OK...its time.....Man of Steel vs Superman Returns - Part 1

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I heard from one person that they saw SR and MOS were on opposite ends of the spectrum: SR was substance over style, and MOS was style over substance. While I agree with that statement, I don't think MOS suffers from it compared to SR. MOS was fun and I wanted to see it more, and want to know what will happen next (moreso, because of Justice League), whereas with SR I got bored after viewing it for the second time; I only knew one way to go with SR2, but over time I didn't care anymore.

That statement; I want to happen concerning MOS2.



Routh is doing Call of Duty: Ghosts.

Ah right, I still think there is a good comic-book movie role out there for him though, the guy is huge.

i think that statement is totally bogus. how could you agree with it???
to me, SR's style is as prominent as MOS; however, SR is lack of substance, (the main event evolved around lois and lex only) while MOS is full of substance (telling the 2 fathers' hope on their son, the krypton, general Zod's perspective, clark's life fr baby, kid, teenage to adult, and lois's story)

really, what subtance you are talking about???

SR had plenty of substance which it explored through it main theme, which is spelt out on the scrabble board at the start of the movie 'alienation.' Superman has never felt quite at home on earth, despite his love for humanity, hence why he goes back to Krypton. The alienation them is spoken by Superman and live by Superman throughout, for example, lines like "That place was a graveyard, and i'm all thats left." Him overhearing Lois saying she never loved him, seeing the article "Why the world doesnt need Superman," the reciting of Jor-El's speech, particulatly Kal-El's face when he says "Even though you have ben raised as a human being, you are not one of them....." and so on and so forth. The biggest one being Lex turning a remnant of his homeworld, long lost and completely destroyed along with his people, into a "sick joke." Thats what I like about the movie, Superman goes through a lot of hardships in SR but they are emotional rather than physical, in a way he is being tortured throughout the movie, with saving people his only happy moments.

Then of course to find out at the end that there IS someone like him in the universe, and its his own is very uplifting in the movie. Hence why Kal-El relaying Jor-El's speech to Jason was highly emotional, and Superman was genuinely happy at the end of the movie when he wasnt for most it, he's not alone anymore.

 

[sf2]

Ah right, I still think there is a good comic-book movie role out there for him though, the guy is huge.



SR had plenty of substance which it explored through it main theme, which is spelt out on the scrabble board at the start of the movie 'alienation.' Superman has never felt quite at home on earth, despite his love for humanity, hence why he goes back to Krypton. The alienation them is spoken by Superman and live by Superman throughout, for example, lines like "That place was a graveyard, and i'm all thats left." Him overhearing Lois saying she never loved him, seeing the article "Why the world doesnt need Superman," the reciting of Jor-El's speech, particulatly Kal-El's face when he says "Even though you have ben raised as a human being, you are not one of them....." and so on and so forth. The biggest one being Lex turning a remnant of his homeworld, long lost and completely destroyed along with his people, into a "sick joke." Thats what I like about the movie, Superman goes through a lot of hardships in SR but they are emotional rather than physical, in a way he is being tortured throughout the movie, with saving people his only happy moments.

Then of course to find out at the end that there IS someone like him in the universe, and its his own is very uplifting in the movie. Hence why Kal-El relaying Jor-El's speech to Jason was highly emotional, and Superman was genuinely happy at the end of the movie when he wasnt for most it, he's not alone anymore.

Thanks. Sound very sentimental, making people cry.
Can I put it this way... SR is like a jazz music, blue n slow; while MOS like a rock music, fast n explosive. But that doesn't make SR more subtance than MOS.

Therefore, that statement is b..llsh..t to me.

 

[Binker]

I was only relying what was said.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Thanks. Sound very sentimental, making people cry.
Can I put it this way... SR is like a jazz music, blue n slow; while MOS like a rock music, fast n explosive. But that doesn't make SR more subtance than MOS.

Therefore, that statement is b..llsh..t to me.

Ah right thats fair enough. I personally thought SR had a bit more substance than MOS but MOS wasnt devoid of it, in fact it had plenty. For some reason Snyders movies get criticised for a lack of substance, but I dont find this to be the case at all. 300 had some, but particularly Watchmen and MoS had plenty as well.

