TMOS Review & Speculation Thread (Spoilers) - Part 3

[Antithesis_SD]

You are one of the smartest people on this board, Midtown! You are seeing the errors.

So if you like this movie, you are dumb? Is that what you're saying? Okay...

 

[Princess Denise]

I'll probably have to see it again to judge that for myself. Krypton definitely is difficult to showcase without completely overpowering the rest of the film. I thought that it was shown for the proper amount of time before they decided to cut to Earth, but I can definitely say it left me wanting more. As with Asgard, I would have liked to see some more of Krypton's people. Not that it killed the experience for me, the setting alone was enough to inspire a sense of history about the place, but I do want to see some normal, everyday Kryptonians. It could have been a nice opportunity to have given a nod to Kara Zor-El and some of Kal's extended family.

All in all I still really enjoyed it.

Yes, I would love to see the full 3 hour, 20 minute cut one day or even flashbacks to Krypton in a sequel. It just all moved too quickly here and it had so much potential.

Glad you enjoyed MOS! I loved it so much I am seeing it again tomorrow! Can't wait! t:

 

[Supermanofsteel]

Just got back from Man of Steel...here's my review:

Pros:

- I really liked Henry Cavill as Superman. He was brilliant in my opinion and grasped the image of a modern day Superman.

- I liked the interaction between Superman and the army...and also when they first call him Superman.

- His flight scene was really nicely done I thought.

- Krypton looked cool.

- Lois Lane is better than any Lois before.

- Jor El was really well portrayed.

- Faora was a powerful villain.

- Superman vs Tentacled Machine

- There was a scene near the mid-end, where you fear for Earth and that leads to a good sequence of action.

- Liked the acting of Colonel Hardy (Meloni)


Cons:

- Some pretty annoying shaky camera work, that I haven't noticed in too many movies before, but I have now.

- Failed a lot in basic storytelling...They had the right ideas on what to show, but they just didn't show enough of it. The flashbacks just didn't work for me. I have nothing against flashbacks...they were used really well in Batman Begins, but they were pretty weak here. Things just happened...one after the other.

- Scene lengths were too short to convey enough emotion. What happened after the tornado...how did his father's dead affect him? What happened after he found out he was an alien? What kinds of decisions does he make in life and how? These are fundamentals of story and character development that were missing...which leads me to the next point.

- Character development was really weak...we really don't know who Clark Kent is...what values his fathers instil in him. Some scenes with Jonathan and Clark would really help. They skipped over him growing up (and showed it with flashbacks), so we really don't know how Clark got to the fishing boat or the fortress/ship or anywhere really. Like I said, things just happened. We really miss the journey from Clark to Superman that is promised from an origin movie. This is replaced by action...

- Side characters were not important at all and I really wanted them to be after the Dark Knight Trilogy. People were making a fuss about Jenny Olsen and she barely had a line. Perry White did very little, but his character was fine. The movie was missing a Gordon/Fox/Alfred type side role...Having important side characters can make a movie memorable.

- In my opinion Superman needed to struggle more (especially with the type of action they showed). There wasn't a scene where it looked like he was losing. If there was, it quickly jumped back into the action. There was no breather or time to think or see him struggle. It was beat-down after beat-down.


Mixed:

- Absolutely beautiful soundtrack by Hans Zimmer that sounds better by itself than in the movie (in my opinion)

- Even though Lois Lane is a good character and well portrayed...her motivations and her relationship with Clark is underdeveloped. Her journey is mentioned but unexplored and would've worked a lot better in a linear storytelling format. Not a big issue though.

- Really good amount of action and good quality action. There were some scenes that were well done and others that were too over the top and for me a bit too similar visually. I good chunk could be replaced by story building and character building. They needed to give some time to think about what's going on.

- Missing humour and memorable dialogue. I saw really good, memorable dialogue in the trailers and that's pretty much all I can recall. Even those lines felt a bit off for me in the movie...because they missed any sort of consequence and the movie kept skipping to the next scene. However, humour and memorable dialogue is not needed, if you get the primary points right.

