TMOS Review & Speculation Thread (Spoilers) - Part 3

[KalMart]

Or maybe if WB wanted him to have input they should have just asked him to direct it in the first place, rather than as you say, thrust his ideas onto someone who has a completely different ideology than him.

We can only surmise though, the only people who really know whose ideas were whose are those people involved.

I guess the comment above about an hour being cut make sense to me now. Maybe the Snyder uncut version would make the film make more sense. Maybe we didn't see the complete picture as intended. That's a shame whoever made the decision to cut it didn't show more balls to say 'no, this is how it is intended and this is how it is going out'.

I can't imagine him being interested in doing that. And he had plenty on his plate already. This seemed for all intents and purposes at the time a 'bone' he was throwing WB.

And as I said...if it's true that Snyder had a 3+ hr cut, then that must have been a gigantic mess. It would kinda' make sense that it would cut down to something rather choppy and awkward, but it's not a good thing that it was that long to begin with. It means they tried to pack in too much crap...just like with TDKR which also felt overstuffed and choppy.

 

[sf2]

I can't imagine him being interested in doing that. And he had plenty on his plate already. This seemed for all intents and purposes at the time a 'bone' he was throwing WB.

And as I said...if it's true that Snyder had a 3+ hr cut, then that must have been a gigantic mess. It would kinda' make sense that it would cut down to something rather choppy and awkward, but it's not a good thing that it was that long to begin with. It means they tried to pack in too much crap...just like with TDKR which also felt overstuffed and choppy.

anything related to superman is never too long for a fan like me.
even the nuclearman 1! i will enjoy all!!!

 

[KalMart]

anything related to superman is never too long for a fan like me.
even the nuclearman 1! i will enjoy all!!!

Just gimme the Big Gulp...who cares if it gets flat and warm...!

 

[BlueLantern]

The Dark Knight Rises felt like two films smashed into one and as a result there's key developmental points like Bruce/Miranda's relationship, Bruce's solitude and Bane's rule over Gotham that were just not given sufficient space.

Here the issue was that all the relevant information was there and developed really well but certain key elements to the character were not present and there was an over-reliance on action in the final third not to mention gigantic leaps of logic to facilitate that. Two different issues but glaring in their own way.

Though the Dark Knight Rises had enough good to override its flaws. Man of Steel could've too, but there's that lack of 'spectacular' that's instead replaced by 'spectacle'. There was a dearth of '****, that's Superman!'

 

[blksuperman2]

It's funny some of the things people failed to see and questions they have, I've had to explain to my family members. My sons who are 15 and 14 asked me how Clark even knew about the spaceship. The two Canadian Soldiers clearly said that there was something alien up north and they mentioned the U.S. military to imply that the diner was in Canada as well. My wife just seemed to be hating on Lois and I had to keep explaining why she knew so much and why she was starting to fall for Clark. *sigh* I'm not saying that everyone who didn't like MoS are haters but just the few people that I've talked to about it seem to just be used to the Marvel way of storytelling and didn't like this approach.

 

[KalMart]

The Dark Knight Rises felt like two films smashed into one and as a result there's key developmental points like Bruce/Miranda's relationship, Bruce's solitude and Bane's rule over Gotham that were just not given sufficient space.

Here the issue was that all the relevant information was there and developed really well but certain key elements to the character were not present and there was an over-reliance on action in the final third not to mention gigantic leaps of logic to facilitate that. Two different issues but glaring in their own way.

Though the Dark Knight Rises had enough good to override its flaws. Man of Steel could've too, but there's that lack of 'spectacular' that's instead replaced by 'spectacle'. There was a dearth of '****, that's Superman!'

Yeah the film really lacked a sense of wonder with Superman. Probably much by design, but it was missed.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ I disagree about TDKR and MOS. MOS is a more satisfying whole, EVEN with baffling scenes such as the Tornado ultimatum, extended dialog about the DNA codecs, and the climax that seems to never end. TDKR was Nolan trying to create an epic but with conflicting ideals. You can practically FEEL his weariness of the genre (and character).

