The Superhero Cinematic Civil War of Tomorrow Thread - Part 62

[DarthSkywalker]

Isn't it Jackie Chan's team on the stunts? Jackie himself had a long career of bruises and concussions filming his stunts, that's why they're so iconic. If this movie is half as daring as a classic Jackie movie, we're gonna eat good.

In what world does "unsafe" equal better stunts? Also Holland ain't Jackie Chan or even Tom Cruise.

 

[FrankenCastle]

Every Spidey fan to Jackie Chan right now:

View attachment 148647

I think Tom Holland is a terrible Spider-Man.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

I'm reading up, I didn't realize that Holland does a lot of his own stunts in these Spidey movies.

I mean this injury sucks, but it's a miracle that he's come this far and this is the only reported concussion he's had.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Without knowing the full details of what happened, I am not going to weigh in on who's fault it is. Stunts are still risky no matter how many precautions are taken. Anything can go wrong.

 

[FrankenCastle]

In what world does "unsafe" equal better stunts? Also Holland ain't Jackie Chan or even Tom Cruise.

They brough in Jackie's team, these guys are pushing boundaries, if they wanted to play it safe, they could've just CGI the whole thing, that's just the stunt buisness, it can get ugly. Tom Holland is a big guy, I'm sure he understands it just fine or he wouldn't have agreed to this, no one's forcing him to do his own stunts. Tom Cruise too didn't start as an action superstar.

 

[Lily Adler]

Without knowing the full details of what happened, I am not going to weigh in on who's fault it is. Stunts are still risky no matter how many precautions are taken. Anything can go wrong.

 

[Sithborg]

They brough in Jackie's team, these guys are pushing boundaries, if they wanted to play it safe, they could've just CGI the whole thing, that's just the stunt buisness, it can get ugly. Tom Holland is a big guy, I'm sure he understands it just fine or he wouldn't have agreed to this, no one's forcing him to do his own stunts. Tom Cruise too didn't start as an action superstar.

You push boundaries with stunt people. Not actors who have a little stunt experience.

 

[FrankenCastle]

You push boundaries with stunt people. Not actors who have a little stunt experience.

If someone's forced him into it, he should sue the hell out of him. But if he agreed to perform such a risky stunt, on his own free will. He can only blame himself.

As of now, we don't know what happened, it could as well be equipment failure.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think Tom Holland is a terrible Spider-Man.

Well of course. He believes in a free speech and is mixing his blood with the unclean.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

View attachment 148649

Zendaya on set.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They brough in Jackie's team, these guys are pushing boundaries, if they wanted to play it safe, they could've just CGI the whole thing, that's just the stunt buisness, it can get ugly. Tom Holland is a big guy, I'm sure he understands it just fine or he wouldn't have agreed to this, no one's forcing him to do his own stunts. Tom Cruise too didn't start as an action superstar.

This is word salad that does not explain why unsafe is somehow better.

 

[FrankenCastle]

Well of course. He believes in a free speech and is mixing his blood with the unclean.

So do I! I believe in free speech and I'm unclean too since I'm from north african/iberian ancestry. I should befriend him.

 

[FrankenCastle]

This is word salad that does not explain why unsafe is somehow better.

They look raw, intense, and authentic, they add a wow-factor that CGI or overly controlled setups can lack.

 

[MarvelFan]

Superman III (1983)

No ambiguity here - definitely my first time seeing this

A cursory search online reveals that CBM fans don't have much respect for this film, with many calling it one of the worst superhero sequels ever made! While I wouldn't personally go that far, I do concede that the drop in quality between the second and third films is considerable; it would appear there was much more of Richard Donner in Superman II than Richard Lester. Or perhaps we can attribute the drop in quality to someone whose name wasn't Richard...

In his Superman III review, Roger Ebert said, "The running gag about the hero’s double identity isn’t really exploited this time." Umm Roger, did we not see the same film? This second sequel takes the theme of duality to its logical conclusion, by not just exploring the pitfalls and concessions necessary to maintain a secret identity, but by literally separating Superman into two distinct personas! I asked rhetorically in my review for the second film what would happen if Superman decided one day to start exploring his base instincts, instead of rigidly adhering to the moral conditioning of his upbringing (and make no mistake friends, conditioned he was as an alien taught to mimic human behaviours and emotions). And the answer Superman III provides is, not much...