- Zod was a good villain (much much better than Mandarin for me), but I expected more craziness and anger from him. Shannon is capable and his strongest line was "I will find him"...most of it's shown in the trailer.

- Sci-fi stuff worked really well with Superman, but I'm still undecided about some of the stuff shown - like the advancement of Jor El's A.I. It was nothing major again.

- The krypton stuff was covered well, but I felt they could've covered that (in short) during the fortress scene, when Jor El is telling him about what happened, rather than so much in the beginning. I could've given them more time for Clark + Kent development.

Some of the critics were really harsh though...especially the ones that didn't understand the concept of the modern Superman being different from Donner's. However, a lot of the reviews did bring up these points.

Rating: 6.5/10

 

[manofsteel4life]

Hey just wanna say it's good to be back lol....first off I wanna say I loved MOS.....from Cavill to even the secondary characters I thought were spot on. My only problem was Lana....she didn't do anything. I don't think she even spoke.....I thought there was gonna be more there. Anyone who didn't know she was playing Lana would never know who she was playing. Was it one of the cuts scenes that Zack was talking bout??....anywho.....I can see the pacing problems and I do agree with some of the critics and fans on those issues. But I was so proud of Henry though.........he was awesome. So many moments from his look or just a simple expression was spot on. Especially one scene when he's talking to Lois after he saves her the first time, and realizes Martha is in trouble. You could the oh **** moment and fear on his face just before he took off. Those were one of many that had me grinning.....but all in all, I'm so happy this film was what it was. People in my theater were cheering and clapping at the end, that gave me goosebumps and tears came pouring out. I felt like I was watching my kid graduate college, to describe it. I hope those issues in MOS, which were many lol, get fixed for the sequel......close curtain

 

[Superhero 101]

Just came back from the movie I thought it was a good film not great as Batman Begins TDK or TDKR

Let me start with the good
Henry Cavill as Superman is a great choice he looks the part and I can't wait for future films and see How his Clark Kent persona will be in the next movie. The Rest of the cast did a okay job. Crowe and Costner were really good. Adams was okay although at times i felt her voice was really soft. I know i might get criticized for this but I though Shannon did a okay job he wasn't as great as some people are saying. Also Diane Lane was underused and i felt like she had no role.

The Action in this film was Amazing. I mean we finally get to see Superman hit something and go through buildings creating the building to collapse and using heat vision. Though i felt some of the CGI was a little off in a few scenes but most of the time it looked good.

I thought the flashbacks were pretty emotional especially the ones with Pa Kent except the tornado scene that scene where Pa kent
Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:


Now Let me get to the Bad
I hated the pacing. I felt that the transitions of flashbacks was poorly handled. Certain scenes jumped from one scene to the next and i didn't like it too much.

Also Even though I loved the action I thought there was just too much going on especially with the scene where Supes is fighting the tentacle looking thing I felt that scene had too much going on.

Also I felt the film felt too serious at times. It didn't have that Lighthearted Superman feeling which l like. At least with the Nolans Bat films we had Bruce and Alfred telling a few jokes in between for us to laugh at. But this film only had like one or two scenes to lighten the mood. Not that i don't mind a serious film but I think the next film should be a little lighter.

Overall This movie is a good movie Not Great like TDK or Avengers which I consider my favorite Superhero films This film is The Superman movie we were waiting for and Snyder and Nolan have delivered a good film

8/10

 

[Ubba Dubba]

Just got back from seeing MOS and had to join SHH (have read posts for years) just to post my review.