MOS was Goyer trying to create a strong action-oriented flick while leaving the characters thin enough to expand upon for a sequel. True, it would be optimal to bring out fully-fleshed out characters this time around, but it would make for a disappointing FRANCHISE where everything goes downhill.

Also, the critics wouldn't appreciate MOS, even if it was a masterpiece.

 

[KalMart]

Also, the critics wouldn't appreciate MOS, even if it was a masterpiece.

You can't assume that, seeing that it so clearly isn't.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Yeah the film really lacked a sense of wonder with Superman. Probably much by design, but it was missed.

I think that with Bale's Batman, the coolness is emphasized, while the scale of Superman takes the lead for Snyder's MOS.

I feel like there needed to be slower-paced flying scenes for that sense of wonder to sneak in. I hope they put that in the sequel.

 

[BlueLantern]

It's funny some of the things people failed to see and questions they have, I've had to explain to my family members. My sons who are 15 and 14 asked me how Clark even knew about the spaceship. The two Canadian Soldiers clearly said that there was something alien up north and they mentioned the U.S. military to imply that the diner was in Canada as well. My wife just seemed to be hating on Lois and I had to keep explaining why she knew so much and why she was starting to fall for Clark. *sigh* I'm not saying that everyone who didn't like MoS are haters but just the few people that I've talked to about it seem to just be used to the Marvel way of storytelling and didn't like this approach.

I think those oversights are understandable, but I didn't have any issue with those problem. However, this concept of 'haters' is a silly generalization. I don't know anyone who's 'hated' the film, but know folk who've not accepted the occasional reliance on spectacle over substance and evidences of lazy storytelling.

In fact, the Canadian Military scene is one of them. Colour me paranoid, but I don't think were I an Officer I'd sit at a bar and openly discuss classified intelligence. Though the Military/Air Force in general isn't portrayed in the best light here. They're more concerned with 'destroying' than 'protecting' and it's something also present in Superman's own actions throughout the final third of the film.

For example, them firing missiles on Smallville's main street without even evacuating folk prior to that. I'm quite sure those shops and buildings aren't bunkers built to resist aerial assaults with the intention of deadly force. Ditto for the Metropolis stuff.

By the by, what's the 'Marvel' way of storytelling?

 

[BlueLantern]

^ I disagree about TDKR and MOS. MOS is a more satisfying whole, EVEN with baffling scenes such as the Tornado ultimatum, extended dialog about the DNA codecs, and the climax that seems to never end. TDKR was Nolan trying to create an epic but with conflicting ideals. You can practically FEEL his weariness of the genre (and character).

MOS was Goyer trying to create a strong action-oriented flick while leaving the characters thin enough to expand upon for a sequel. True, it would be optimal to bring out fully-fleshed out characters this time around, but it would make for a disappointing FRANCHISE where everything goes downhill.

Also, the critics wouldn't appreciate MOS, even if it was a masterpiece.

I don't think Chris Nolan was tired of the genre but I can imagine a desire to wrap things up. I think the issue with Rises was that Jonah Nolan clearly wrote a massive script that needed to be trimmed not just whilst writing but also when editing the film itself. That lent to the cluttered feel.

Regarding your opinion on Man of Steel I find that hard to believe. First up, Goyer's explicitly stated that leaves nothing for sequels and puts his all into a film. Secondly, the truth is starting with an antagonist like Zod only guarantees a smaller a film in scale. You can't really lead into the second with ANOTHER world event so to speak.

That final point you made I won't address since DarthSkywalker is surely lurking to restrict my freewill to state opinions.

 

[blksuperman2]

I think those oversights are understandable, but I didn't have any issue with those problem. However, this concept of 'haters' is a silly generalization. I don't know anyone who's 'hated' the film, but know folk who've not accepted the occasional reliance on spectacle over substance and evidences of lazy storytelling.

