Man of Steel vs Superman: The Movie

[blumatic]

He was a better written, more well rounded character and expressed more emotion in Superman: The Movie. He felt more like a person than a character in a movie. The film was much better at conveying his humanity than Man of Steel.

I can see your point. STM showed more of a passion for humanity.

 

[The Question]

I can see your point. STM showed more of a passion for humanity.

It also did the scenes meant to humanize the character better. All of the stuff in Smallville in Superman: The Movie completely blew Man of Steel's Smallville scenes out of the water.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ The Smallville in Superman:TM did have an unbeatable Americana elegance to it.

 

[blumatic]

It also did the scenes meant to humanize the character better. All of the stuff in Smallville in Superman: The Movie completely blew Man of Steel's Smallville scenes out of the water.

Well. I see you like STM more. I love them both. I think both films has its strength and weaknesses. I'm glad MOS took its own route.

It showed me a different side to the origin story.

 

[B]

I voted for Man of Steel & here's why, Superman: The Movie was a good film for it's time, I mean there is no question about that considering the film was out for a good 15 years before I was old enough to have seen it for the first time in the early to mid 90's.

There's no doubting it is a classic, however it is a classic because it's one of the first superhero films that came out & one of the first that was actually good. However in my opinion, it isn't a timeless classic. It isn't a film that could be updated & released again & you'd think as fondly of it. Just look at Superman Returns for proof, in my opinion that film was virtually just a more updated telling of that same story/plot & it wasn't even in the same league as STM.

Superman The Movie will always hold a special place with me, however for me it's no longer the best & only good Superman film in existence. I've been waiting to see this sort of Superman series of films, ever since I'd seen the first Spiderman film in 2001/2002.. then again with Batman Begins. Something more updated with the times & a more realistic take on such a complex character.

 

[Loki882]

Really, Reeve was a better written character than Cavill, disagree completely.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

There's no doubting it is a classic, however it is a classic because it's one of the first superhero films that came out & one of the first that was actually good. However in my opinion, it isn't a timeless classic. It isn't a film that could be updated & released again & you'd think as fondly of it. Just look at Superman Returns for proof, in my opinion that film was virtually just a more updated telling of that same story/plot & it wasn't even in the same league as STM.

But the same could be said about MOS. It was STM and SII in one movie more updated.

Superman The Movie will always hold a special place with me, however for me it's no longer the best & only good Superman film in existence. I've been waiting to see this sort of Superman series of films, ever since I'd seen the first Spiderman film in 2001/2002.. then again with Batman Begins. Something more updated with the times & a more realistic take on such a complex character.

I get Batman Begins; it certainly set a tone rarely seen before in superhero movies. But Spider-man was the same old school Donner-like storytelling. Minor details overlooked, campy humor everywhere, one-dimensional characters, etc.

 

[Loki882]

I though that TASM was a much better movie than the first Raimi movie (though SM 2 is the best overall). TASM put a new spin on the origins, introduced a conspiracy plot line that will play out over the long-term, had an excellent romance, great acting, and made Norman Osborn a threat without even showing him. MOS was a similar experience for me.

 

[conan69]

Superman: The Movie is a much better film. It's better written and better directed and overall much more compelling. The plot is a little clunky, especially in the theatrical cut, and Lois' inner monologue is horrid, but all in all it captures the humanity of Superman much better than Man of Steel did.

Lois dialogue was studio pressure. That was supposed to be a scene with them and just music... no dialogue. The studio didnt "get" it" and the voice over was put in.

I was really hoping that voiceover would be cut from the Dir Cut.

 

[Bad Superman]

I do find it funny that while some MOS fans hate how the critics supposedly dislike the movie out of nostalgia for the old, they essentially don't like STM because it dosen't fit their 21st century mandate for a Superman film. Heck, some MOS fans only seem to like it because its modern, and therefore "Theirs".

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

Lois dialogue was studio pressure. That was supposed to be a scene with them and just music... no dialogue. The studio didnt "get" it" and the voice over was put in.

I was really hoping that voiceover would be cut from the Dir Cut.

I always put that crap monologue on mute when if comes up. Totally ruined the scene.

 

[Blake II]

You can't compare these two.

I'd rather see a movie with modern graphics, wiring, tones, and views than stuff from way back then.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

I though that TASM was a much better movie than the first Raimi movie (though SM 2 is the best overall). TASM put a new spin on the origins, introduced a conspiracy plot line that will play out over the long-term, had an excellent romance, great acting, and made Norman Osborn a threat without even showing him. MOS was a similar experience for me.

I agree on everything.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

You can't compare these two.

I'd rather see a movie with modern graphics, wiring, tones, and views than stuff from way back then.

Yup!!!! I'd rather see something like Behind Enemy Lines over something like Apocalypse Now!!!! I mean, Behind Enemy Lines was made recently so it has updated gfx!!!!! Apocalypse Now was made in 1979! Yuck!!!! My mother didn't even pop her cherry then!

 

[B]

But the same could be said about MOS. It was STM and SII in one movie more updated.

Well no not really, in Superman II Zod's plan was seemingly to just rule Earth & kill Kal-El.. or have him be his slave. In Man of Steel, Zod's plan is much more in line with what Zod's angle is in comics & other incarnations of the character with his main goal or aim being to rebuild Krypton.

