All Things Superman: An Open Discussion (Spoilers) - - - - - - - - - - Part 90

[Herolee10]

This is extremely rich considering those "criticizing" the film are doing so from a position that the film is in fact flawed, and thus those that don't find the same flaws are living in some sort of fanboy dream state.

You cannot judge how someone else feels about the film. Others might not see something you see as a flaw in the same way. You didn't like the film, fine. But your need to be here and continue to argue the films merits are interesting at the very least. Your sole purpose seems to be to encourage disdain for the film.

Did I find the film "perfect". Nope. But outside of some sketchy moments of dialogue, I loved it. I see no flaw in the editing. I understood the structure and embrace it completely.

 

[tomoe]

To a degree you are correct, speaking for myself I was hoping more than anything else that Nolan's influence would rub off on Snyder, or at the very least he'd keep a closer eye on proceedings. What it boils down to for me is that the trailers had me convinced that influence did in fact rub off. Ever since Snyder was announced as director the warning signals were flashing in my head yet I still caved because I wanted to believe he could finally deliver the goods. There was a build up in each trailer, new layers being added each time, a new series of emotions and story elements, it was Nolan-esque in its delivery. I honestly felt if the film lived up to its full potential based on those series of trailers it would have been one if not the best superhero film ever. And yet once again Snyder came up short. What I've noticed is that Snyder is good a short sequences like trailers and action pieces and even some character moments, but he's not a good story teller, his films lack consistency and the foundations are always weak. I honestly got more out of the trailers than I did the actual movie which is kinda sad.

This is exactly how I feel. I'm actually kind of angry at Nolan for not keeping a tighter rein on this. I'm now wondering if all those times he repeatedly said he didn't do much , wasn't involved beyond the initial idea, etc. he was trying to clean himself of any blame for a movie that didn't quite live up. I find it very hard to believe he didn't see the flaws in the movie which seemed so obvious to many people.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It's not Green Lantern bad by any means, but I don't understand why it should be given a free pass either. Fans are very protective of their favourite characters, I get that, but they should also be able to accept it when the films don't deliver.

What if it delivered for them? At what point is this not an argument of taste? In which case, telling someone they have to "accept" something as flawed is the height of arrogance and completely wrong.

 

[Zionite1]

Not only did I not say that it was Green Lantern bad, but that's doing nothing more than introducing a red herring; it's neither here nor there.

If I feel that the movie isn't up to standard, it simply isn't up to standard. A similar film being as bad or worse doesn't excuse the flaws I found in this one.

I said impresssion not that you said.And I wasnt even talking about you.And Im not going red herring-the bashing here makes it sound like a gloomfest with mindless action and emo supes.

 

[Herolee10]

What if it delivered for them? At what point is this not an argument of taste? In which case, telling someone they have to "accept" something as flawed is the height of arrogance and completely wrong.

Agreed; last time that I checked, there are a good amount of people who were overall satisfied with the film and I don't think most of us have gone on to say that the film is flawless...we have acknowledged that the film has mistakes and flaws in it but we still enjoy it for what it is and I don't think we should be "convinced" to see it being a disappointment because some people didn't like it.

 

[PacificBoy]

Yeah, MoS is streets ahead of Green Lantern. MoS had a lot going for it - the incredible cast put together, the stunning visuals, the ambitious screenplay. Just that the execution fell flat for those are disappointed with the final product.

I can only speak for myself here but I have never been this vociferous about a movie's flaws. Probably because I have never been this letdown by a movie. A case of mismanaged or misguided expectations? Perhaps.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Agreed; last time that I checked, there are a good amount of people who were overall satisfied with the film and I don't think most of us have gone on to say that the film is flawless...we have acknowledged that the film has mistakes and flaws in it but we still enjoy it for what it is and I don't think we should be "convinced" to see it being a disappointment because some people didn't like it.

It comes down to the idea that if a film has flaws, it suddenly isn't any good. In which case, you can take a stick to the vast majority of films and call them "overrated".

The thing that has got me most is the idea that the film is "cold" or "lacks emotions" because there isn't a lot of time spent with certain characters. I know what I felt watching the film. It didn't need 20 more minutes with Pa Kent to know what that meant to Clark, to me.

 

[BlueLantern]

This is extremely rich considering those "criticizing" the film are doing so from a position that the film is in fact flawed, and thus those that don't find the same flaws are living in some sort of fanboy dream state.