Its an unjustified criticism to me.

 

[Jaxon]

Ah right thats fair enough. I personally thought SR had a bit more substance than MOS but MOS wasnt devoid of it, in fact it had plenty. For some reason Snyders movies get criticised for a lack of substance, but I dont find this to be the case at all. 300 had some, but particularly Watchmen and MoS had plenty as well.

Its an unjustified criticism to me.

All movies with high production values and action get criticised for lack of depth, it's just critic dribble because they think the only movies of substance are created in someones shed on a $4 budget

 

[sf2]

All movies with high production values and action get criticised for lack of depth, it's just critic dribble because they think the only movies of substance are created in someones shed on a $4 budget

Lol.

 

[Doc Ock]

If WB decide that Arrow and Flash series are separate from the DC movies-verse, then I wouldn't mind occasional Brandon Routh as Clark Kent (and Superman) cameo in Flash.

But they would really need to make this as a separate interpretation not connected to either SR, MOS, and Donner movies. Design a new suit.

I think it would be flippin sweet to have Routh return as Clark/Superman for at least the small screen!

Yep, a flaw of one seems to be something good about the other and vice-versa, put together they would probably make the perfect Superman movie. Though MOS sets up sequels much better than SR did, though I still love SR.

Yeah MOS is oozing with sequel potential, I think the best part of the film is the way it ends with Clark in the Daily Planet. It made me so giddy!

I heard from one person that they saw SR and MOS were on opposite ends of the spectrum: SR was substance over style, and MOS was style over substance. While I agree with that statement, I don't think MOS suffers from it compared to SR. MOS was fun and I wanted to see it more, and want to know what will happen next (moreso, because of Justice League), whereas with SR I got bored after viewing it for the second time; I only knew one way to go with SR2, but over time I didn't care anymore.

That statement; I want to happen concerning MOS2.

Yeah I can see that. Although I think MOS did have good substance elements, it just wasn't (and I'm not sure how to word it to where it makes sense out loud) together. It was kinda randomly placed here and there but wasn't complete. I suppose it might be the same for style when it comes to Returns. I don't find SR boring but I can see why others would see it that way. I view it as the Donnerverse Superman III.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

All movies with high production values and action get criticised for lack of depth, it's just critic dribble because they think the only movies of substance are created in someones shed on a $4 budget

I dont think thats quite true, most recently IM3 and The Avengers were not criticised for a lack of substance yet MOS was, I personally thought MOS had more substance than both. I am not talking about movie quality here, while MOS was better than IM3 it wasnt better than TA, but it had more substance and emotional moments than both for me.

Yeah MOS is oozing with sequel potential, I think the best part of the film is the way it ends with Clark in the Daily Planet. It made me so giddy!


.

I did love that "Welcome to the planet." "Glad to be here Lois," awesome stuff. Its why I am little disappointed we are getting Batman vs Superman as the nest movie, as MOS only really scratched the surface of Supermans story, for example, he started at the planet at the end of the movie. I hope they can make it work though.

 

[sf2]

I dont think thats quite true, most recently IM3 and The Avengers were not criticised for a lack of substance yet MOS was, I personally thought MOS had more substance than both. I am not talking about movie quality here, while MOS was better than IM3 it wasnt better than TA, but it had more substance and emotional moments than both for me.



I did love that "Welcome to the planet." "Glad to be here Lois," awesome stuff. Its why I am little disappointed we are getting Batman vs Superman as the nest movie, as MOS only really scratched the surface of Supermans story, for example, he started at the planet at the end of the movie. I hope they can make it work though.

I guess it's the case where to them IM3 n TA are excesss thier expectations while MOS is out of their expectations.

Ya, it's very disappointing that we don't get a solo sequel.

 

[charl_huntress]

MOS...SR was not good and failed in many ways.

 

[blumatic]

Critics loved SR. Some calling it an action packed blockbuster. Wow.

It's just terrible that the hero and villain have one scene together.

I would sat SR structurally is a better made film. It plays off strongly the themes of the Donner films. But I just don't understand why it took 2.5 hours to tell that story. And nothing seemed new, fresh or different. In know it's Donnerverse but the film seemed stale. Maybe if it came out in 1990 it would have been great. But as a 21st century superhero film it was bland.

