Rate MAN OF STEEL......once and for all

[BH/HHH]

They are playing the same character, just playing it differently, and the Stamp one is superior. You didn't need to explain to me the different character motives, it's still the same character.

Saying maybe you should have done anything means you're saying it's ok to do that if it was a possible option to you in the first place.

There's no mention of casualties because the movie glosses over the repercussions of it. Like what Flint Marko says, it just cuts to Superman smart mouthing an Army general.

They are the same character in name only, two totally different interpretations.

No it doesn't maybe simple means what it is, maybe not yes you should have.

It didn't need to be dealt with, it wasn't important to the ending of Man of Steel.

 

[Joeyjojo72]

Lol at "powerful impact".

 

[The Question]

They are the same character in name only, two totally different interpretations.

No it doesn't maybe simple means what it is, maybe not yes you should have.

It didn't need to be dealt with, it wasn't important to the ending of Man of Steel.

If dealing with the mass causalities wasn't important to the ending of Man of Steel, then mass casualties and city wide destruction shouldn't have been included at all. Man of Steel could have accomplished everything it wanted to if Superman and Zod had fought in a dessert somewhere. Don't put things in your script if you're going to gloss over them.

 

[Boy Scout]

I thought every actor (especially Kevin Costner) was dull. Cavill (the exception), Adams, and Shannon were the best, but the latter two lost me about halfway through.

 

[The Question]

I thought every actor (except for Cavill and especially Costner) was dull. Cavill, Adams, and Shannon were the best, but the latter two lost me about halfway through.

Adams' role became completely superfluous about half way through. After "discovering" Superman, she was relegated to "we have to find something for her to do" status. Instead of crafting the story around Lois and making her integral to what it was about (you know, like most good Superman stories where she plays a prominent roll), they had her fill a specific plot function and then cast her aside after they got bored with her.

And Zod received no characterization at all beyond his first appearance. All of his supposedly deep and nuanced traits came from him describing them to the audience instead of us seeing them in-scene.

Cavill was really the only actor who consistently had material to work with.

 

[Boy Scout]

Adams' role became completely superfluous about half way through. After "discovering" Superman, she was relegated to "we have to find something for her to do" status. Instead of crafting the story around Lois and making her integral to what it was about (you know, like most good Superman stories where she plays a prominent roll), they had her fill a specific plot function and then cast her aside after they got bored with her.

I'm inclined to agree with you. My biggest issue is that she was written very generically. She possessed no spunk, no fire, no real personality after discovering Superman. Why was someone as talented as Amy Adams chosen to portray such a bland interpretation of the character?

And Zod received no characterization at all beyond his first appearance. All of his supposedly deep and nuanced traits came from him describing them to the audience instead of us seeing them in-scene.

Zod was the definition of unintimidating. He was also rather stupid. Faora would have made a better villain.

Cavill was really the only actor who consistently had material to work with.

I would say that he did the best at doing his best with what he had to work with.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Oh!

I'm not the only one who thought Amy's Lois was bland...it feels so good knowing you're not alone

 

[kguillou]

See, I liked Amy Adams and I bought her attraction and relationship with Clark. I also REALLY loved how they switched the Lois and Clark dynamic up FINALLY. The whole "Lois cant recognize clark and superman are the same because of his glasses thing" is so played out and corny imo and frankly just would not work realistically. Especially for someone who is supposed to be a keen savvy reporter. Its cool that Lois knows who he is and will help protect his identity going forward.

 

[Goshdarn Batman]

If dealing with the mass causalities wasn't important to the ending of Man of Steel, then mass casualties and city wide destruction shouldn't have been included at all.

Same thing with the cervical dislocation (tm) scene. People say things like "Superman had no choice" and "Zod was going to kill everyone in the whole world...and their pets too!".

But, were talking about fictional characters here. Goyer/Snyder (Snoyer? Gayder?) had a choice. It's not like someone showed up at their door and threatened to kill a poor, innocent family in front of their eyes. It was probably included just to shock people.

I think Man of Steel is the Bizarro version of Superman the movie.

 

[Rodrigo90]

And to be honest. I thought a lot of the acting, from such talented actors, was lifeless and bland.

Cavill and Shannon gave it their best in this. Granted Shannon mumbles out a lot of his lines, but at least he put some emotion and spunk into it.

Everybody was just bland, delivering lines that sound like they came from a badly written Shakespeare play.

 

[The Question]

Same thing with the cervical dislocation (tm) scene. People say things like "Superman had no choice" and "Zod was going to kill everyone in the whole world...and their pets too!".

But, were talking about fictional characters here. Goyer/Snyder (Snoyer? Gayder?) had a choice. It's not like someone showed up at their door and threatened to kill a poor, innocent family in front of their eyes. It was probably included just to shock people.

I think Man of Steel is the Bizarro version of Superman the movie.

Like, here's the thing: I have no problem with Superman killing somebody in a movie. But Man of Steel didn't do anything with it. There was no build up to it and it wasn't referenced again after that scene. It served no purpose, which is super distracting.

 

[The Question]

And to be honest. I thought a lot of the acting, from such talented actors, was lifeless and bland.