In fact, the Canadian Military scene is one of them. Colour me paranoid, but I don't think were I an Officer I'd sit at a bar and openly discuss classified intelligence. Though the Military/Air Force in general isn't portrayed in the best light here. They're more concerned with 'destroying' than 'protecting' and it's something also present in Superman's own actions throughout the final third of the film.

For example, them firing missiles on Smallville's main street without even evacuating folk prior to that. I'm quite sure those shops and buildings aren't bunkers built to resist aerial assaults with the intention of deadly force. Ditto for the Metropolis stuff.

By the by, what's the 'Marvel' way of storytelling?

I didn't see a the military's portrayal any different than how the government just seemily decided to nuke New York in the Avengers. And I felt that Supes handled every fight as if this was he first fight in his life and he's getting his butt handled to him by a superior fighting force.

To answer your question. Marvel has had a way of storytelling by shoehorning comedy in scenes to break up the tension. I've talked to a few co-workers who wanted a more light-hearted scenes and mentioned Ironman, Spider-man and the Avengers as examples of how they wanted the film to be.

 

[BlueLantern]

I didn't see a the military's portrayal any different than how the government just seemily decided to nuke New York in the Avengers. And I felt that Supes handled every fight as if this was he first fight in his life and he's getting his butt handled to him by a superior fighting force.

To answer your question. Marvel has had a way of storytelling by shoehorning comedy in scenes to break up the tension. I've talked to a few co-workers who wanted a more light-hearted scenes and mentioned Ironman, Spider-man and the Avengers as examples of how they wanted the film to be.

I think you're right about the latter, though I'd say the scenes have felt relatively natural outside of the recent Spider-Man flick. It's primarily because that universe itself as that reverent in the comics even.

Regarding the Army in the Avengers, come on, didn't you think that it was one of the dumbest things about that film? Oh look, we're gonna fire a nuke at New York City instead of just firing one into that portal!

Yeah, it's not a good sign if you're mimicking the Government that was featured in the Avengers. They're as incompetent as the Galactic Empire.

About the fight scenes, I get that. I think the inexperience was exhibited by design. That being said, isn't it odd that he still managed to defeat everything thrown his way? Yes, he's Superman but then that same justification should be enough to show him instinctively protecting people.

For example, he rescues one dude falling from a chopper but ignores the rest of the chopper crashing in his periphery. He flies Zod straight into Metropolis' train station where there's countless innocents. Not to mention before that he flew into the Kryptonian scout ship, heat visioned it and then casually let it crash into Metropolis without even considering the potential loss of life and collateral damage.

It's a bit lazy on the filmmakers' part. Unfortunately it's profoundly visible to me three viewings in.

 

[Lionbush]

I think those oversights are understandable, but I didn't have any issue with those problem. However, this concept of 'haters' is a silly generalization. I don't know anyone who's 'hated' the film, but know folk who've not accepted the occasional reliance on spectacle over substance and evidences of lazy storytelling.

In fact, the Canadian Military scene is one of them. Colour me paranoid, but I don't think were I an Officer I'd sit at a bar and openly discuss classified intelligence. Though the Military/Air Force in general isn't portrayed in the best light here. They're more concerned with 'destroying' than 'protecting' and it's something also present in Superman's own actions throughout the final third of the film.

For example, them firing missiles on Smallville's main street without even evacuating folk prior to that. I'm quite sure those shops and buildings aren't bunkers built to resist aerial assaults with the intention of deadly force. Ditto for the Metropolis stuff.

By the by, what's the 'Marvel' way of storytelling?

Them talking about it happens all the time, they weren't broadcasting it just having a conversation that only Clark could hear. And yes it does happen, trust me.

Secondly, from someone who has experience of military actions against perceived threats, if there is a major imminent threat with no time to evacuate then they will take appropriate actions. There was no way to evacuate Smallville in the time available. What would happen is they would try secure the area to prevent people entering. As far as the military was concerened a threat existed and they had to try stop it.