You cannot judge how someone else feels about the film. Others might not see something you see as a flaw in the same way. You didn't like the film, fine. But your need to be here and continue to argue the films merits are interesting at the very least. Your sole purpose seems to be to encourage disdain for the film.

Did I find the film "perfect". Nope. But outside of some sketchy moments of dialogue, I loved it. I see no flaw in the editing. I understood the structure and embrace it completely.

That's you assuming that you're a gusher. I'm referring more to folk who have ready made excuses for criticisms and call it the best film ever made and so on. If you or herolee4950 feel that you come under the same umbrella, then it's your label. No one's asking you to disown the film or dislike it. Most are just stating their opinion.

Furthermore, by you implying that you 'understood' the structure you're implying that people who didn't like the story didn't 'understand' it and that in itself is condescending. Do you see how this goes in circles? Good. Moving on. What people take away from a movie is personal but blind adulation is very grating.

Furthermore, I'd rather you not try and portray me as criticizing the film purely to encourage dislike for it. My criticisms are my own. But I've already mentioned that ad hominem so I'm guessing you've just run out of ways to beat down detractors of the film. Ouroboros factor and all that.

 

[jmc]

What if it delivered for them? At what point is this not an argument of taste? In which case, telling someone they have to ''accept'' something as flawed is the height of arrogance and completely wrong.

Some people go into denial. I've got nothing wrong with people who genuinely love a certain movie in spite of its flaws and can admit it, but I've seen it time and time again where some fans don't like it when genuine problems are brought up, they then become uber defensive usually bringing up all manner of counter arguments that usually don't address the issue that is the center of the dislike.

 

[SilentWarriorZ]

Its very Bad DC is just keep getting Criticized by every means necessary I dont know where this will take the JL Universe
I hope they come up with good Strategy for future Films .

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

This is exactly how I feel. I'm actually kind of angry at Nolan for not keeping a tighter rein on this. I'm now wondering if all those times he repeatedly said he didn't do much , wasn't involved beyond the initial idea, etc. he was trying to clean himself of any blame for a movie that didn't quite live up. I find it very hard to believe he didn't see the flaws in the movie which seemed so obvious to many people.

I think Nolan should have had more influence on the screenplay. That being said, backing off and letting Zack direct the movie he wanted to was a good move.
'
Sure, a Nolan-influence on the direction might make some moments work more cohesively. But I honestly think that would make it feel more emotionally cold, like the director was confined to his role for hire, and it would show in the final product.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

That's you assuming that you're a gusher. I'm referring more to folk who have ready made excuses for criticisms and call it the best film ever made or the most awesome thing of the century. If you or herolee4950 feel that you come under the same umbrella, then it's your label.

Furthermore, by you implying that you 'understood' the structure you're implying that people who didn't like the story didn't 'understand' it and that in itself is condescending. Do you see how this goes in circles? Good. Moving on.

If it is the best movie ever made to someone, why the hell do you care? Do you need to teach people why they are wrong? For years my niece's favorite film was Tarzan. To her, it was the best movie ever made. Who am I to tell her any differently?

And me saying I understood something implies nothing. Other then that I understood what they were going for and thought it worked. Though it brings up an interesting point as most arguments against the editing misrepresent how the film is edited. There is a difference between whether you enjoy the editing and how the film is actually edited. The latter is actual fact.

 

[Herolee10]

It comes down to the idea that if a film has flaws, it suddenly isn't any good. In which case, you can take a stick to the vast majority of films and call them "overrated".

The thing that has got me most is the idea that the film is "cold" or "lacks emotions" because there isn't a lot of time spent with certain characters. I know what I felt watching the film. It didn't need 20 more minutes with Pa Kent to know what that meant to Clark, to me.

Agreed; I don't think any of the people who have seen the film and enjoyed it have said that the film is flawless and even mentioned that while they had noticed the issues it had, it didn't prevent them from enjoying it overall.

And yeah, I don't get that either because this film has several moments that I've seen people mentioning on how it really got to them on an emotional level and I don't know about anyone else, but this is the FIRST superman film where I truly felt emphatic with the character. I enjoyed the character in previous films, but I never felt such a sense of connection with the characterization of those portrayals, even though I greatly respect and enjoy CR's version.

Hell, I'm still wrapping my mind around the anger that some people have over how Lois and Clark's relationship (or lack of thereof for some folks as they have worded it) was portrayed in the film. Sure, they weren't "officially" involved, but to say that they didn't have an connection and that it wasn't evident that them getting together in the nearby future being inevitably clear is just like...wow, I can't even begin to post regarding that criticism.