Cavill and Shannon gave it their best in this. Granted Shannon mumbles out a lot of his lines, but at least he put some emotion and spunk into it.

Everybody was just bland, delivering lines that sound like they came from a badly written Shakespeare play.

Fishburn was the most disappointing. Fishburn is an amazing actor who is incredibly good at playing authority figures like Perry, but he really had nothing to work with. All of his dialogue was terrible and his character had no personality or arc or anything to make him more than just "some guy who Lois shares expository dialogue with." Watch him in Hannibal as Jack Crawford. Crawford isn't too much like Perry White in terms of personality, but it is a similar supporting authority figure role, except this time in a project with good writing and a director who knows how to work with actors. His performance in that is amazing.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Fishburn was the most disappointing. Fishburn is an amazing actor who is incredibly good at playing authority figures like Perry, but he really had nothing to work with. All of his dialogue was terrible and his character had no personality or arc or anything to make him more than just "some guy who Lois shares expository dialogue with." Watch him in Hannibal as Jack Crawford. Crawford isn't too much like Perry White, but it is a similar supporting authority figure role, except this time in a project with good writing and a director who knows how to work with actors. His performance in that is amazing.

Oh I know. What a waste he was in this movie.

Why add such amazing actors, and provide them with what we saw?

Again I stress, MOS is not a terrible movie, but it was just a piss poor execution of something that should have been great, and along the lines other fine quality superhero movies. Everybody saying, "wait til the next one", and then still defending this, SOMEHOW, is just not good enough.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I'm watching it right now, I think the film is like a perfectly adapted comic book. I could really picture this as a comic book, it flows amazingly well.

Its certainly set up like that, it reminds me a lot of Birthright in that regard. I think that is the Superman origin they took the most from, while also borrowing elements from others. I personally loved Birthright, and I love MOS.

 

[The Question]

Oh I know. What a waste he was in this movie.

Why add such amazing actors, and provide them with what we saw?

Again I stress, MOS is not a terrible movie, but it was just a piss poor execution of something that should have been great, and along the lines other fine quality superhero movies. Everybody saying, "wait til the next one", and then still defending this, SOMEHOW, is just not good enough.

Man of Steel is a film that is only interested in its main character, so all of the supporting characters who came along from the source material have to be given something to do, instead of crafting a story where everyone matters and everyone plays an important role.

It's what happens when you're only building your story up to the cliché action set piece climax, instead of actually charting a character driven journey than then naturally culminates in something grand.

 

[Destructus86]

I voted average...I liked the look of the film...but the pacing was off and I found all the characters to be very emotionally subdued to the point they just felt like blank slates waiting for a personality to be written in.

 

[kguillou]

I will absolutely agree the pacing was off and that the movie was perhaps TOO focused on Clark and not the world around him. I wouldve loved to see more of Lois, Perry, the Daily Planet, Clark's relationships with the people at the diner he worked at, the oil rig etc. The script jumped from place to place and even though it was a 2hr 20 min film we didnt learn too much about anybody but Clark.

 

[Zionite1]

this why I'm glad for Affleck and Terrio.Affleck to aid Snyder in the storytelling skills he clearly lacks and Terrio to polish Goyers ideas which Goyer clearly can't.

basically Afflack and Terrio are what MOS truly needed:Editors

 

[Jason_Todd]

this why I'm glad for Affleck and Terrio.Affleck to aid Snyder in the storytelling skills he clearly lacks and Terrio to polish Goyers ideas which Goyer clearly can't.

basically Afflack and Terrio are what MOS truly needed:Editors

I really wish people wouldn't jump the gun with this hopeful assumption.
People are complaining about the destruction, but there is evidence that it will play a major role in Batman V Superman.

 

[The Question]

I really wish people wouldn't jump the gun with this hopeful assumption.
People are complaining about the destruction, but there is evidence that it will play a major role in Batman V Superman.

Destruction in of itself is not bad for movies. The issue if how the destruction is presented and how it ties into the narrative and themes of the film.

 

[Zionite1]

People are complaining about the destruction, but there is evidence that it will play a major role in Batman V Superman.

it should have played a role in MOS.

 

[Rodrigo90]

MOS was the first stepping stone. All the movie was, was just build up for a sequel. All the answers and consequences that were left up in the air, will certainly be addressed in BvS.

And that's also why I think MOS is weak.

 

[The Question]

MOS was the first stepping stone. All the movie was, was just build up for a sequel. All the answers and consequences that were left up in the air, will certainly be addressed in BvS.

And that's also why I think MOS is weak.

Your movie isn't good if it isn't actually a movie.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Is it true that MOS was intended just as a standalone movie? Does that mean it wasn't supposed to be connected to the DCFU, or it wasn't going to spawn sequels?

 

[The Question]

Is it true that MOS was intended just as a standalone movie? Does that mean it wasn't supposed to be connected to the DCFU, or it wasn't going to spawn sequels?

I've never heard that. I always assumed that it was intended as the DCFU's big kickoff, regardless of how much they had their future line up planned out at that point. That doesn't excuse the fact that it doesn't stand on its own as a film at all.