Thread Manager
Moderator
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 1
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]477241[/split]
People reading this probably don't believe you're serious, but yeah.. it was released on Tuesday (along with the new Batmobile). Welcome back.
Thanks! I was serious. I really don't follow movie news and I only sporadically checked the internet and email while I was away.
I just saw the suit. It's marinating in my head. Not sure how I feel about it. The bat mobile looked good though.
But surely that's part of the responsibilities of Superman? Why does he need to say he's not going to be around for a while? Batman was away for 8 years in The Dark Knight Rises.
The point of them leaving is not that they left, it's that the world moved on once they did, but ultimately, it still needed them. It's a narratively sound concep
Quote:
Also, what good scenes did he have with Lex? The scene where he walks up to him and gets his ass kicked? Maybe other people thought he was great in that scene, I don't know. He just came off completely upstaged by Spacey, IMO.
The scene with Lex on the island is good. Whether or not Superman gets beaten up. Is the scene where Batman gets defeated in The Dark Knight Rises bad because he is defeated?
Quote:
Anyway, maybe the writers "got" Superman and maybe they didn't... but I think it's very telling how little dialogue he has in the movie. Some people complained about the same thing with MOS and Cavill, but I didn't notice it there... he had plenty of lines, IMO, and even in scenes where his dialogue is limited, Cavill conveyed more to the audience (pain, fear, rage, wonder, etc.). Perhaps that's simply a credit to Cavill being a better actor.
Or it's because you prefer the film.
On that note, I think Cavill really portrayed the essential qualities of Superman brilliantly, you can't even begin to make comparisons with
Routh - because Superman and Clark Kent are really just one character.
Rather than a caricature and the god with no personality, which is how
Routh played it (I blame Singer for that).
So Cavill had tons to work with. He's a better actor than Routh by far,
because whereas Routh's Supes only had one expression, many times
Cavill didn't have to say a word, but you know what he's thinking.
Example: he's getting pounded by Faora and Nam-Ek, zaps them with the
ol' HV, check out the expression on his face as he gets up (which is just before the copters open fire). It's like "Okay, is that all you've got ?"
And then the look when he sees the pilot falling. When Honest trailers criticized Cavill's acting, I was like "Whaaaat ? Did you even see the same movie ? " now I know they over-blow things to make a point, but like many
critics they were soooo wrong about MOS.
I love the film, but I admit it has its flaws (well, okay I can't see any, but there have to be a few, even the Godfather aint perfect) but seriously folks,
Cavill's acting isn't one of them.
Sure he's broodier than Reeve, but still earnest and kind, which is what Superman is all about. And tough too, his Superman gives a sense of being tough, which is part of the character IMO - tough without having to prove it to anyone. That really came out in the interrogation scene
"You afraid of me because you can't control me. You don't, you never will"
good lines, and delivered by a good actor. There was a reason why SR killed Routh's career, part of it's Singer's fault, but Routh just wasn't up to it.
Routh got the job because he looked like Reeve.
Cavill got the job because he looks, and can act, like Superman.
If They'd cast Gina Carano as WW, I think B v S would be vying for the greatest Super-film of all time.
but just IMO.
Great post! The MOS Honest Trailer was pretty funny, but their skewering of Cavill was just stupid.
Criticizing the fact that Superman was played by an "Englishman", for instance. A couple things:
1. The character of Superman was born on Krypton, not in the United States.
2. It's actually possible to cast a person as a character of a different nationality than their own. In the biz, they called it "acting".
Then there's calling Cavill a "beefcake" with the "acting range of a crumpet". The latter is just flat-out wrong for the reasons you pointed out.
- He could be. Though it's too soon to be bringing out Doomsday, IMO.A couple of things about this:
-He's dropping hints about villains again, lol
-He's so nice to those TMZ folks. He always answers questions when they bombard him in the air port.
-His fashion sense is horrid. I find it endearing because it fits with his adorkable nature, but it's true. Those colors don't work together and that jacket doesn't fit him. Size up, Cav-el.
-Despite the heinous clothes, he looks damn good.
-He's so nice to those TMZ folks. He always answers questions when they bombard him in the air port.
The main difference between MOS and SR for me was the Superman and the actor playing him. In SR, Superman was just not...superman. He didn't come off strong, confident, commanding, or...anything really. He was just there to stare blankly and all his "charming" moments were regurgitated Reeve lines delivered with no charisma. Routh didn't do anything. The suit and hair they gave him didn't do his image any favors either. Superman is not a "half way" character. You either embody him or you don't. Routh didn't. He was just awkward Routh the whole time. His only words to his nemesis were the blandly delivered "you have something that belongs to me." He was like a whimpy, wet-blanket (and no, not just because he got beat up, but because there was just nothing there).
Cavill on the other hand could come off commanding, confident, strong, charismatic when allowed to be, and even sad, joyful and warm. He had the "superman factor." The look they gave him did him every favor (expect the hair, that wasn't terrible, but also not ideal). His tone of voice was perfection for this character.
The fact that MOS included a superman that seemed like superman made all the difference. Even if I don't agree with all dialogue or plot choices, I felt Cavill was the character. There's a big difference between watching an actor attempt to play a character and watching an actor understand a character. Cavill gets it. He was able to help minimize some of MOS's flaws because his superness distracted me from them. Routh exacerbated SR's flaws because his acting was flawed.
Also, the fact that SR had less action than MOS does not mean it was character driven. It wasn't. It's superman was dull, it's lois came off like a petulant child, the kid...ugh, Lex was a caricature during every scene but the Kryptonite stab scene. Jimmy and Richard were decent (but Richard's presence created a scenario I didn't care to see). The "character" moments were often hollow filler. SR was just a dull movie that lacked action. It was not a character drama that made up for a lack of action by being interesting in other ways. It was a big nothing with the exception of the actor playing Jimmy, a couple ok Clark scenes and the plane rescue.
Anyways...sorry about the SR talk. That's just my two cents.