 

[Herolee10]

If it is the best movie ever made to someone, why the hell do you care? Do you need to teach people why they are wrong? For years my niece's favorite film was Tarzan. To her, it was the best movie ever made. Who am I to tell her any differently?

And me saying I understood something implies nothing. Other then that I understood what they were going for and thought it worked. Though it brings up an interesting point as most arguments against the editing misrepresent how the film is edited. There is a difference between whether you enjoy the editing and how the film is actually edited. The latter is actual fact.

 

[PacificBoy]

Agreed; last time that I checked, there are a good amount of people who were overall satisfied with the film and I don't think most of us have gone on to say that the film is flawless...we have acknowledged that the film has mistakes and flaws in it but we still enjoy it for what it is and I don't think we should be "convinced" to see it being a disappointment because some people didn't like it.

You are right. But I don't think anyone's trying to convince those who enjoyed the movie to love it a little less. Those who, unfortunately, didn't enjoy it as much are simply giving their reasons why.

I myself have seen it twice, telling my friends and family it's a must-see despite how I personally feel about it. And I'm happy a fair number liked it to have backed the film by putting seats in the theater. This means another stab at the mythos with a great ensemble for me.

Don't see anything wrong with having a healthy discussion about the movie's talking points, beloved or reviled. Have enjoyed reading the views from both sides.

 

[Visualiza]

What if it delivered for them? At what point is this not an argument of taste? In which case, telling someone they have to "accept" something as flawed is the height of arrogance and completely wrong.

It can deliver while still being flawed; personal favorite isn't necessarily synonymous with being comparatively superlative. Personally, I don't particularly care whether someone 'accepts' that or not, but I will say that the failure to acknowledge said flaws is equally, if not more, arrogant and wrong. Makes me think of the parent who refuses to believe that their misfit child is anything but an angel. It's love, sure, but it's still not very rational or reasonable.

With that being said, I don't think anyone is telling anybody else not to enjoy the film. It's entirely possible to like something in spite of it's flaws, and I'm pretty sure we all understand that.

I said impresssion not that you said.And I wasnt even talking about you.And Im not going red herring-the bashing here makes it sound like a gloomfest with mindless action and emo supes.

Fair enough.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Some people go into denial. I've got nothing wrong with people who genuinely love a certain movie in spite of its flaws and can admit it, but I've seen it time and time again where some fans don't like it when genuine problems are brought up, they then become uber defensive usually bringing up all manner of counter arguments that usually don't address the issue that is the center of the dislike.

How is it denial? What flaws are there to admit, if you find none?

I understand arguing the merits of a film. That is one thing. Hell, I did it for quite a while with Prometheus, to the point that I probably went overboard more then once.

A genuine problem is "the cgi was of lower quality in this scene" or "Zod's scar keeps changing sides", etc. Those things are factual for the most part. Now whether someone likes the story, scenes, characters, and structure are completely different. That is personal and subjective.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ Tarzan's one of Disney's grittier and more ambitious films, and is one of Disney's later 2D films. I'm strangely okay with this

If MOS is a person's favorite movie, could it be that the person connects emotionally to the characters and the action enough to overlook certain aspects? And if that's the case, does it mean the person's a bad critic, or someone who can appreciate the scale and energy of the film?

I hate it when this person said this person likes X, therefore he or she cannot have a say in movies. I feel like everyone should be free to have his or own opinion,free from ridicule, unless that opinion is morally questionable.

 

[BlueLantern]

If it is the best movie ever made to someone, why the hell do you care? Do you need to teach people why they are wrong? For years my niece's favorite film was Tarzan. To her, it was the best movie ever made. Who am I to tell her any differently?

And me saying I understood something implies nothing. Other then that I understood what they were going for and thought it worked. Though it brings up an interesting point as most arguments against the editing misrepresent how the film is edited. There is a difference between whether you enjoy the editing and how the film is actually edited. The latter is actual fact.

Either you're intentionally getting the wrong end of the stick or not getting my point. I have no issue with people thinking something's the best thing ever. However, when posters start accusing people of being blind (sf2) it begins to insult people's intelligence. Does that make sense? I liked Batman Forever. I speak from experience.

In regards to the technical merits of the film, such matters are subjective. I felt the film was shoddily edited in as much as it had too much flab in the action department and very little meat in the character department. But that's down to storytelling more than editing.