It was not epic at all.

 

[Kal-El.9859]

I really enjoyed Superman Returns....just watched it again the other night. But for me, Man of Steel is the Superman movie to beat!

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I can still watch SR, just watched it last week, and enjoy it, its still a great movie that I have had years of entertainment from. But I think I will get the same with MOS as well, watched it for the 4th time today and have loved it every time, I am still noticing new things as well like subtle hints and story beats which I am loving.

Both are awesome Superman movies and both give us something very different, which I think is great.

 

[Azrael24]

SR vs MOS- my thoughts.

Acting: MOS wins this by a mile, the best actor in SR is Kevin Spacey and honestly that is hardly his best work. Every character was better portrayed by their acting counterparts in MOS

Script: MOS. I honestly think SR had a very novel idea of having him 'return' to the screen and in the Superman universe. But it was very poorly executed and to lift the exact same plot from STM is just lazy. MOS, for me had a classic comic book plot, very good for an origin story same level as BB. People complain about the corny dialogue in MOS (where?) but SR had some horrible lines, "I'm always around." Really?

Music: MOS...omg. Anyone who didn't like the Hans Score..dunno what to tell you. John Ottman should only focus on editing or composing..not both in the same film, that is a bad decision by Singer. His score was very very very depressing.

Cinematography: MOS. SR was actually not bad, there were some very nice shots, but Snyder is known for this and is probably the best visual director in hollywood.

Romance: Here is where it gets interesting..I am actually going with MOS. Kate Bosworth is HORRIBLE. No chemistry between her and Brandon. The Superman in handcuffs interview with Lois is more romantic than any scene in SR. Just because you put two people close and play slow music doesn't emit romance...you need screen chemistry which they lacked. Same thing I feel about Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.

Superman: MOS. I'm sorry, I am a rabid Superman fan and I LOVED this Superman. This is the one I knew as a kid, I never felt like he didn't try to save people. I just felt like he was physically (finally) matched up so he couldn't just do everything. They made him a man, not a god. Thank you. SR..not so much...this Superman f***ed lois and then left earth without telling her for 7 years!? Yeah..okay.

Villains: MOS. Faora alone wins this category

I'm sorry, I just don't see how the two compare. SR made me defend Superman to friends who didn't like the character. MOS made those friends fans.

 

[Kal-El.9859]

SR vs MOS- my thoughts.

Acting: MOS wins this by a mile, the best actor in SR is Kevin Spacey and honestly that is hardly his best work. Every character was better portrayed by their acting counterparts in MOS

Script: MOS. I honestly think SR had a very novel idea of having him 'return' to the screen and in the Superman universe. But it was very poorly executed and to lift the exact same plot from STM is just lazy. MOS, for me had a classic comic book plot, very good for an origin story same level as BB. People complain about the corny dialogue in MOS (where?) but SR had some horrible lines, "I'm always around." Really?

Music: MOS...omg. Anyone who didn't like the Hans Score..dunno what to tell you. John Ottman should only focus on editing or composing..not both in the same film, that is a bad decision by Singer. His score was very very very depressing.

Cinematography: MOS. SR was actually not bad, there were some very nice shots, but Snyder is known for this and is probably the best visual director in hollywood.

Romance: Here is where it gets interesting..I am actually going with MOS. Kate Bosworth is HORRIBLE. No chemistry between her and Brandon. The Superman in handcuffs interview with Lois is more romantic than any scene in SR. Just because you put two people close and play slow music doesn't emit romance...you need screen chemistry which they lacked. Same thing I feel about Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.

Superman: MOS. I'm sorry, I am a rabid Superman fan and I LOVED this Superman. This is the one I knew as a kid, I never felt like he didn't try to save people. I just felt like he was physically (finally) matched up so he couldn't just do everything. They made him a man, not a god. Thank you. SR..not so much...this Superman f***ed lois and then left earth without telling her for 7 years!? Yeah..okay.

Villains: MOS. Faora alone wins this category

I'm sorry, I just don't see how the two compare. SR made me defend Superman to friends who didn't like the character. MOS made those friends fans.