 

[blksuperman2]

I think you're right about the latter, though I'd say the scenes have felt relatively natural outside of the recent Spider-Man flick. It's primarily because that universe itself as that reverent in the comics even.

Regarding the Army in the Avengers, come on, didn't you think that it was one of the dumbest things about that film? Oh look, we're gonna fire a nuke at New York City instead of just firing one into that portal!

Yeah, it's not a good sign if you're mimicking the Government that was featured in the Avengers. They're as incompetent as the Galactic Empire.

About the fight scenes, I get that. I think the inexperience was exhibited by design. That being said, isn't it odd that he still managed to defeat everything thrown his way? Yes, he's Superman but then that same justification should be enough to show him instinctively protecting people.

For example, he rescues one dude falling from a chopper but ignores the rest of the chopper crashing in his periphery. He flies Zod straight into Metropolis' train station where there's countless innocents. Not to mention before that he flew into the Kryptonian scout ship, heat visioned it and then casually let it crash into Metropolis without even considering the potential loss of life and collateral damage.

It's a bit lazy on the filmmakers' part is all I'm thinking. Nothing more and nothing less. Unfortunately it's profoundly visible to me three viewings in.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to defend the military in MoS, I was just stating that it made just as much sense in the Avengers. Like I said before, Imma haveta watch it quite a few more times but I really didn't see how he could have done anything about the collateral damage. True, I did want to see him protecting more innocent people and shielding the soldiers who were also trying to kill him as well.

 

[BlueLantern]

Them talking about it happens all the time, they weren't broadcasting it just having a conversation that only Clark could hear. And yes it does happen, trust me.

Secondly, from someone who has experience of military actions against perceived threats, if there is a major imminent threat with no time to evacuate then they will take appropriate actions. There was no way to evacuate Smallville in the time available. What would happen is they would try secure the area to prevent people entering. As far as the military was concerened a threat existed and they had to try stop it.

Strange, considering I've been in a situation where the Military here's deployed as many ground troops as they can during a terrorist attack.

If they hadn't, a hell of a lot of people would've died. So I don't know on that one.

Regarding secrets, again I've worked for a financial institution where discussing anything of work premises was career suicide. Again, odd.

 

[Lionbush]

Strange, considering I've been in a situation where the Military here's deployed as many ground troops as they can during a terrorist attack.

If they hadn't, a hell of a lot of people would've died. So I don't know on that one.

Regarding secrets, again I've worked for a financial institution where discussing anything of work premises was career suicide. Again, odd.

I didn't say it wasn't career suicide, I was just saying it does happen. People get careless. Christ we've had many people leave laptops in cars which were stolen containing top level military secrets.

As for the military actions, we have to stretch the realism a little in that the threat is something that no one will ever encounter in reality. But, if it was to happen like in the film I'd expect that they would react like they did based on my experience. Even recently in the UK there was an attack on the street of a UK soldier by two assailants. They killed him with machetes then started waving a gun around. The police arrived and shot them on the street, with innocent people standing around. There was no time to evacuate the street or anything. They just took action.


Even in Metropolis firing the missiles at the Spaceship was showing little regard for the damage they may cause, but totally reasonable considering the threat the World Engine posed to the planet as a whole. They may kill thousands of people, but in the end billions could be saved. It was a last ditch effort so anything goes.

 

[BlueLantern]

I didn't say it wasn't career suicide, I was just saying it does happen. People get careless. Christ we've had many people leave laptops in cars which were stolen containing top level military secrets.

As for the military actions, we have to stretch the realism a little in that the threat is something that no one will ever encounter in reality. But, if it was to happen like in the film I'd expect that they would react like they did based on my experience.

Even in Metropolis firing the missiles at the Spaceship was showing little regard for the damage they may cause, but totally reasonable considering the threat the World Engine posed to the planet as a whole. They may kill thousands of people, but in the end billions could be saved. It was a last ditch effort so anything goes.

