Sequels "Going Wrath Of Khan":The Official MOS Action Thread

[X Knight]

actually, while I watched SR and when I walked out of the theaters, I was initially very positive and gung-ho about the movie. I even accepted the Kid plot point, partly because I was expecting the kid to be Supe's anyways ( although I was still hoping the kid would be Richard's ). Heck, even the costume looked great!!!

so, for the first few days, I was really pumped about the movie. I really didn't know what everyone was complaining about.......

But, something still didn't "feel" right. As the days progressed, and the intitial enthusiasm subsided, I thought about the movie, the story, the characters......and that's when I realized that SR was a very shallow and hollow movie, imo of course.

Visually beautiful, no question. But shallow........

 

[04nbod]

i want a more modern superman in the sequel. i want him to speak like a human and not someone high and mighty. i didn't mind the kid angle either because i think it could open superman up a lot in the sequel. i want a villain i haven't seen in the cinema before. i really didn't have a problem with returns other than the fact that it had all been done before.

Can someone answer me this- in the comics can superman have children? all i've ever seen are alternate reality children and kon-el the clone. i think its possible he can not have children with humans.

 

[matrix_ghost]

It dn't think that you can really say that loading a film with action solves the problems.
Tojo you're going too far with this IMO. Imagine a Spiderman movie with NO ACTION whatsoever. Or an X-Men movie with NO ACTION whatsoever. Just talking.
The movie would suck.

You need to have the right balance between action and dramatic scenes.If you go too much into the action you get to a point where the story just goes over the head and you're there purely for the spectacle. Afterwards you're just looking at you're watch wondering when the next action sequence arrives.
Too little action and you get pacing problems , in other words the movie get boring.

The type of action also plays an important role . There are certain expectations with the action performed by comic book characters.
And with todays VFX technology , everything can be done. So you're arriving at a point where there are no restrictions in making a f(faithful) translation from the comics to the movies .
And when you finally see Superman saving a plane from crashing and lifting a big island , you're ( or at least my and many of my friends and relatives) are left wondering with ...."THAT'S IT ?!!??".
Spiderman upping the ante of VFX in creating superhero action , Fantastic FOur having a fight with their major villains in a VFX fest , even batman having a proper fight with his villains....and superman just saves a plane and raises an island.
Where's Doomsday ? Where's Brainiac ?

Many people who saw the superbrawl fight in Matrix REvolutions, were finally convinced that a fight in the skies was now possible. Movies like spiderman show that superhero action can be done.

So it's not a question of loading a film with action. It's putting just enough action so that justice in doe to the character IN THE EYES OF THE AUDIENCE.

 

[Hunter Rider]

If Superman gets a bazooka,cusses Perry out and calls Lois Sugar panties then WB will have their hit

The action will be amped up no doubt and the only other problem i saw was a kinda retread storyline which obviously won't be a issue for the sequel as they will have a new story

The only problem beyond that is the kid and that isn't going away no matter what

 

[matrix_ghost]

If Superman gets a bazooka,cusses Perry out and calls Lois Sugar panties then WB will have their hit

The action will be amped up no doubt and the only other problem i saw was a kinda retread storyline which obviously won't be a issue for the sequel as they will have a new story

The only problem beyond that is the kid and that isn't going away no matter what

Bah , have Jack Bauer knock some sense into Brian SInger and he;ll make the coolstest superman movie the world has ever seen

 

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

actually i think the only reason they are doing that is the response from the public was that there wasn't enough action..which is crap in my opinion..the movie had the right element for the story that was being told.

if it was a super villian other than lex luthor.. then you increase the action due to the amount of danger your placing superman in.

 

[C. Lee]

Hey Dew couldn't you just ask me to edit out the 'idiot/mongrel' part instead of deleting the whole post?

I wasn't insulting anyone specifically anyway but i'd be happy to have edited it but noooooo that would be way too complicated wouldn't it.

Basically(people who read this thread) i said WB execs saying there will be more action than any DC film ever was a bad way of trying to fix the last films problems..

Hey Tojo.....couldn't you just post without being rude and insulting....everyone has been told not to act that way...but for you to not follow the rules and act civily would be way too complicated, huh?

