Is Man of Steel the 'Godfather' of Comic Book Films?

[Lord]

It was on purpose, everything according to plan

 

[Senator Pleasury]

It was on purpose, everything according to plan

 

[sf2]

Same here. I watch it at least several times a year. It's a classic that has held up incredibly well...it was the innovator.

Think robotcop better.

 

[jonathancrane]

Godfather? No. That would be a History of Violence.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I love this film. I find it to be a great film. But no. Just no. It's not The Godfather of CBM's. Hell even the TDK, which to many fans IS The Godfather of CBM's is NOT The Godfather of CBM's.

And again, saying this as a huge fan of Snyder's work in MOS, but Armond White is just a run of the mill contrarian. He just HAS to have an iconoclastic opinion on everything. I refuse to believe he really appreciates MOS for what it is and what it does as a film or as a action packed tentpole. He just wants to seem to stand out from other critics. He's a world class *****enozzle.

 

[Batmannerism]

I love this film. I find it to be a great film. But no. Just no. It's not The Godfather of CBM's. Hell even the TDK, which to many fans IS The Godfather of CBM's is NOT The Godfather of CBM's.

And again, saying this as a huge fan of Snyder's work in MOS, but Armond White is just a run of the mill contrarian. He just HAS to have an iconoclastic opinion on everything. I refuse to believe he really appreciates MOS for what it is and what it does as a film or as a action packed tentpole. He just wants to seem to stand out from other critics. He's a world class *****enozzle.

Agree on MOS not being the Godfather of comic book films, but if there was such a thing, what would it be ? Watchmen ?

Personally, I think TDK comes about as close as it gets, as it has such appeal beyond the cbm fanbase (kind of like Gfather transcends the gangster film genre). Perhaps Watchmen, in terms of its storyline, but
TDK in terms of its wonderful performances and slick execution.

Just IMO.

 

[blumatic]

STM will always be the Godfather. Like both films it changed cinemas.

In a market where superhero floods the marketplace I'm not sure if there is any stone unturned.

MOS was more concerned with Superman and his legacy than its place in the history of film.

To me MOS added a significant contribution to Superman's legacy. MOS broke some new ground. It shook things up. But it remained true to what a Superhero should be. And who Superman is.

MOS made huge waves is Superman lore and superhero history. As for films in general. Not much of a blip.

 

[Lord]

There isn't a superhero Godfather film, there is However: Superman: The Movie, Batman 89, Spider-man (2002), The Dark Knight and The Avengers

 

[Visceral]

There once was an individual brave enough to believe that there are better films in existence besides The Godfather. The academic community burnt him at the stake though for his heresy.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

There isn't a superhero Godfather film, there is However: Superman: The Movie, Batman 89, Spider-man (2002), The Dark Knight and The Avengers

Three of them are my all-time favorite.

 

[Green Goblin]

I'd be interested in why some would think this.

 

[BLobo]

I enjoyed Man Of Steel. Cool movie. But The Godfather? Lol...

 

[Superman_200]

I think it is certainly one of the better superhero/comic book films ever made because I agree with Armond White that it actually took itself seriously and that alone makes it at least the best Superman movie ever.

People always say you can't take the character seriously because he has a red cape, etc. but then if you make a movie about Noah or Jesus, Moses, etc. it is expected to take itself seriously.

I don't mean to open up a can of worms, but if you believe that a movie about a magical man who makes planets, suns, galaxies, a universe, cures all illness and gives a dead guy a wink and he comes back to life should be taken seriously, then I don't see why you should have a hard time believing a Superman movie can't take itself seriously. After all, if you believe there is a magical man then, you should also believe that if an alien came to this planet, there is a possibility that he can do things people from this planet can't.

I look at it this way, if Exorcist, and a ton of other horror movies, and sci-fi movies, and movies about religious figures can take themselves seriously and make it seem like it is actually plausible, then why not superhero movies?

 

[bluearth]

I think it is certainly one of the better superhero/comic book films ever made because I agree with Armond White that it actually took itself seriously and that alone makes it at least the best Superman movie ever.

People always say you can't take the character seriously because he has a red cape, etc. but then if you make a movie about Noah or Jesus, Moses, etc. it is expected to take itself seriously.

I don't mean to open up a can of worms, but if you believe that a movie about a magical man who makes planets, suns, galaxies, a universe, cures all illness and gives a dead guy a wink and he comes back to life should be taken seriously, then I don't see why you should have a hard time believing a Superman movie can't take itself seriously. After all, if you believe there is a magical man then, you should also believe that if an alien came to this planet, there is a possibility that he can do things people from this planet can't.

I look at it this way, if Exorcist, and a ton of other horror movies, and sci-fi movies, and movies about religious figures can take themselves seriously and make it seem like it is actually plausible, then why not superhero movies?

This post contradicts itself. People living just 200 years ago would think television or a cell phone is magic. Like them, you dismiss something you cant understand as magic.

If its possible for an alien to fly, why would it not be possible for a being from a different realm to cure or resurrect someone?

Its interesting how we're asked to be open to alternative lifestyles without mocking them, but the same people asking such refuse to be open to certain beliefs while mocking them. Double standard, eh?

 

[Superman_200]

This post contradicts itself. People living just 200 years ago would think television or a cell phone is magic. Like them, you dismiss something you cant understand as magic.

If its possible for an alien to fly, why would it not be possible for a being from a different realm to cure or resurrect someone?

Its interesting how we're asked to be open to alternative lifestyles without mocking them, but the same people asking such refuse to be open to certain beliefs while mocking them. Double standard, eh?

I am not mocking one, I am saying if you take one seriously, then why not take the other seriously at least for the purpose of a movie. Scientifically, it is more likely that there is life elsewhere in the universe (since it is infinite and there are so many galaxies with a sun or even some with 2 suns with millions of planets) than there is of any of the things described in religions happening. Science has not been able to find any shred of truth yet to any religion; however, all religions are taken seriously in films correct? Yet, there is no evidence to support any of it. There is evidence that indicates there is a good possibility of life elsewhere. So, if you treat one seriously, it is a double standard to not treat the other seriously.

 

[Human Torch]

I've always felt Superman the movie is the Godfather of comics films.

 

[Lord]

^^^

It does have the same screenwriter

 

[Lord]

Three of them are my all-time favorite.

I guess you're talking about Batman, The Dark Knight and The Avengers, right?

 

[Lead Cenobite]

^^^

It does have the same screenwriter

And the Godfather himself.

 

[Milu]

No chance in hell. Godfather is on a tier that Man of Steel doesn't even come close to touching.

 

[Nemeres]

It's the The Sicilian of comic book films.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

LOL, NO.
Superman the Movie had the writer of the Godfather working on the script, and it's not regarded as such.