After being exposed to synthetic Kryptonite with a key element substituted, Superman becomes corrupted by the unnatural compound and starts to turn evil. Or does he? Does the synthetic Kryptonite really change Superman or does it merely suppress his Ego, allowing Superman's Id to reveal his true potential for anarchy and callousness? Yet instead of exploring the implications of a super-powered alien deciding to pursue his own self-interests, despite being conditioned to love and protect us, how do the producers choose to depict a chillingly fascist Superman? They have him straighten the Leaning Tower of Pisa and covertly blow out the Olympic Flame?? Get drunk at a bar?? Can Superman even get drunk?? Seriously, this was the extent of their inspiration?? Sure the 'evil' Superman also causes an oil spill but that was a request fulfilled so he can sleep with Lorelei, and proves easy enough to 'fix' later in the film. Speaking of Lorelei, my favourite line in the film comes when Superman tells her, "don't ask me to save you because I don't do that anymore." So what exactly does 'bad' Superman do all day? Fly around stealing candy from kids and causing other benign naughtiness? Whatever the case may be, this **** is funny...

Once again, the depictions of women in the film strongly suggest, if not downright misogyny, then a certain patronization on the part of Lester and the Newmans. To be honest though, the men don't fare much better here, either. Ross Webster, functioning as a second-rate Lex-Lite (because Gene Hackman presumably had better things to do) barely registers, and the constant ridiculing of his sister Vera's implied undesirability becomes progressively more distasteful as the movie lumbers on. This was my first-ever exposure to Richard Pryor, and while clearly a gifted physical comedian, even he couldn't add much of a pulse to the proceedings. And don't even get me started on Lois, who doesn't have more than two minutes of screentime in the entire film. Reportedly, Margot Kidder clashed so bitterly with the producers over Lois' portrayal in the second film that she was essentially written out of the third. Apparently she felt her depiction wasn't providing a strong role model for little girls who were fans of the movies. The nerve of her!!

Margot's replacement in the film sadly provides a watered-down alterative, completely devoid of the salty broth that made Lois so indelible in the first two films (admittedly less so in the second movie). As Lana, Annette O'Toole brings a certain sweetness and vulnerability to the role, but as a foil to our hero, she ain't no Kidder (who was?). However, one scene involving Lana and 'evil' Clark fascinated me. Just after 'turning', a clearly uncomfortably Lana asks Superman to leave her house, but he initially refuses, a very predatory demeanor overtaking him. He comes to his senses eventually, but was the implication that this version of Superman just might be capable of sexual abuse? Would an alien understand the human aspect of 'consent'? Later in the film, Superman willingly takes advantage of Lorelei's sexual offer, but wait! Didn't the second film strongly suggest that Superman cannot have sex with a human in his powered state? Are we to assume that Clark's base alien instinct is so twisted that he would risk murdering a human, just to satisfy his carnal urges?

At first the fight between a split Superman and Clark in the junkyard made me groan, but the disappearance of the 'bad' Superman at the end made me realize that the battle was ideological and not physical, which is right. Having thought about the film holistically since watching it, I do believe that Superman III respects the Superman mythos - at least the one established in this franchise - more than it disrespects it. I can definitely sympathize with fan complaints: gone is all sense of wonder and recognizable human emotion this time around. The effects are much shoddier in this latest sequel, and there's nothing as compelling as the “Can You Read My Mind” romantic sequence from the first film or the Fortress of Solitude seduction scene from the second. Superman III is compromised (fatally, if we're being honest here) by a director more interested in slapstick than reverence (though that might be a classic example of 'skill versus will' on Lester's part). Having said all that, I can't completely discount the film because it's a SUPERMAN MOVIE STARRING CHRISTOPHER REEVE! We only got what, like four of them (not counting the Director's Cuts and Special Editions of course)? And we'll sadly never get another one so this fact is enough to justify Superman III's existence. It's a shame the film isn't better - it's the most comic booky Superman movie yet! And as sucky as it is, I've read that Superman IV: The Quest for Peace is even worse!

I've come this far - may as well make it all the way to the bitter end


View attachment 148290

this is a hot take but Superman III was my favorite among the Reeves' series.
Maybe because it was the first Reeves' Superman movies that I've watched, haha.