 

[Tojo]

If Superman gets a bazooka,cusses Perry out and calls Lois Sugar panties then WB will have their hit

The only problem beyond that is the kid and that isn't going away no matter what

can he call her sugar **** instead?

And no, dat dere kid is here to stay

 

[gdw]

the classic superman: The Movie had the same type [if not less] action then superman Returns yet people never have forgotten it. Some people that didn't like returns simply didn't like the vague history[like myself], which is a dumb idea from singer, beleiving that people remeber every single detail of the old superman movies.

Hence VAGUE history. Even a direct sequel does not require you to remember everything from the film before it.

Actually using the Donner films as a reference piece was pure genious simply because SO MANY people DO remember them and how they looked and felt and how they deffined Superman.

It's a ctually a surprisingly similar approach to the one that Nolan took with Begins.

So many people remembered Burtons film and how he did it.

Because of how much both films were remembered, neither director wanted to try to REdo what was doen. No point in remaking the same film.

So you either build on what is already there and so strongly remembered, ala Returns, or you just do it differently, ala Begins.

 

[gdw]

Also, if Singer DID try to re-invent the wheel with Superman, then there would be one of two things happening with reaction to the film, either "it's been done" or "it's too different."

 

[Maze]

Hence VAGUE history. Even a direct sequel does not require you to remember everything from the film before it.

Actually using the Donner films as a reference piece was pure genious simply because SO MANY people DO remember them and how they looked and felt and how they deffined Superman.

It's actually a surprisingly similar approach to the one that Nolan took with Begins.

So many people remembered Burtons film and how he did it.

Because of how much both films were remembered, neither director wanted to try to REdo what was doen. No point in remaking the same film.

So you either build on what is already there and so strongly remembered, ala Returns, or you just do it differently, ala Begins.

Also, if Singer DID try to re-invent the wheel with Superman, then there would be one of two things happening with reaction to the film, either "it's been done" or "it's too different."

You summarized it perfectly.

 

[Walks Unseen]

Putting in more action dosen't fix the problems with the film but it sure does help!! What Man Of Steel needs more than anything is boat loads of mind blowing action. I'm talking Supes fighting a villian, like Darkseid all over the world, punching each other to different continents. Superman isn't just some ordinary superhero. He's the superhero. The action in Man Of Steel should reflect his god like power. It really needs to show what Superman is capable of.

 

[The Kid]

Only a reboot will solve the problems.

Put in a superbrawl through metropolis, put in Jason throwing more pianos, put in whatever you want, but this'll still seem like a cheap knock-off of the original superman films if they keep up with this vague history gag.

 

[Tojo]

I don't really see why vague history is such a problem. Thge last thing i wanted was an origin, and a returns story was pretty perfect, but yes Singer could still have done this Returns story and made it original to him, and then we could have seen his origin perhaps in flashbacks over the sequel.

But STM did an origin and it was great, no need to tread old ground imo.

 

[newmexneon]

Most movie goers are mindless drones who can't pay attention unless their is an explosion of some sort every ten minutes which while being a mediocre movie POTC2 did so well. Superman balanced action very well with story. I happen to consider the whole New krypton scene suspenseful action so adding that to metropolis falling apart there is almost 40 minutes of solid action.

 

[The Kid]

I don't really see why vague history is such a problem. Thge last thing i wanted was an origin, and a returns story was pretty perfect, but yes Singer could still have done this Returns story and made it original to him, and then we could have seen his origin perhaps in flashbacks over the sequel.

But STM did an origin and it was great, no need to tread old ground imo.

Yeah that's my point even though I disagree that an origin wouldn't have been awesome. But I do think there's No need to rehash elements from Donner's movies.

I don't know if you want to understand what I'm saying, but here it is:

Trying in any way to tie this franchise down to the last one will only limit its potential, even moreso than adding the little superkid.

Look at batman begins. I thought that movie was ok and not the best batman it could have been, but i'm not counting bale's batman out yet because he has so much freedom now to go anywhere nolan's imagination can take it since he's making HIS batman. I don't think I can say the same for singer and his whatever it is he wants to call it, "vague sequel" or whatever.

 

[DvilDog]

Most movie goers are mindless drones who can't pay attention unless their is an explosion of some sort every ten minutes which while being a mediocre movie POTC2 did so well. Superman balanced action very well with story. I happen to consider the whole New krypton scene suspenseful action so adding that to metropolis falling apart there is almost 40 minutes of solid action.