I loved this movie so much. I was a little worried after the RT free falling %. I thought Henry was great but only time and a great follow up with more DP Clark will I be able to compare him to Reeve. Amy was very good, I don't get the complaints of her being under used. Costner and Crowe were both great and Lane was such a mom, loved her and hope she gets some time in a sequel.
The rest of the roles were pretty small but were all good, Fishburn, Meloni etc. I also don't get the too much action complaint, never got bored or thought when is this scene going to end. I do agree to a point with some of the complaints about the pacing and flashbacks. It by no means was a big deal to me but I can see people having a problem with it. I guess part of the problem is people can't wait to get to the action and can't sit through a slow build up or a long movie at all. I read somewhere that they wanted a 2:20 running time because that was as long as people could sit through and enjoy.
Personally I would love a linear story and the 3hr and 20 min run time, even if there was no superman till 1/2 way through. A lot of people are aying the critics are looking for the Donner version. If that is the case I don't get it. I have been a Superman fan for over 40 years and grew up with the Donner version and loved it. I still think SI and SII are classics and always will, but we needed a new version for now and MOS was it for me. Could it have been even better, well of course and each of us could make our own perfect version if we had the means and the talent to so. We don't so we have to take some one else vision. I for one think this was a great one and rate it 9.5. My wife and older son(17) liked it a lot and my 13 y.o. loved it. To any who have not seen it don't let others opinions keep you away and make your own decision.

 

[iamsilvio]

Antithesis_SD,

Yes, Midtown is smart because he has a filmmakers eye and writers instinct. Think back to the classic action films. i.e Terminator 2, Die Hard, Predator 1 etc. They have great action and their pacing is pitch perfect. There is alot of action in die hard 1, but it is spread through out the movie. I think that Hollywood is suffering from a lack of talent. All the great superhero films/shows are the cartoons in my opinion. Bruce Timm and Paul Dini are excellent writers and have a good sense of pace.

 

[Robin91939]

THE ENDING:

THEN SUPERMAN KILLS ZOD! WHAT…THE F***?! I literally sat there in the theater with my hands in the air, surrendered to confusion and disbelief. SUPERMAN DOES NOT KILL! At all. Ever. And the build up to it was so incredibly void of drama. Not to mention this was completely pointless! What does this do for the character other than demean everything he’s supposed to represent?! What does it do? What was the point of this? There is nothing “edgy” or “modern” about a Superman that can’t save the day without killing. NOTHING. There is no reason this couldn’t have been resolved without Superman killing Zod, and there is no reason to believe the film and characters would have been lesser for it. I still can’t believe they did this. This whole movie was nothing short of Snyder/Goyer/Nolan depicting their inability to understand Superman.

And then there is the introduction of Clark Kent at the Daily Planet. Who is literally Superman in glasses. They made no attempt to present any sort of reasonable disguise. And how does Clark get a job at the planet anyways? He has no training or education as a journalist. In none of the flashbacks has he shown any interest in writing at all. He just walks into one of the most prestigious papers and has a job.


I ‘d give it a 2/10.

Now, I singled out the complaint that keeps getting leveled against this film. And I don't understand where it's coming from. Superman HAS killed in the comics. Superman HAS killed in the films. In fact, this killing was the only one that we felt the weight of the decision with Superman as he did it -- and the affect on him after it was done. It's painful. It's a decision he knows he can't take back -- but one he knows he had to do.

Why were all of the "Superman doesn't kill" people at in 1980 when Christopher Reeve's Superman killed General Zod? Or when Lois Lane killed Ursa? Was it because it was handled lightly, without much drama and with a smile that it was okay? Zod was depowered. He was human. He couldn't fly and had breakable bones. Superman throws him into an unending hole in the Fortress of Solitude. That killed him. There's no debate here. Chris Reeve's Superman KILLED. And he did it with a smirk on his face.

[YT]jUORL-bvwA0[/YT]

Now, I love Reeve's Superman -- but it's undeniable that he also killed.

So why is it suddenly a problem now? When in this film, they made Superman physically and emotionally pained to do it?


You're a great poster. And I always read your stuff when I see it. And much of your criticism that you had I can see where they come from (which is why I only went after this one). But this is just a little baseless.

You could say that your Superman, the quintessential one that you see in your head when you picture the character, doesn't kill. But do say that Superman doesn't kill and that the filmmakers fundamentally don't understand the character because they had him kill -- that's just wrong. (Superman also killed Zod in the comics).

-R

 

[Autonet]

When he breaks his hand, I die laughing every time it's so good. Screw you Zod.

