Man of Steel vs Superman: The Movie

[Jim-El]

Could we get back to the subject?

I can't think of a more perfect movie than Superman The Movie. Even to this day.
Maybe someday, I will go into detail on all the strengths this movie has/had...It would be a novel of strengths...

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

Why is this even a question. The fact that its asked and the vote is tied makes me doubt the objectivity on this board.

 

[Jim-El]

Why is this even a question. The fact that its asked and the vote is tied makes me doubt the objectivity on this board.

 

[blumatic]

Why is this even a question. The fact that its asked and the vote is tied makes me doubt the objectivity on this board.

Well I didnt vote. I like them both a lot.

and there are a lot of people who hate Superman because of the Donner films. I was shocked to hear how many people hate STM. But magic and romance is not for them.

MOS is kickass, badass, and epic.

 

[bluearth]

Superman The Movie has aged only slightly better then the Adam West Batman show. Its full of cliches and caricatures. The villain trys to kill millions, yet he is comedic, which makes no sense.

Christopher Reeve was the perfect choice for Superman, and while I prefer Amy Adam's Lois Lane, Margot Kidder did an extremely good job in Superman The Movie.

The movie overall just has too many flaws. The pace is sometimes slow and then sometimes abrupt. Theres an annoying amount of silly comedy. Theres the absurd Lois and Superman flying scene

Superman The Movie was fun for its time. But if you take off the nostalgia glasses it falls apart pretty easily.

Man of Steel is great science fiction. Superman The Movie has .... icicles I guess. And shiny, white robes. Prefered the look of Krypton in Man of Steel by far. We saw more technology, even some wildlife. Superman the Movie Krypton looked like an ice planet.

As for Jor-El? Russel Crowe completely shocked me in Man of Steel. His role was much more then the 'cameo' in Superman The Movie. His beat down of Zod was epic. I prefer Crowe's Jor-El

 

[Jim-El]

Are you 2 twins or something? Time for bed. School comes early.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

Not to Narc out but I thought multiple accounts weren't allowed? at least that's how it is on a number of other forums.

well if the mods catch it, they can delete the BATS N' HORNETS account as this IS the new one!

 

[mace1]

Superman The Movie has aged only slightly better then the Adam West Batman show. Its full of cliches and caricatures. The villain trys to kill millions, yet he is comedic, which makes no sense.

Christopher Reeve was the perfect choice for Superman, and while I prefer Amy Adam's Lois Lane, Margot Kidder did an extremely good job in Superman The Movie.

The movie overall just has too many flaws. The pace is sometimes slow and then sometimes abrupt. Theres an annoying amount of silly comedy. Theres the absurd Lois and Superman flying scene

Superman The Movie was fun for its time. But if you take off the nostalgia glasses it falls apart pretty easily.

Man of Steel is great science fiction. Superman The Movie has .... icicles I guess. And shiny, white robes. Prefered the look of Krypton in Man of Steel by far. We saw more technology, even some wildlife. Superman the Movie Krypton looked like an ice planet.

As for Jor-El? Russel Crowe completely shocked me in Man of Steel. His role was much more then the 'cameo' in Superman The Movie. His beat down of Zod was epic. I prefer Crowe's Jor-El

Some folks on youtube and other places were complaining that Jor-el was shown too much.
I had no problem with that,in fact i like it better that way.He was more interesting in this version anyway.

 

[blumatic]

Some folks on youtube and other places were complaining that Jor-el was shown too much.
I had no problem with that,in fact i like it better that way.He was more interesting in this version anyway.

What? Man some people. I think thats Goyer's greatest strength. All the characters have a presence through out the whole film. No one is a throw away.

 

[STARMAN]

The audience is more critical now. I think they would be less forgiving of STM if released today. But STM was a game-changer for it's time.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ THIS!

Someone should write a story with a similar structure, similar romance, and similar WTH? ending, and see what critics think of it, with a character DIFFERENT from Superman.

I can see it now: "This charming, but uneven film is mainly carried by its leading man, but not without its special moments."

I like S:TM. I feel like Reeve elevated the film to something highly enjoyable, and it has some neat disaster effects and miniatures. But the script loses steam, IMHO.

 

[Bruce Malone]

I think just physically these two perfectly captured the essence for the superman of their time.

Although in 30 years I wouldn't be surprised if Reeve still has the more timeless look?

 

[PacificBoy]

^ THIS!

Someone should write a story with a similar structure, similar romance, and similar WTH? ending, and see what critics think of it, with a character DIFFERENT from Superman.

I can see it now: "This charming, but uneven film is mainly carried by its leading man, but not without its special moments."

I like S:TM. I feel like Reeve elevated the film to something highly enjoyable, and it has some neat disaster effects and miniatures. But the script loses steam, IMHO.

Agree, but will a comic book movie cut from the same cloth as STM ever be made in today's context? MoS is a product of our time, as much as STM was.

 

[Tequilla]

Dick Donner film is still the best Superman movie.