BINGO....I agree 110% I agree to infinity and beyond that Superman was unable to save people in Metropolis due to the fact that he was matched up with a villain that was able to go toe to toe with him. If Superman was trying to save People Zod would just fly around Metropolis and kill more people and destroy more of the city. All in all I thought Man of Steel was the superior movie between the two

 

[Azrael24]

BINGO....I agree 110% I agree to infinity and beyond that Superman was unable to save people in Metropolis due to the fact that he was matched up with a villain that was able to go toe to toe with him. If Superman was trying to save People Zod would just fly around Metropolis and kill more people and destroy more of the city. All in all I thought Man of Steel was the superior movie between the two

Thank you. I am glad someone else sees that. Zod and Faora told him they were going to kill every human alive..wth!? No hero in any comic movie has had that sort of threat. He couldn't save everyone fighting individuals who were his equals with training on top of that. Case in point, when he saved the guy who fell out the helicopter what happened to him right after that? He got sucker punched, knocked out and Faora went on an @$$ whooping tirade.

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

Oooo I wanna play!!!!

Acting: Man Of Steel! Brandon was a bad copy of Christopher Reeves and he had no charisma or screen prescence as Superman. I am blaming Kate for her lame Lois because she apparently modeled her after Katherine Hepburn; where the he-- did that come from.
In MOS, Henry was a great Superman despite being in scenes with Oscar winners and nominees he mostly did better than them. The only actors who did better than him were Ayulet and Russel.

Script: I will give this one to MOS barely. I feel that both scripts had flaws, but good gracious SR copied the plot of Superman and made minor changes. Really! Lex and another land scheme. Did no one question this when filming and writing. I did like the intention of Superman's son and Lois not being to happy with Supes for essentially knocking her up and abandoning him.
The MOS script needed to be more linear and ironed out. There are too many time jumps that make you question what's going on. Most notably at the end when he kills Zod, cries then the very next scene is being snarky with the General.

Music: Tie, I love Flight, and Arcade but felt "How Could You Leave Us Like That" was one of the most beautiful songs I've ever heard.

Cinematography: SR, no shaky cam is enough to give this win to Singer. Plus he shot some really beautiful shots like Superman falling back to Earth unconscious.

Romance: I guess I have to give it a tie. Brandon as Kate were horrible but I did like their story. I liked that Lois found someone else and Superman had to suffer for his actions towards her. I also felt the flying was one of the most romantic scenes I have ever seen.
In MOS there wasn't a lot of romance or at least not the in your face kind. There was flirting and attraction but no real romance. NM it's not a tie I give this to SR though I hate not giving the romance card to Henry.

Superman: This isn't even a contest, Henry Cavill.

Villains: Faora, Zod, the other Krypto's. Even that skinny skeletal Kryptonian was better than Kevin Spacy as Lex.

Costume: MOS, not only because they got rid of the trunks, but also because of the cape (best cape ever). And the way Henry filled it out. There is one promo still of Brandon with his hands on his hips and his thighs look like they belong to a woman.

Flying: SR, again no shaky cam. MOS's flying was more powerful but you couldn't get a good look at it because it was either just a small speck on the screen or the close up were to shaky and went by to fast. The one thing I felt that should have been kept from SR was the idea that the movement while flying was like swimming.

Lois Lane: MOS I will always feel that Amy did not have Lois' spunk or attitude but at least she was playing Lois Lane, unlike Kate who was playing Lois Lane with a lobotomy. Coincidentally I feel that both the female sidekicks in both movies would have been better as Lois, Ayulet and Parker Posey.

Martha Kent: MOS

Perry White: MOS

Teenage Clark: MOS

Clark's Spaceship: SR

 

[Batmannerism]

SR vs MOS- my thoughts.

Acting: MOS wins this by a mile, the best actor in SR is Kevin Spacey and honestly that is hardly his best work. Every character was better portrayed by their acting counterparts in MOS

Script: MOS. I honestly think SR had a very novel idea of having him 'return' to the screen and in the Superman universe. But it was very poorly executed and to lift the exact same plot from STM is just lazy. MOS, for me had a classic comic book plot, very good for an origin story same level as BB. People complain about the corny dialogue in MOS (where?) but SR had some horrible lines, "I'm always around." Really?