 

[Sup3rman81]

It had a tremendous amount of flaws...sorry, but it could have been a MASTERPIECE if they trusted the story to carry the action rather than the other around.

Are you trying to convince him that it does have flaws? That's ur opinion of the movie. I found no flaws and neither do a lot of people. It seems like people on here that dislike it want to convince people that did like it that it ain't that good. My opinion is that it's an epic movie and the best comic book movie since TDK

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

No, that's not the general consensus overall.

Have you seen the RT rating? It continues to drop. Interestingly enough, the common denominator in the harsher reviews seems to be the excessively overwrought violence and non-stop skyscraper destruction. In fact, even some of the reviewers who gave the film higher marks complain about this in their articles.

So yes, this is very much a general consensus.

 

[Jim-El]

In the end, Zod should have been more of a match for Superman. The film was building up pretty well, then snap (pardon the pun)...
Zod is easily defeated by Supes.

 

[Antithesis_SD]

Antithesis_SD,

Yes, Midtown is smart because he has a filmmakers eye and writers instinct. Think back to the classic action films. i.e Terminator 2, Die Hard, Predator 1 etc. They have great action and their pacing is pitch perfect. There is alot of action in die hard 1, but it spread through out the movie. I think that Hollywood is suffering from a lack of talent. All the great superhero films/shows are the cartoons in my opinion. Bruce Timm and Paul Dini are excellent writers and have a good sense of pace.

Are... are you being sarcastic?

 

[Juicy J]

It was just.... Eh.
I wanted to love this movie, I really did. It was nice to look at and all (Henry Cavill is a beautiful man, and I say that as a heterosexual male) but I just didn't feel anything while watching this movie, the only reaction it got from me was when I cringed from the dialogue. Man were there some poor lines.
"He's kinda hot"
"You're a monster Zod.. and I'm going to stop you"
Just... eh. It could've been so much better. Maybe that's where my disappointment is coming from.
And the action was boring. It was cool at first but watching someone get punched through a building for the 87th time got reeeaaal boring. It was like they were trying to overcompensate for the lack of action in Returns.
I'd give it a 6 out of 10 if I'm being generous. I'll see it again to get my thoughts together but a 6 is what I'm sticking with for now.

 

[Pickleweasel]

Have you seen the RT rating? It continues to drop. Interestingly enough, the common denominator in the harsher reviews seems to be the excessively overwrought violence and non-stop skyscraper destruction. In fact, even some of the reviewers who gave the film higher marks complain about this in their articles.

So yes, this is very much a general consensus.

The general consensus is based off of 207 people 88 of which said it was bad? Ok, if you want to say 200 people of which MORE people said it was good than bad is the general consensus out of the millions who will see it, go ahead.

 

[bullets]

Huh....actually using Lana instead of Lois couldve worked. Although i like Lois better. I just hated her and how she was used in this movie though

Is the girl who saw what Clark did on the bus supposed Snyder's version of Lana?

 

[MadVillainy]

Is the girl who saw what Clark did on the bus supposed Snyder's version of Lana?

ya i think

 

[terry78]

I think that was Lana Lang, they just didn't say it.

 

[Juicy J]

They looked ridiculously similar to the point where it couldn't have been a coincidence.

 

[manofsteel4life]

I think that was Lana Lang, they just didn't say it.

But I wish I knew the reason for them not giving Lana any time in this movie. I always thought she was probably the 3rd most important character in smallville after the Kent's

 

[Heretic]

Is the girl who saw what Clark did on the bus supposed Snyder's version of Lana?

Yes, she was mentioned by name after the accident.

I hated how Lois was involved in so many action scenes. Why would the military trust an untrained reporter with being the point man on the most important military mission in human history?