 

[STARMAN]

I think part of the charm of STM is first seeing it as a kid. If you're an adult the first time you see STM, it doesn't seem as appealing.

 

[Skrilla31]

I think part of the charm of STM is first seeing it as a kid. If you're an adult the first time you see STM, it doesn't seem as appealing.

I'd argue otherwise. I think actual adults would take more to the original than they would Man Of Steel. It's a better told story with charm, wit and imagination. It has fully realized characters. It has a real romance angle. It's mythic.

Just because you're not a teenager anymore, it doesn't make you an adult. Eventually you reach a state of mind and a state of being where explosions don't matter and all you want is an engaging story. All the CGI spectacle in the world couldn't save Snyder's film for me. It was exhausting and tedious by that point. And don't even bring up young children. I'm certain that young children would take more to Donner's movie than Snyder's. Not even close.

Superman The Movie will live on forever as a timeless classic. I just don't see time being as kind to Man Of Steel. It doesn't have those same qualities. It wasn't as good a film.

 

[STARMAN]

As an adult I see flaws in both STM and MOS. As a kid, STM seemed flawless. STM will live on despite the troubles of the sequels. MOS needs successful sequels for it to live on.

 

[PacificBoy]

My take is that STM is timeless despite its flaws, and MoS is cool despite its. But cool is ephemeral, a product of its time.

 

[STARMAN]

But I think it's more timeless for kids. There's nothing wrong with that. If you put the film on and a kid watches it they will have no idea it was filmed in 1978. They'll usually love it anyway.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I'd argue otherwise. I think actual adults would take more to the original than they would Man Of Steel. It's a better told story with charm, wit and imagination. It has fully realized characters [agreed]. It has a real romance angle [that's one of it's strengths, and flaws]. It's mythic. [agreed, though I would argue that there's a mythological element to MOS]

Just because you're not a teenager anymore, it doesn't make you an adult. Eventually you reach a state of mind and a state of being where explosions don't matter and all you want is an engaging story [that sounds a tad pretentious. I personally found Clark's struggle to fit in and protect humanity to be engaging]. All the CGI spectacle in the world couldn't save Snyder's film for me. It was exhausting and tedious by that point. [I actually agree.] And don't even bring up young children. I'm certain that young children would take more to Donner's movie than Snyder's. Not even close. [Depends on the child.]

Superman The Movie will live on forever as a timeless classic. I just don't see time being as kind to Man Of Steel. [I like the film, and I agree. I think MOS will age better than some think, because of its attempt to combine the FX driven action with realism, character, and plot. But it's not a game-changer and is too controversial to have universal appeal.] It doesn't have those same qualities. It wasn't as good a film.[I think Superman:TM is more fleshed out than MOS, but MOS does a good job at capturing something that hasn't been shown in film for decades. The full effect of his power.]

My response is in brackets.

 

[Skrilla31]

STM only has one real "flaw", and that was it's ending. Part of that has to do with it's troubled production but it's a flaw nonetheless. The emotional stakes are completely dropped because Superman goes back in time without repercussion. So yes, I'm willing to concede that it is a great movie that has a bad ending.

But outside of that it doesn't have any real flaws. At least they weren't flaws when there was no other superhero movie out there to compare it to. You have to remember there was no reference point for this to work off of. Back then supervillains were campy and jovial, but that doesn't mean they weren't worthy villains. Hackman's Luthor isn't as menacing on the outside like Ledger's Joker, but this is still a guy who wants to kill every single person on the west coast so he could buy up all the land and use it as leverage against the government. This is still a scary and dangerous person to have to deal with. But Donner wanted this to be a fun family film and so the tone is very light even though the danger is very real.

 

[STARMAN]

I just think that there are parts of STM that haven't aged well. So something that wasn't an issue back in 78 now seems like a flaw today. MOS has flaws right here and now in 2013. Who knows what flaws it will seem to have 30 years from now.

I am curious if the death of Zod won't be controversial years from now. 30 years from now, MOS might seem campy compared to what's being released far into the future.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I just think that there are parts of STM that haven't aged well. So something that wasn't an issue back in 78 now seems like a flaw today. MOS has flaws right here and now in 2013. Who knows what flaws it will seem to have 30 years from now.

I am curious if the death of Zod won't be controversial years from now. 30 years from now, MOS might seem campy compared to what's being released far into the future.

"Dad, this small town fight is BORING. Well, when I was a young man, this was the best superheroic action sequence ever."

 

[STARMAN]

Yeah. Thirty years from now, audiences will feel like MOS has too much story and not enough action. Lol.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ At this rate of audience expectations, yes.

I can see it now. Superman2030. Superman starts out punching a robot and beating it. He then realizes that it was sent by Luthor, who conveniently has Kryptonite missles. Supes deflects the missles into space which releases the Phantom Zone criminals. He beats them up and flies into their ship where the AI is controlled by a certain cyborg named Brainiac. He saves earth, than realizes that he's late to work, while capturing terrorists around the world. And Luthor gets away