I agree with you. Having said that, considering they have a quote-unquote wildcard in Superman in their favour I would've preferred they play around and with him to devise a strategy to save as many lives as possible.

It's what the Superman I've grown up with would've done. No number of lives is too few and all that. Sure, it's the Superman for a 'new generation' but I'll put my hand up and say I don't quite like it.

It kind of grates more so because one of the undertones and criminally underused concepts in the film was the idea that Superman and humanity had to both take a leap of faith and put trust in the things they may fear.

Showing a military that was quite content with letting people die, whether grounded in realism or not, isn't the best way to reinforce that belief no matter how much of the greater good they're striving for. Zod had the greater good in mind and look where that got him.

 

[Lionbush]

I agree with you. Having said that, considering they have a quote-unquote wildcard in Superman in their favour I would've preferred they play around and with him to devise a strategy to save as many lives as possible.

It's what the Superman I've grown up with would've done. No number of lives is too few and all that. Sure, it's the Superman for a 'new generation' but I'll put my hand up and say I don't quite like it.

It kind of grates more so because one of the undertones and criminally underused concepts in the film was the idea that Superman and humanity had to both take a leap of faith and put trust in the things they may fear.

Showing a military that was quite content with letting people die, whether grounded in realism or not, isn't the best way to reinforce that belief no matter how much of the greater good they're striving for. Zod had the greater good in mind and look where that got him.

From the Kryptonian point of view Zod had the greater good in mind, but not from the Earth point of view .

I don't think that the military were content with letting people die as such. This was them dealing with something that they wouldn't have encountered before, as much at it was Superman dealing with it too. If in the next films he is still doing the same and there is no evolution with him trying to at least minimize damage then I'll agree with you. Until then, I'll put it down to him evolving as the character. He was thrown into it as much as everyone else was.

I agree that elements could have been done better. It would be interesting to see how the Snyder final cut would have changed things.

Overall though I loved it despite it's flaws. It felt like superhumans going at each other.

 

[BlueLantern]

From the Kryptonian point of view Zod had the greater good in mind, but not from the Earth point of view .

I don't think that the military were content with letting people die as such. This was them dealing with something that they wouldn't have encountered before, as much at it was Superman dealing with it too. If in the next films he is still doing the same and there is no evolution with him trying to at least minimize damage then I'll agree with you. Until then, I'll put it down to him evolving as the character. He was thrown into it as much as everyone else was.

I agree that elements could have been done better. It would be interesting to see how the Snyder final cut would have changed things.

Overall though I loved it despite it's flaws. It felt like superhumans going at each other.

When I mentioned the greater good I meant the military potentially looking at the greater good of saving billions instead of thousands.

The issue with dealing with the threat is that unlike the Avengers where the heroes recognized the folly of the Council's decision, the morality of the situation isn't addressed at all.

But yes, I'd hope that both Superman and the Military learn their lessons. If it continues in the same vain as seen in Man of Steel, I'm not sure there's any reason to refer to him as Superman.

After three viewings I've got the film firmly at 3.5/5. The final act wasn't well constructed but everything prior to that was gold. A steady cam and a co-writer for Goyer would be very very welcome though.

 

[Xeno]

Regarding the Army in the Avengers, come on, didn't you think that it was one of the dumbest things about that film? Oh look, we're gonna fire a nuke at New York City instead of just firing one into that portal!

Yeah, it's not a good sign if you're mimicking the Government that was featured in the Avengers. They're as incompetent as the Galactic Empire.

I'm just addressing your point about the military and the nuclear strike on Manhattan in The Avengers.

It was not the Army or the US government that decided to nuke Manhattan in TA. That decision was made by members of the World Security Council, the fictional NATO-like group that oversees SHIELD. The Council removed Fury from command when he refused to follow orders and ordered one of the fighter pilots on the Helicarrier to launch the missile. It was made clear that the WSC had their thumbs up their asses from the start of the movie, so their actions regarding the nuke were par for the course.