In my opinion...the Lana story could have been more of a focal point...with Lois as a reporter trying to uncover the truth about the alien. Maybe instead of the Kents telling Clark that he should let people die instead of using his powers, Lana could have cared for him...but feared him...and that would have led Clark to want to keep his powers secret after she shuns him...maybe even not saving his father out of fear of being seen. Lois would have been a subplot until the end...maybe have that "please dont share my identity" speech at the end of the film.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

Why were all of the "Superman doesn't kill" people at in 1980 when Christopher Reeve's Superman killed General Zod? Or when Lois Lane killed Ursa? Was it because it was handled lightly, without much drama and with a smile that it was okay? Zod was depowered. He was human. He couldn't fly and had breakable bones. Superman throws him into an unending hole in the Fortress of Solitude. That killed him. There's no debate here. Chris Reeve's Superman KILLED. And he did it with a smirk on his face.

To claim that Chris Reeve's Superman and Margot Kidder's Lois Lane "killed" Zod and Ursa is stretching things a bit. There is no conclusive evidence that they died. Zod didn't "die" of a crushed hand. Ursa didn't "die" of a fist to her jaw. What was actually shown were the three villians being depowered and falling/being hurled into an abyss in the Fortress of Solitude. Did their falls land them in another Phantom Zone type scenario? Did they even land anywhere? We can only imply our own conclusions. Since the Kryptonians used the Phantom Zone due their disbelief in the death penalty it seems unlikely that Superman would suddenly adopt that stance in a Fortress crafted from Kryptonian technology.

Whatever happened to Zod, Ursa and Non, that scene portrayed nothing on the level of finality compared to MOS' death of Zod. That scene actually showed Superman snapping someone's neck in an unmistakably brutal way.

What bothers me? The neck-snapping was done for one purpose: shock value. That's it. And the really sad part is that Superman didn't have to do that to save those innocent lives.

Part of what makes Superman so brilliant is his ability to think of clever ways to solve problems and conflicts. MOS' Superman wasn't really clever or thinking on his toes there. He just did the fastest and most expedient thing on pure impulse.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

The general consensus is based off of 207 people 88 of which said it was bad? Ok, if you want to say 200 people of which MORE people said it was good than bad is the general consensus out of the millions who will see it, go ahead.

You may want to reread my post again. I stated quite clearly that many reviews--both positive and negative--cited non-stop violence for the 3rd act as something that detracted from the film. Even fans here who loved the film have said the same thing.

I've seen the film twice with two groups of friends: Last night's midnight showing was with fanboys who had mixed reviews but all felt the action was unbalanced and tiresome. Today I went with family and non-CBM fans. Same reactions.

In other words, general consensus does not have to include 100% of everyone involved to be considered "general".

 

[MadVillainy]

But I wish I knew the reason for them not giving Lana any time in this movie. I always thought she was probably the 3rd most important character in smallville after the Kent's

probably didnt have the time or maybe saving it for a sequel

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

To claim that Chris Reeve's Superman and Margot Kidder's Lois Lane "killed" Zod and Ursa is stretching things a bit. There is no conclusive evidence that they died. Zod didn't "die" of a crushed hand. Ursa didn't "die" of a fist to her jaw. What was actually shown were the three villians being depowered and falling/being hurled into an abyss in the Fortress of Solitude. Did their falls land them in another Phantom Zone type scenario? Did they even land anywhere? We can only imply our own conclusions. Since the Kryptonians used the Phantom Zone due their disbelief in the death penalty it seems unlikely that Superman would suddenly adopt that stance in a Fortress crafted from Kryptonian technology.

Whatever happened to Zod, Ursa and Non, that scene portrayed nothing on the level of finality compared to MOS' death of Zod. That scene actually showed Superman snapping someone's neck in an unmistakably brutal way.

What bothers me? The neck-snapping was done for one purpose: shock value. That's it. And the really sad part is that Superman didn't have to do that to save those innocent lives.

Part of what makes Superman so brilliant is his ability to think of clever ways to solve problems and conflicts. MOS' Superman wasn't really clever or thinking on his toes there. He just did the fastest and most expedient thing on pure impulse.

Exactly, and he was just starting out. Give him time before he starts thinking of other clever ways to solve conflicts. This time he was beginning, and acted on impulse. He needs time to grow into the version of your ideal Superman. It wasn't done exclusively for shock value.