Music: MOS...omg. Anyone who didn't like the Hans Score..dunno what to tell you. John Ottman should only focus on editing or composing..not both in the same film, that is a bad decision by Singer. His score was very very very depressing.

Cinematography: MOS. SR was actually not bad, there were some very nice shots, but Snyder is known for this and is probably the best visual director in hollywood.

Romance: Here is where it gets interesting..I am actually going with MOS. Kate Bosworth is HORRIBLE. No chemistry between her and Brandon. The Superman in handcuffs interview with Lois is more romantic than any scene in SR. Just because you put two people close and play slow music doesn't emit romance...you need screen chemistry which they lacked. Same thing I feel about Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.

Superman: MOS. I'm sorry, I am a rabid Superman fan and I LOVED this Superman. This is the one I knew as a kid, I never felt like he didn't try to save people. I just felt like he was physically (finally) matched up so he couldn't just do everything. They made him a man, not a god. Thank you. SR..not so much...this Superman f***ed lois and then left earth without telling her for 7 years!? Yeah..okay.

Villains: MOS. Faora alone wins this category

I'm sorry, I just don't see how the two compare. SR made me defend Superman to friends who didn't like the character. MOS made those friends fans.

Boo-yaaa ! Agree 100% plus, my own thoughts.

1) the single thing that made me hate SR so much !

Superman, son of the greatest mind of Krypton,
Superman possessed of super-senses (X-ray vision, telescopic vision ) that are just part of his natural sensory apparatus
Superman, who has only ever faced one human who used Kryptonite against him....

SR wants us to believe that this Superman will land on an island, made, in large part OF THE ONE ****ING SUBSTANCE THAT CAN KILL HIM !
and then looked surprised when he gets his ass kicked, and nearly gets stabbed to death with it !

I just cannot accept Superman being that ****ING STUPID !!!!!!

I've argued this point to death and beyond with people, it just doesn't make sense -it's way past Tony picking a fight with the Mandarin, and not raising any defences, that's dumb......but nowhere near as galactically stupid as
what Superman did in SR.

(yeah, and he knocks up Lois and then buggers off to space, what a prick !).

Cavill's Superman is ten times the man that Routh's Superman was.
Like people have said, he may have godlike might, but he's not a god, he's fallible and that makes us like him more.

Also, there's no emotional payoff, Lex escapes the island and then is marooned on an island ha-ha-ha that's hillarious......**** you Bryan Singer !
(come on, after seeing those goons, and Lex kick the **** out of Superman,
they had a beating coming.....and instead most of them are crushed by rocks)

vs MOS, Zod tries to wipe out humanity, and Snap ! Superman ends the threat, once and for all.

At last Superman gets to throw a punch. The Smallville fight is the best
super-hero on Super-villain smackdown on screen to date.
(they fight in a hail of bullets and cannon fire, and don't even care !!! Awesomeness ! And Faora :1 US army : 0 , wow, she was badass
to the nth degree, best hench-person ever !)

2) SR is an un-original piece of **** !

Basically, it's an homage that's really just a re-hashing of a bunch of the elements of Donner and Reeve's films. Particularly when it comes to Lex Luthor:
- Lex Luthor finds the fortress of solitude, again.
-Superman saves a plane, again,
-Lex Luthor uses Kryptonite against Superman, again, and throws him into some water afterwards.
-Lex Luthor has a bunch of dumb goons, and a bimbo girlfriend, again.
- Lex Luthor's evil scheme is based around obtaining a market monopoly in real property (i.e. land).

**** me ! are there any original ideas in this film ?????


MOS is re-interpretation, that has all the key elements of the Superman myth, but with an original spin on them.
At least Snyder/Nolan and Goyer had the balls to come up with their own
ideas, or at least draw on source material that diverges significantly from
Donner's.

What they attempted to do, and I think largely succeeded, was bring
Superman into the 21st century, as we recognize it.



But this is all IMO. But come on, you walk out of MOS going "**** yeah!"
that "Welcome to the planet" line, sums up what the entire story was about,
a man finding his place in the world.

When I walked out of SR, I wanted to ask for my money back.