I won't deny that it was not a good movie by any means (Gus Gorman was very annoying and overacting a little bit sometimes) but idk, there was so much campy charm in that movie imo

From Clark running through photo booth and then came out flying to save that guy in a car, the fire extinguish scene (Superman using his ice breath to create a giant ice out of the lake was so freaking cool!), Clark running the cornfield to turn into Superman, the evil Superman fiascos were very entertaining (i loved when he yells "what're you looking at??? Hehhh!!!") and then the epic 1 on 1 Clark vs Superman.

for the entertaining part, Brad got what he deserved at the end lol ("I always hated you, Kent...you know why? Cause you're nice...and nice guy won't last long"

To me, Superman III is such a guilty pleasure!

Oh and the scene where the woman villain turned into a robot was kinda terrifying

 

[Spider-Fan]

My friend threw a WrestlePalooza watch party last night (silly fool gave them 30 bucks) and said that he's saving 50 cents every two hours from now until 2027 to get that ticket to Saudi Mania.

I told him that's nice, but then asked what about the flight from NYC to Riyadh?

I didn't even watch Wrestlepalooza. Not watching WWE at first cause of the 30 bucks ESPN service thing, and then Kimmel happened. ESPN ain't getting a dime from me

 

[Venom 1988]

They look raw, intense, and authentic, they add a wow-factor that CGI or overly controlled setups can lack.

Safety trumps everything else. Nobody should be getting sent to hospital or dying over a movie.

 

[FrankenCastle]

I enjoy Superman 3 very much, the evil Clark scenes are a blast, the fight in the trash yard in one of the best Superman moments ever imo, and Gus Gorman makes me laugh (I must be the only one).

 

[FrankenCastle]

Safety trumps everything else. Nobody should be getting sent to hospital or dying over a movie.

Never said the opposite, safety is number one priority. But even with all the precautions, you can’t stop life from throwing curveballs. So, if an actor wants to perform his own stunts, he must be aware that injuries comes with the territory.

 

[NotToday]

safety is number one priority. But

injuries comes with the territory.

Do you see the contradiction here?

Yes, injuries can occur with stuntwork; but you seem to think it's a 'normal' part of the process, and it is NOT.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

I didn't even watch Wrestlepalooza. Not watching WWE at first cause of the 30 bucks ESPN service thing, and then Kimmel happened. ESPN ain't getting a dime from me

I feel you man.

Honestly, you really didn't miss a damn thing.

 

[FrankenCastle]

Do you see the contradiction here?

Yes, injuries can occur with stuntwork; but you seem to think it's a 'normal' part of the process, and it is NOT.

I don't see any contradictions, that's just the reality of action films and daring stunts since the begining of movie making. We are just flesh and bones, and making action films demands intensive and vigourous training, there’s a reason MCU stars prep like Olympians.

 

[NotToday]

The lead actor getting concussed in definitely NOT "just the reality of action films".

 

[FrankenCastle]

The lead actor getting concussed in definitely NOT "just the reality of action films".

Jason Statham's truck on Expendables 3 was ditched into deep waters, Brenden Fraser was almost hanged for real in The Mummy, Stallone broke his ribs in a dangerous jump sequence in Rambo I, Bruce Willis damaged his ears from all the shootings in Die Hard and many many other similar incidents.

Hollywood is full of situations were stunts had gone terribly wrong, this one form Tora! Tora! Tora! is still unblievable.

 

[MarvelFan]

Do you guys like Star Trek lore or Star Wars lore more?

Star Wars!
The lore I think is more rich...besides the movies and tv shows, I've been reading the Marvel's Star Wars comics (the comics are canon to the mythos)
My favorite run is Charles Soule's Darth Vader, the story takes place after Episode III and we get to know where and how Anakin got his red lightsaber and my favorite Jacosta-Nu arc (the female librarian that we saw briefly in Episode II was a bad ass Jedi as it turns out!)

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

Star Wars!
The lore I think is more rich...besides the movies and tv shows, I've been reading the Marvel's Star Wars comics (the comics are canon to the mythos)
My favorite run is Charles Soule's Darth Vader, the story takes place after Episode III and we get to know where and how Anakin got his red lightsaber and my favorite Jacosta-Nu arc (the female librarian that we saw briefly in Episode II was a bad ass Jedi as it turns out!)

You know when you stop and think about certain elements, Star Wars is nothing but an American Metal Hero film series LOL.