The Army (or National Guard) did make it into the city to assist in the ground battle some time after the invasion began, but they were only seen briefly. In the real world the Army probably wouldn't fire nukes anyway. That would be up to the Air Force or the Navy since they are the ones with nuclear weapons in their arsenals and planes and missiles with which to deliver them.

 

[BlueLantern]

I'm just addressing your point about the military and the nuclear strike on Manhattan in The Avengers.

It was not the Army or the US government that decided to nuke Manhattan in TA. That decision was made by members of the World Security Council, the fictional NATO-like group that oversees SHIELD. The Council removed Fury from command when he refused to follow orders and ordered one of the fighter pilots on the Helicarrier to launch the missile. It was made clear that the WSC had their thumbs up their asses from the start of the movie, so their actions regarding the nuke were par for the course.

The Army (or National Guard) did make it into the city to assist in the ground battle some time after the invasion began, but they were only seen briefly. In the real world the Army probably wouldn't fire nukes anyway. That would be up to the Air Force or the Navy since they are the ones with nuclear weapons in their arsenals and planes and missiles with which to deliver them.

I agree with you. My point was simply that it was a dumbass decision for the Council to make.

What you've mentioned is what I wanted to see in Man of Steel. Ground battle assistance etc etc.

 

[sf2]

Yeah the film really lacked a sense of wonder with Superman. Probably much by design, but it was missed.

Because they didnt show people/ bystanders in awe n disbelief?

 

[Mr.M]

Saw the film last Saturday, thought I'd throw in my two cents. David Goyer... get the **** out of here, insert Jonathan Nolan. He just can't write worth a lick. Just keep him in a consultant role. Snyder. You have plateaued. This is the best you can do. You cannot juggle an ensemble cast and keep us emotionally invested into these characters. You are what you are. I think he needs to be replaced. There is of course, the fear of the unknown. Anytime you bring in new blood, you are taking a big risk. It's like changing a head coach or changing a key position/personnel move on a successful sports team that just can't seem to get over that championship hump. Something always ends up coming short and a little flat. It's time to take that plunge into the abyss. Dial down the action, bring in someone who can actually make the Daily Planet work. Get Lex Luthor right. Bruce Wayne if he is to make an appearance. Lots of characters that need to be developed. Lots of decent writing and top notch directing will be required. Snyder cannot ultimately deliver that.

Thought Russel Crowe carried the film. Shannon was great as was Cavill. Amy Adams was wasted for all that talent, but still got more than I expected from her given the reviews. I liked the product for what it was, but this is the best it will ever be with this team. It's simply not good enough given the gravity of the material and what is at stake here for WB. Time to make some tough decisions and make the neccessary changes.

Quick note, I don't think Clark Kent works in this franchise. That final scene was kinda laughable. My idea is, Lois and Perry White know, and they are going to cover it up as long as possible. The rest of the Planet never got a really close glimpse of Kal-El so maybe they can't tell. The secret identity just doesn't work.

7/10.

 

[BlueLantern]

Because they didnt show people/ bystanders in awe n disbelief?

Personally it's because there was a dearth of '****, that's Superman' scenes as a viewer. Scenes that are iconic and would have me cheering.

It's a major I had gripe with the action sequences. Every superhero film that I've truly enjoyed has had an organic feel to its action and also evoked the core of the hero and brings out that sense of wonder at their powers.

For example, Batman's return in the Dark Knight and the Dark Knight Rises. Or even when he goes 'I'm Batman' in Begins. Same like the tracking shot in the Avengers or when you see the heroes back to back and ready to kick rumble. There's other films too, but memory's fuzzy.

The action in Man of Steel felt very...technical. It was visually perfect but that emotional feeling wasn't there and just happened without much joy. Fans of the action genre probably enjoyed it, but it's not for me.

I prefer a sense of wonder to the action even if it's not as technically proficient as what was presented in Man of Steel. Kind of why the duels in the Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi win over the prequel ones.