Don't even get me started on Lois Lane, Adams was a million times better than Bosworth - I've never been happy with how Lois was depicted onscreen, but Adams' Lois was likeable and finally cut the Gordian knot that is the central
problem with the character - not only does she know Clark is Superman/Kal-El, it's her that finds him !

or Zod, he was a much more understandable character than SR's Luthor.
Yeah, he's a bit crazy and a bit shouty, but he's not a cartoon character, like Lex.

So in summing up, MOS = epitome of awesome SR = epitome of crap.

 

[Azrael24]

Oooo I wanna play!!!!

Music: Tie, I love Flight, and Arcade but felt "How Could You Leave Us Like That" was one of the most beautiful songs I've ever heard.

Cinematography: SR, no shaky cam is enough to give this win to Singer. Plus he shot some really beautiful shots like Superman falling back to Earth unconscious.

Flying: SR, again no shaky cam. MOS's flying was more powerful but you couldn't get a good look at it because it was either just a small speck on the screen or the close up were to shaky and went by to fast. The one thing I felt that should have been kept from SR was the idea that the movement while flying was like swimming.

Lois Lane: MOS I will always feel that Amy did not have Lois' spunk or attitude but at least she was playing Lois Lane, unlike Kate who was playing Lois Lane with a lobotomy. Coincidentally I feel that both the female sidekicks in both movies would have been better as Lois, Ayulet and Parker Posey.

Nice comments. Got some fun rebuttals for ya (edited your post to what I wanted to comment on).

Music: I did love "How Could You Leave Us Like That" and "You're not one of them". But the fact that Zimmer composed a brand new theme and had more action in his music...I gotta go with MOS.

Cinematography: No way in the world SR wins this. Seriously?! SR has nothing as epic as any of the following-
-Superman emerging from the fotress..cape billowing in the wind..
-Superman flying into Zod
-Superman being thrown into the vault
-Krypton...the whole thing.
I could go on and on. The scene with BR falling to earth was ok...but my gosh..everything else was horrid which brings me too...

Flying: Come on man! No way! Superman returns flying was CG just like MOS. The difference is it was TERRIBLE. They used CG when they didn't have too. He felt slow and a lot of the flying was at night where I could barely see him. Remember Superman's night flight with Lois in STM? Remember how you could actually see them? In SR...you can't see crap.

I disagree about the small peck on the screen...there were some incredible shots...especially the fact that he would fly while fighting. But I do agree, some of the shots could be even clearer or more graceful on certain aspects. SR plane rescue was the only good flying in the whole movie...with the exception of BR's blank stare that plagued his Superman performance.

Lois: I LOVED Amy's lois. For once she wasn't a b****. That's right I said it. You can have a strong, smart, independent woman without her always having to be so sarcastic, snarky, or down right irritating. I never liked that interpretation because it's never truly been Lois. I think Amy had enough wit (remember her bantering with Perry or the Military), she just didn't have it with Clark...and she's not supposed too. She's kinda in awe of the guy. That's what women do when they really like a guy, they tend to drop the 'attitude' per say.

But I respect your points. Just wanted a friendly SHH forum debate.

 

[Azrael24]

Boo-yaaa ! Agree 100% plus, my own thoughts.

1) the single thing that made me hate SR so much !

Superman, son of the greatest mind of Krypton,
Superman possessed of super-senses (X-ray vision, telescopic vision ) that are just part of his natural sensory apparatus
Superman, who has only ever faced one human who used Kryptonite against him....

SR wants us to believe that this Superman will land on an island, made, in large part OF THE ONE ****ING SUBSTANCE THAT CAN KILL HIM !
and then looked surprised when he gets his ass kicked, and nearly gets stabbed to death with it !

I just cannot accept Superman being that ****ING STUPID !!!!!!

I've argued this point to death and beyond with people, it just doesn't make sense -it's way past Tony picking a fight with the Mandarin, and not raising any defences, that's dumb......but nowhere near as galactically stupid as
what Superman did in SR.

(yeah, and he knocks up Lois and then buggers off to space, what a prick !).

Cavill's Superman is ten times the man that Routh's Superman was.
Like people have said, he may have godlike might, but he's not a god, he's fallible and that makes us like him more.