This is the one of the most accurate statements I have ever read imo. I saw SR 5 times in theaters. I bought the DVD when it came out and I still sat in awe and shock watching the whole thing over again. Should they have had someone else other than Lex and Creating new Krypton? Maybe. I got a lot more action than what I bargained for if you asked me. They were talking vague history I was thinking STM which was great for its time but would be so boring today. I didnt walk in and expect Superman to be beating on Lex Luthor. Lets all be honest here. Superman punching Lex would end the greatest criminal mind of all time. Im going to give Singer the benefit here. Now that he has established what he wanted with the first, he can take it in his own direction, and hopefully give you guys the punches from Earth to the Moon, and the matrix(hopfully better) like fighting scenes that you want. But if they dont build this story and keep it going from a mental stand point they are going to lose me just like X3 did. But thats just my opinion I could be wrong

 

[The Kid]

Why do some have to always come up with these baseless assumptions all the time about most of the movie going public being a bunch of morons? Do you know how that makes you sound? What does that say about the spidey audiences who liked those flicks that imo were mediocre, heh... (Puts up spidey-fan flame shield)

Tho I won't argue against the belief that most people are really not as discerning with films as us internet geeks but I'm really not one to talk myself... I don't know that much about movies

And the passion beating was so predictable. I couldn't get pass how he'd just give lex a shot at him honestly... my god, not to sound too pretentious, but I do yearn for the days when directors didn't feel the need to use cheap shock tactics to garner sympathy for a character. Back when I was but a youngster, the character had dialogue and certain actions that made me give a damn. The only thing I didn't expect to see was spacey running away from the falling spires or whatever. That was funky stuff.

As far as action goes, what I think people are saying when they request more action is that they FINALLY want to see superman fight someone besides lex, zod, or himself, or his own clone. It makes sense to me since spidey's been through the goblin, ock, and soon venom, sandman, and gg2. The people want to see supes top that.

 

[dark_b]

Most movie goers are mindless drones who can't pay attention unless their is an explosion of some sort every ten minutes which while being a mediocre movie POTC2 did so well. Superman balanced action very well with story. I happen to consider the whole New krypton scene suspenseful action so adding that to metropolis falling apart there is almost 40 minutes of solid action.

see thaths the problem. lifting NK is not action for me. when flying in the air and turning and start using heat vision is not action for me. saving a guy from falling is not action for me. puting down a mustang is nto action for me.
and singer said already that he didnt want that we see the people in metropolis in to much trouble. because of the kids.
he wanted to make this movie so light on action. ok. but the problem comes when you have 200 milions of budget and the movie make only 200 milions domestic.

thats the problems that i have. and now we are gettign a smaller budget because SR didnt have enough action and we are getting more action because SR didnt have enough action.

 

[mego joe]

loading a movie with action and special effects doesn't make a movie good if the plot / story sucks. Then the movie becomes superficial......beautiful on the outside, hollow on the inside.

For me, SR's action was plenty good for me. Frankly, I got goosebumps everytime he flew or used his powers. The plane rescue was superb, even lifting NK and the subsequent descent at the end was grand ( albeit implausible with the copious amounts of Krypton ).

It's just the underlying story I didn't care for. More specifically, the KID!! That one plot point ruined the entire movie for me.

So, even if Singer includes a stadium load of action in the sequel, the fact that we will still have the plot elements from SR doesn't make me that interested.....

Exactly. That is exactly how I feel.

 

[Lead Cenobite]

It is rembered because it set THE standard for people flying in movies. The story is poor and the acting mediocre. But the style of it and beeig the first Superhero movie made it history.

That's your opinion. My opinion is the movie still holds up, and is even superior to a lot of superhero and comic movies out today.

 

[DvilDog]

That's your opinion. My opinion is the movie still holds up, and is even superior to a lot of superhero and comic movies out today.

I second this opinion

 

[Excel]

for superman 2.

sound good?

 

[Sebastos]

I think it sould be serious on some aspects but overall fun indeed.

 

[Excel]

superman tm and returns were both imo too serious.l

superman 2 had the perfect balance of fun and drama. we need to find that again.