Furthermore, if you want proof of condescension and a lack of tolerance, see herolee10's recent posts. He's posting gifs to simultaneously backup your points and mock folk who disagree with you. Therein lies the hostility. Not with constructive discussion.

 

[Herolee10]

I guess my bigger question is, for those that didn't care about the film at all, why are you guys even here posting about it constantly if you hated the film or see it as a failure? I mean, just because you didn't like it doesn't mean that you need to constantly point out the legitimate issues the film had and then some to posters on a constant basis from what I've seen. Some of us "fanboys" aren't that blind and we can see for ourselves on the problems that the film had, but the last thing that people want are debbie downers for the film.

 

[BlueLantern]

I guess my bigger question is, for those that didn't care about the film at all, why are you guys even here posting about it constantly if you hated the film or see it as a failure? I mean, just because you didn't like it doesn't mean that you need to constantly point out the legitimate issues the film had and then some to posters on a constant basis from what I've seen. Some of us "fanboys" aren't that blind and we can see for ourselves on the problems that the film had, but the last thing that people want are debbie downers for the film.

It's down to being disappointed with a highly anticipated product and being ardent fans of the character and mythos. At least for me. Consider this a catharsis. If you don't understand this point in itself then I would ask how you've managed to survive on the internet without tearing your hair out. Visit a Star Wars forum some day.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It can deliver while still being flawed; personal favorite isn't necessarily synonymous with being comparatively superlative. Personally, I don't particularly care whether someone 'accepts' that or not, but I will say that the failure to acknowledge said flaws is equally, if not more, arrogant and wrong. Makes me think of the parent who refuses to believe that their misfit child is anything but an angel. It's love, sure, but it's still not very rational or reasonable.

With that being said, I don't think anyone is telling anybody else not to enjoy the film. It's entirely possible to like something in spite of it's flaws, and I'm pretty sure we all understand that.

Since when is a film a problem child? Is this film dangerous? Is it possibly going to stab another child at school or set fire to their grandparent's house? This is art.

You are coming at it from a position that the film is flawed. That is your opinion. No one else has to share it. That isn't arrogance. Attempting to put upon others that the film is flawless and they have to agree, would be. But I don't see many doing that here.

And yes, it is kinda of hilarious that the film has been out three weeks and those that don't enjoy it feel the need to stick around this board to just tell all us no-hopers why we are so wrong. What in the world are you and Blue Lantern getting out of this? I stopped responding to BL's post opening week. Thinking maybe, in a few, he'd be gone. After all, he didn't like the movie and I find it odd that you would spend so much time discussing a movie you don't like. Nope.

 

[Zionite1]

It's down to being disappointed with a highly anticipated product and being ardent fans of the character and mythos. At least for me. Consider this a catharsis. If you don't understand this point in itself then I would ask how you've managed to survive on the internet without tearing your hair out. Visit a Star Wars forum some day.

In fairness to heroless there is a complaints thread.....

Mybe I should create a Mos positives thread

 

[BlueLantern]

Darth Skywalker, I believe you stopped responding to my posts when you ran out of sarcastic/condescending comments to make. So far most conversations have been constructive despite the odd attempts of people to troll for their own purposes. But we can't all find a neutral ground on which to discuss things without getting personal.

Zionite1, I suggest you visit the complaints thread and see the number of people trying to convince critics of the film that they're wrong. Should explain a lot.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Either you're intentionally getting the wrong end of the stick or not getting my point. I have no issue with people thinking something's the best thing ever. However, when posters start accusing people of being blind (sf2) it begins to insult people's intelligence. Does that make sense? I liked Batman Forever. I speak from experience.

Then perhaps you should realize telling others that a film is in fact flawed is going to engender a similar reaction?

In regards to the technical merits of the film, such matters are subjective. I felt the film was shoddily edited in as much as it had too much flab in the action department and very little meat in the character department. But that's down to storytelling more than editing.

No, how you feel about the editing is subjective. How it is edited is most certainly not subjective. Just like the difference between film and digital, or how one feels about a film's score.

Furthermore, if you want proof of condescension and a lack of tolerance, see herolee10's recent posts. He's posting gifs to simultaneously backup your points and mock folk who disagree with you. Therein lies the hostility. Not with constructive discussion.

Your discussion hasn't been constructive from day one. I meant your "flaws" with examples of how I felt you were wrong, and you spent the entire time talking down to me like I was some blind fool.

You lost the moral high ground opening weekend.