Discussion in 'Man of Steel' started by Thread Manager, Jul 18, 2013.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]459811[/split]
Which was the better franchise reboot...
Man of Steel is better. Simple in my opinion.
I wouldn't call Returns a reboot really. An homage would be a better term.
I'm thinking two terms would fit better. An homage, like you said, and a reintroduction. Even if they had gone through with a sequel <*cringe*> then I still wouldn't even have called it a reboot. Even if they had gone all "Wrath of Khan" with that Superman, it would still be in direct continuation of the previous films. So I'm extremely happy with the way things have turned out.
I like the one with the British guy better
Good gracious I just looked at the cast list for SR, did this movie ruin everyone's career? Don't know what's up with Kate, Kevin has disappeared, Brandon is on tv, and Brian hasn't had a hit in years.
Superman Returns should have been a reboot and not a continuation. That was a mistake. Can you imagine Nolan continuing the Burton films instead of rebooting Batman? It was an awful, awful mistake.
Man of Steel can win this one by virtue of simply being a proper, quality reboot. I like Cavill better then Routh. I like Adams better then Bosworth. I like Fishburne better the Langella.
I will say Superman Returns had a much better romance subplot then Man of Steel. But thats the only thing I can think of going for it.
To be honest, I don't really think SR could even qualify for having a decent subplot considering on how the whole situation between Superman and Lois in SR was something that many hated; let alone the fact that another issue was on how Routh and Bosworth really had no chemistry with each other on screen.
I mean how could they think that people would root for Superman and Lois to be together if she's with a guy that's as nice and great like Superman, but without powers, and some would even argue that Richard White was a better person, in terms of characterization at least, than Superman was in SR.
Making Richard White a good guy and not a selfish cheating loser just so the audience can root for them to break up was a good idea imo. It made the whole situation more difficult and interesting while avoiding played out tropes.
I liked the love triangle subplot in Returns. I hope they have a love triangle subplot in Man of Steel 2, but this time with another female who tries to take Clark form Lois. It shouldnt go very far, but they need to throw some problems into their relationship. Maybe a Chloe-like character from Smallville.
Another huge problem with Superman returns was that he was waaaay too powerful. Once again the only way to put a scratch on him was kryptonite. In Man of Steel Superman still has to use his Superspeed to try and avoid things as theres now consequences for taking a direct hit and not bracing for it.
This is understated to be honest, every review of Superman Returns (at least video-wise) have highlighted how the reviewers felt that they were going to get a rebooted Superman, until they realized it was a copypasta'd Donner film. People were ready to move on from Donner's Superman, and yet the audience was sucked back into it, almost out of necessity. Even then, the film also suffers from writing Superman as someone we still can't relate to, or understand (which is why I appreciate MOS' take on Clark/Kal-El as an outsider trying to blend in).
Superman having a kid was downright stupid
Man of steel by a mile not even close..
Flaws with SR..
1) stupid idea to make it a sequel to S2... it was a love story to Donner. Whoever came up with this idea is a moron.
2) Having a kid --> really? in what world does this make sense moving forward
3) Brandon Routh as Clark kent - i found him way to awkward - way to stiff... HC killed it overall, i know he didn't play the reporter role yet, but as far as acting chops HC>>BR
4) Lex Luthor done wrong again! I have no problem with lex... i say bring in Lex as a political power house.. maybe as a senator or even better president... but what kind of moron decides to bring up a lex that is essentially a 2000 version of the old movies... terrible terrible idea!!!
5) Superman doesn't throw a damn punch! how is that even possible.
After that horrid display i'm not sure if i can watch anything singer related..terrible
For the reasons you stated = NO SR sequel.
I didnt think it was a stupid idea to make a sequel. I was excited for it. But it was not a good idea. I thought I wanted more Donner buy it was just stale.
I watched SR last month. When the menu comes up the John Williams score plays and you get pumped but when you dont see Reeve its like a weird feeling. Im like, who the hell are these people?
SR was just a mistake.
Well said blu...Who were those people???...
I disagree about the chemistry. It wasn't one of the biggest couples ever seen but far from terrible (specially considering it wasn't close to how unbearable the Maguire/Dunst or Bale/Holmes duos did).
But I agree - and have said so loads of times myself - that the premises of the movie should have been fleshed put a lot more.
If someone has been in love and had to leave only to find at their return that the woman they love is with someone else, they can root for it.
Anyone else would have resorted to the jerk new boyfriend cliche without thinking about it twice.
Cue Lana Lang.
But that's because he's confronted with other Kryptonians as powerful as he is. Kryptonite and Kryptonians have always been the ones in movies.
I completely understand him. In the real world, you cannot always stay with the person you love, your beloved woman's new boyfriend is not always a jerk you can just defeat by presence, and certainly you feel alone many times.
But by being a sequel, it forced people to be fully aware of STM and SII and all that happened in them. And strategically speaking that was a too big risk.
Ok. But please tell me why.
Sequels to successful popular movies. No, not only morons think of them.
In the world where the inherent themes of a movie are not disregarded but taken as starting points to develop the characters from.
He was the same as Reeve, as it was a sequel, but IMO he was a little better than Reeve, more believably clumsy and awkward.
Basically all the adaptations of a character are a whatever-the-year version of something already done. I am not the biggest fan of this version of Lex either.
How is that even necessary?
He didn't throw a punch in STM either.
Sometimes I haven't liked one song/album of a band that I like. I won't dislike that band's future and past works because that just make no sense.
Other actors, just like when Schumacher replaced Bruce Wayne/Batman for his sequels, or when suddenly Rachel Dawes looked like Maggie Gyllenhaal. I think all of us' intellects can figure out this one.
Just a shocking idea, how could they ever think anyone would like this?
I liked it
I pity the fool that likes it
So now I'm a fool for liking something you don't like. Quite an immature response.
I mean, what do you actually like about Superman having a kid that kills a dude with a piano? And mind you, somehow forgets that she was impregnated by Clark Kent who she seems to have somehow forgotten the fact that he's superman even though he seeded her as Clark Kent.
I think the implication was that Superman and Lois had an sexual relationship prior towards him leaving Earth for those five years; thus it was not as Clark Kent, but as Superman, that she was involved with and impregnated by from Lois's POV.
The problem with this whole debacle is that the writers weren't clear at first as to whether Superman II was considered canon in the continuity that SR was coming from. By the time it came to the release, I heard them saying things like how it was more of a sequel to S:TM than it was to SII and that it only "borrowed" certain themes from SII, like Lex visiting the FOS and Lois and Superman having slept together in the past.
I do not want a love triangle. No way. Its done to death. I want Lois and Clark to grow very close. I want Lois to truly mean something to Clark and Superman. Have them have a very strong bond and relationship based on trust and faith.
Sort of like Neo and Trinity (but PG-13). So if anything were to happen to Lois. All he'll will break loose.
I see no problem with LnC having children together, they've been together for 75yrs and I do not necessarily believe it is impossible for Supes to have children with her. I do think it is better if it is in an ending scenario and doesn't continue in other stories.
SR left a lot of questions open about Superman and Lois' relationship and how it resulted in Jason. Did Lois get pregnant in Superman II? Is the fact that Superman lost his powers the reason Jason is so sick? Did Superman and Lois have a relationship post Superman II and that's how she got pregnant? Does Lois know from the beginning who Jason's father is? When did she meet Richard and does he believe he is the father?
Apparently these questions would have been answered in the sequel but I honestly think they should have made it clear in the actual movie instead of just ending the movie with some major question marks.