Also, there's no emotional payoff, Lex escapes the island and then is marooned on an island ha-ha-ha that's hillarious......**** you Bryan Singer !
(come on, after seeing those goons, and Lex kick the **** out of Superman,
they had a beating coming.....and instead most of them are crushed by rocks)

vs MOS, Zod tries to wipe out humanity, and Snap ! Superman ends the threat, once and for all.

At last Superman gets to throw a punch. The Smallville fight is the best
super-hero on Super-villain smackdown on screen to date.
(they fight in a hail of bullets and cannon fire, and don't even care !!! Awesomeness ! And Faora :1 US army : 0 , wow, she was badass
to the nth degree, best hench-person ever !)

2) SR is an un-original piece of **** !

Basically, it's an homage that's really just a re-hashing of a bunch of the elements of Donner and Reeve's films. Particularly when it comes to Lex Luthor:
- Lex Luthor finds the fortress of solitude, again.
-Superman saves a plane, again,
-Lex Luthor uses Kryptonite against Superman, again, and throws him into some water afterwards.
-Lex Luthor has a bunch of dumb goons, and a bimbo girlfriend, again.
- Lex Luthor's evil scheme is based around obtaining a market monopoly in real property (i.e. land).

**** me ! are there any original ideas in this film ?????


MOS is re-interpretation, that has all the key elements of the Superman myth, but with an original spin on them.
At least Snyder/Nolan and Goyer had the balls to come up with their own
ideas, or at least draw on source material that diverges significantly from
Donner's.

What they attempted to do, and I think largely succeeded, was bring
Superman into the 21st century, as we recognize it.



But this is all IMO. But come on, you walk out of MOS going "**** yeah!"
that "Welcome to the planet" line, sums up what the entire story was about,
a man finding his place in the world.

When I walked out of SR, I wanted to ask for my money back.

Don't even get me started on Lois Lane, Adams was a million times better than Bosworth - I've never been happy with how Lois was depicted onscreen, but Adams' Lois was likeable and finally cut the Gordian knot that is the central
problem with the character - not only does she know Clark is Superman/Kal-El, it's her that finds him !

or Zod, he was a much more understandable character than SR's Luthor.
Yeah, he's a bit crazy and a bit shouty, but he's not a cartoon character, like Lex.

So in summing up, MOS = epitome of awesome SR = epitome of crap.

I concur. I will sum it up by saying this...and this is by no means a disrespect to Donner's Superman. But this was the first time like I felt I was watching a grown @$$ man be Superman. LOVE Reeve, this Superman in MOS is something different to me. While Reeve held his punch against Ursa (because he's a gentleman even when the world is at stake) Cavill flew her into a dang truck because he knew the stakes. THAT's what I'm talking about. I'm all for no-violence against women..definitely. But when the world is at stake, all bets are off.

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

I feel SR had better cinematography because of Supes flying scenes and the beauty of the Lois and Supes flying together. You mention that you can't see Supes flying because its dark but in MoS you can't see him flying because the camera is shaking so bad. There were some scenes where he looked like a dot on a movie screen like when he is flying through the meadow. I will admit there were some good shots of him flying like when he flies between the rock structure than shoots up into the air. I just think they could have done better and should have done better. Both SR and MOS had some cool flyi moments, for SR it's when he is saving Metropolis and he catches a guy falling, puts him on the ground and keeps going. Then he later turns on his back while flying, I just liked seeing that one. MOS had Clark flying into Zod then skating along the ground on top of him while beating the crap out of him. Also apparently he does some acrobatics/flips but they happen so fast you can't see them.

 

[Frodo]

For me, context is everything. In the context of the post Smallville, Raimi and Webb Spider-man, Nolan Batman, MCU, Avengers, and X Men films, you just couldn't go back to the Donner style Superman, like it or not. The character had to be adapted to its time just like its always been adapted to its time. Now we can all disagree about creative choices the team made but I ultimately think its what had to be done.

SR , whatever its intentions, wasn't the Superman film we needed at that time. Again, looking at context, it had been 20 years since the last one , and you'd already had L&C, STAS, and Smallville which all reflected the post Bryne era. Going back to the Reeve film was a mistake imo.

