balance.. the rest can be explored in future sequels

[John-An]

Originally Posted by Rowsdower!

Exactly. Goyer even said that he's not "fully formed" in MOS (a point that I figured would be obvious to audiences, given that he doesn't even adopt the Daily Planet Clark Kent persona until the very, very end) but if people are determined to b**ch, I've found there's no way to stop it.

COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU MAN.. but some people simply don't get that and have short vision...

[MrMaooz]

SuperMan Man of Steel...is English your first language?

[TheNextNolan22]

The language he speaks is from a country called "What".

[John-An]

Originally Posted by MrMaooz

SuperMan Man of Steel...is English your first language?

No... sorry I do my best

[John-An]

Originally Posted by TheNextNolan22

The language he speaks is from a country called "What".

Pretty funny no need to be rude

[Rowsdower!]

Originally Posted by SuperMan of Steel

COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU MAN.. but some people simply don't get that and have short vision...

Yeah, but what can you do, you know?

[MrMaooz]

Originally Posted by TheNextNolan22

The language he speaks is from a country called "What".

What ain't no country I ever heard of.

They speak English on what?

[MrMaooz]

Originally Posted by SuperMan of Steel

Pretty funny no need to be rude

He wasn't being rude.

[Kane52630]

[TheNextNolan22]

Seems about right.

[MrMaooz]

[John-An]

Originally Posted by Rowsdower!

Yeah, but what can you do, you know?

Exactly

[John-An]

Originally Posted by kane52630

lol

[terry78]

He's just so smug. Like he knows he's gonna knock it out the park.

[Keyser Soze]

Originally Posted by SuperMan of Steel

@keyzer Soze. people actually complaining it wasn't fun that was drama and too serious.. so you're totally wrong IMO. Again depending on the point where you see the movie is your judge and many have misconceptions already made on their minds... it wasn't middle of the road film.. IMO the movie had only made me wanting for more and more and more that's smth different.. but the realistic way they go and put superman his BIG BALLS AGAIN as in the comics (not new 52) that's smth some people don't get it... and for example compairing to Iron man 1 (they only needed to focus on Tony Stark (which is only the character developed) how they are gonna make MOS and at least 5 important character developing the way some people want without rest Superman presence.. what MOS has is balance.. the rest can be explored in future sequels

If you read my full post, you'd see I was actually defending Man of Steel and saying a lot of the bad reviews it got were undeserved. And I noted in my post that the Marvel crowd were alienated because it they thought it was too dark and serious.

[The Question]

Originally Posted by Rowsdower!

As for your second point, I agree completely that MOS was a better movie. It had its problems (like ALL superhero movies do, yes, even TDK and The Avengers) but seemed to get 10 times the scrutiny because "it's Superman" and "they didn't do exactly what [INSERT SANCTIMONIOUS FANBOY HERE]wanted them to!"

Originally Posted by spider-neil

The problem is people have their preconceived ideas of what Supeman should be (like they do with iconic characters like Spider-man Batman, Bond etc) and when that characters doesn't act like the character they have in their head they are going to have problems. Personally I got over the problems when I said this is Superman one year into his career.

I don't really think that's what's happening at all. I think what's happening is that people are bringing up what they think should be done with Superman as is traditional because they think what was done differently in Man of Steel wasn't very good and they're giving an example of something else they think works better that just so happens to be what's usually done.

Also, I wanted to speak to this part particularly:

Originally Posted by Rowsdower!

It had its problems (like ALL superhero movies do, yes, even TDK and The Avengers) but seemed to get 10 times the scrutiny because "it's Superman" and "they didn't do exactly what [INSERT SANCTIMONIOUS FANBOY HERE]wanted them to!"

Yes, all movies have problems, even The Dark Knight and The Avengers, but some movies have more problems than others. Don't you think it's possible that Man of Steel gets ten times the amount of scrutiny that The Dark Knight and The Avengers got because, at least in the minds of the people who scrutinize it, it had ten times as many problems?

[theShape]

Originally Posted by Keyser Soze

If you read my full post, you'd see I was actually defending Man of Steel and saying a lot of the bad reviews it got were undeserved. And I noted in my post that the Marvel crowd were alienated because it they thought it was too dark and serious.

Lol, you make it sound like the Marvel crowd are a bunch of happy-go-lucky doofuses. Not too far off, IMO...

[Keyser Soze]

Originally Posted by theShape

Lol, you make it sound like the Marvel crowd are a bunch of happy-go-lucky doofuses. Not too far off, IMO...

Don't want to downplay the Marvel crowd at all, since I am also in the Marvel crowd and enjoy their movies too. Just saying that Marvel movies cater to different expectations.