STM & SR's main plot angle both involved a Lex Luthor obsessed with selling land.

However this is getting away from my point, my point wasn't that they each had similar plot angles, my point was that STM's main plot wasn't good enough & memorable enough to be updated & retold.

I get Batman Begins; it certainly set a tone rarely seen before in superhero movies. But Spider-man was the same old school Donner-like storytelling. Minor details overlooked, campy humor everywhere, one-dimensional characters, etc.

I kinda disagree, Spiderman wasn't in the same tone as Batman Begins, however it was a more modern story & made an attempt to give more of a realistic take on the character that had been seen before.

 

[JohnConner]

Superman the Movie by far.

MOS had more action and current SFX but ultimately the emotional aspects seemed very forced to me in MOS where in STM it felt far more organic. This goes a long way for me.

Plus the acting/dialogue/storytelling in STM was groundbreaking where MOS didn't set the bar very high and it was overall kind of average.

Once you add up the heart, execution, nostalgia, and Reeve's performance it's clear that STM is on another level.

This summarizes what I could not say...so true 100%

Altho I do like both. STM will always be a classic and timeless and you knew you just finished watching greatness when you finished it...to me for years its been a standard a masterpiece. yes it had flaws...but tolerable and worked well together.

I will watch MOS again but it will fit nicely right in with most transformers films.

I feel superman 2 was good as well. and 3 had elements you grow to like altho overall yes in generally it was abusive to the viewer.

MOS combined STM1 and 2....it was too much. and it felt fast forwarded.

 

[JohnConner]

Superman: The Movie was great for it's time. Man Of Steel is great for it's time.


Does it really matter? Both movies were great.

I think one is def better...and some ppl think the other. and thats fine...but to some degree it does matter.

Its been over 30 yrs for one..it should NOT be better. Its a reflection of Hollywood's poor direction and an overall lowering in quality.

I do think i could enjoy MOS but not for many years to come ill watch it maybe 1 or 2 more times...its no Prometheus or recent batmans.

How is it possible that a movie 35 yrs later cant be REmade properly and without fail? Esp after failing with SR recently....mos was good...good enuff i suppose...but it was not a marvelous masterpiece...i think maybe it could have been...if it slowed down a bit...and was less 'artificial'. and if it didnt cram superman 2 into itself and then regurgitated this onto our eyes.

I will forgive time travel in STM as at least it felt impactful altho obv that the writer had no clue on how time travel could remotely work. He is upset as he could not save his father and could not re-accept failure.

MOS steals all the great elements of already existing storylines and cheapens them by cramming it all, while missing all the in betweens...they even dared to make him almost reach death and then heal from the planet like in Frank Millers dark knight returns.

I dont hate MOS...but the comparison stands and hollywood looks really dumb. 35 years later.

 

[Loki882]

The third act of STM was even more BS than the one in MOS. Prometheus, the movie full of plot holes big enough for you to drive a starship through, unanswered questions up the Wazoo, and the biggest bunch of idiots ever to have graced the silver screen. Yeah, I'll take MOS over Prometheus any day. Also, the comparisons to Transformers are really starting to get on my nerves, THERE IS NO COMPARISON, MOS beats them buy a hundred miles.

 

[John Lambert]

I thought MOS was better by miles. One thing I thought of, in STM, Lois sees Clark running past the train. Even if she is a little young, how does she not years later when SM shows up be like "this must have been that boy I saw running on the train as a child just outside Smallville. Wait, Clark is from Smallville." At least she should think along these lines.

I loved Lois Lane way more in MOS. She was a good reporter, not a reporter who could not spell, and not see what was in front of her that we are told is good.

Also, in STM, the success of Luthor's plot relies on everyone else being very incompetent at points. In MOS, Superman has to use all his effort and energy just to stop the World Engine.

Lastly, if Clark can move fast enough to turn back time, why can't he move fast enough to intercept both missiles?

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ Because a certain catastrophe gave him the adrenaline to do so. But why not turn back time even farther so that he can stop the explosion from going off in the first place?

 

[Superherofan123]

It really bothers me how people say there are so many problems in MOS, but want to ignore all the terribly written plot points in the Donner films. I feel MOS was a far superior movie, and I feel if this same exact movie had been made with Nolan listed as director it would have no less than an 80% on RT. MOS was better than Thor, Iron man 2 and 3, spiderman 3, XMO Wolverine, and so on. It's in the upper echelon of CBM ever IMO.

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

I'm still waitin for someone to tell me why Superman cares so much Lois is dead. If the kiss in MOS is forced, Supes reaction in SM is just convenient, it happens only cuz he's Superman and her name is Lois Lane, with that being said i still think SM > MOS.

 

[Loki882]

Not to mention that turning back time goes against EVERYTHING that Jor-el had taught and warned him about, the entire point of the movie. Yet, he suffered NO consequences for doing this. At least in MOS, Superman was forced to kill a man, which goes against everything he believes in, and had a reaction to it.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ Cuz it was Lois. He cares passionately about Lois because he likes her sense of honesty and tact. But that's somewhat superficial, when one thinks about it

 

[MrMaooz]

MOS because I haven't seen S:TM!