MOS ironically had more freedom because of SR and because Smallville was finally off the air. Even then, I still don't think the changes that MOS were somehow unprecedented as some fans claim. They rehashed a lot of stuff from Smallville, from plot points to tone, and told the story in a non linear fashion like BB.

The only thing's that seemed to me like a drastic change was John Kent's death and Jor- El's death. Even then, John Dying in a hurricane without Clark saving him is on par with John dying on Smallville in a fight with Lionel because Clark changed the fate of the universe to save Lana.

MOS has its flaws no doubt but I just don't see it as this great change in the context of the canon of the character. When compared to the Reeve films, its a sharp contrast, but then again, l&c, STAS, Smallville, and the George Reeve series are sharp contrasts to the Reeve films as well.

 

[Herolee10]

For me, context is everything. In the context of the post Smallville, Raimi and Webb Spider-man, Nolan Batman, MCU, Avengers, and X Men films, you just couldn't go back to the Donner style Superman, like it or not. The character had to be adapted to its time just like its always been adapted to its time. Now we can all disagree about creative choices the team made but I ultimately think its what had to be done.

SR , whatever its intentions, wasn't the Superman film we needed at that time. Again, looking at context, it had been 20 years since the last one , and you'd already had L&C, STAS, and Smallville which all reflected the post Bryne era. Going back to the Reeve film was a mistake imo.

MOS ironically had more freedom because of SR and because Smallville was finally off the air. Even then, I still don't think the changes that MOS were somehow unprecedented as some fans claim. They rehashed a lot of stuff from Smallville, from plot points to tone, and told the story in a non linear fashion like BB.

The only thing's that seemed to me like a drastic change was John Kent's death and Jor- El's death. Even then, John Dying in a hurricane without Clark saving him is on par with John dying on Smallville in a fight with Lionel because Clark changed the fate of the universe to save Lana.

MOS has its flaws no doubt but I just don't see it as this great change in the context of the canon of the character. When compared to the Reeve films, its a sharp contrast, but then again, l&c, STAS, Smallville, and the George Reeve series are sharp contrasts to the Reeve films as well.

In some ways though, one could argue that the development and release of SR was actually a good thing for other Superman-related properties, despite not being a good thing for itself.

Because of SR, "Smallville" was allowed to bring in elements onto its show that were otherwise unavailable due to past superman films that had been in development. It's because of SR that SV was able to get Lois Lane onto the show and the reason why the Fortress looked the way that it did on the show.

Also, it's because of SR that we got a chance to see some form of the Richard Donner Cut for Superman 2 due to Warner Bros buying up the rights to use Brando's unseen footage for SR.

And if it hadn't been for the failure for SR, thus keeping the superman franchise on a temporary hiatus, then we wouldn't have gotten the people that we did for MOS involved with a Superman film.

And I also think that SV the show wouldn't have been able to get as much liberties as they could with the stuff that they introduced onto the show had SR not been a failure.

So SR was in a lot of ways a double edge sword for Superman fans.

 

[sf2]

Glad we have this thread. Which mean SR is still in my mind.

 

[Smashlilman]

In some ways though, one could argue that the development and release of SR was actually a good thing for other Superman-related properties, despite not being a good thing for itself.

Because of SR, "Smallville" was allowed to bring in elements onto its show that were otherwise unavailable due to past superman films that had been in development. It's because of SR that SV was able to get Lois Lane onto the show and the reason why the Fortress looked the way that it did on the show.

Also, it's because of SR that we got a chance to see some form of the Richard Donner Cut for Superman 2 due to Warner Bros buying up the rights to use Brando's unseen footage for SR.

And if it hadn't been for the failure for SR, thus keeping the superman franchise on a temporary hiatus, then we wouldn't have gotten the people that we did for MOS involved with a Superman film.

And I also think that SV the show wouldn't have been able to get as much liberties as they could with the stuff that they introduced onto the show had SR not been a failure.

So SR was in a lot of ways a double edge sword for Superman fans.

The one greatest thing about SR failure is that it completely killed the Donnerverues' Strangle hold over the Superman movie Mythos and allowed for more comic influences to come into play.