TMOS Review & Speculation Thread (Spoilers) - Part 3

[KalMart]

They have these things called generators.

Film crews do.....construction crews, households.....but desert nomads...for tube televisions? t:

 

[Neonzel]

I was wondering isn't the ship Zod in at the end (the one Superman destroyed with heat vision to save Lois & Co) his Fortress? Doesn't that mean he has no base anymore?

 

[MrMaooz]

I was wondering isn't the ship Zod in at the end (the one Superman destroyed with heat vision to save Lois & Co) his Fortress? Doesn't that mean he has no base anymore?

Yup. He has no fortress for now.

 

[KalMart]

I was wondering isn't the ship Zod in at the end (the one Superman destroyed with heat vision to save Lois & Co) his Fortress? Doesn't that mean he has no base anymore?

I thought the giant head lice thingies that were messing with Earth's gravity was, and that was just a ship that he was piloting.

 

[Doc Samson]

hehe... this whole 'realism, gritty, grounded etc 'fad in CBM reminds me of the similiar fad in the comics in the 90's...

Back then there were like 5000 clones of Wolverine and Punisher. even Spiderman got bit by the 'grim and gritty'bug back then.

The strange thing, for me at least, is that every time I've seen this film there were a decent amount of laughs at the intentionally funny parts & a round of applause at it's conclusion. I don't see anything grim or gritty about this movie in the slightest, it's just not super cheesy like the older ones.

 

[DaveMoral]

Hmm..isn't Superman supposed to be 'connected' to people regardless wheter or not he's had personal connection with that place?

People dubbed him the big blue boyscout for a reason. It's supposed to be in his nature. His core character if you will. It's what sets him apart from other heroes.

The point of the film is that he's NOT yet the Big Blue Boy Scout. He's a tortured soul who literally just found out who he is, where he's from and what he's got to do with his gifts. And as soon as that happens, the worst contingent of his people shows up hellbent on killing him to get revenge on his dead father.

This movie lays the groundwork for the Big Blue. Much like BB laid the groundwork for Batman becoming Gotham's Dark Knight.

This movie is a good amalgam of Byrne's Man of Steel, Waid's Birthright, JMS's Earth One and Johns' Last Son. I literally reread Last Son Friday night.... the action was pretty much the same.

 

[Paladin-Hoss]

The strange thing, for me at least, is that every time I've seen this film there were a decent amount of laughs at the intentionally funny parts & a round of applause at it's conclusion. I don't see anything grim or gritty about this movie in the slightest, it's just not super cheesy like the older ones.

I wasn't talking specifically about MOS.

I was just commenting on whenever there's a new CBM, those are the words that fanboys/film makers uses

 

[Paladin-Hoss]

The point of the film is that he's NOT yet the Big Blue Boy Scout. He's a tortured soul who literally just found out who he is, where he's from and what he's got to do with his gifts. And as soon as that happens, the worst contingent of his people shows up hellbent on killing him to get revenge on his dead father.

This movie lays the groundwork for the Big Blue. Much like BB laid the groundwork for Batman becoming Gotham's Dark Knight.

This movie is a good amalgam of Byrne's Man of Steel, Waid's Birthright, JMS's Earth One and Johns' Last Son. I literally reread Last Son Friday night.... the action was pretty much the same.

OK, but the thing that makes him Superman in the first place, isn't gained by experience so to speak. It's in his character and it's supposed to be there right from the start.

 

[Joeyjojo72]

Laughable? In your opinion, in mine it is better than both. Especially Avengers which I found to be a good movie but that's all. TDK was great but I think MOS beats it. Now I admit I am a bigger Superman fan than Batman and MOS is still fresh, so this may change if I watched both a year from now.

Willy Wonka (the one with Gene Wilder) is one of my favorite movies of all time. I can pretty much watch it every week without getting tired of it. But I know its not really a great movie, and that there are like a billion other movies that are better. See the difference?

 

[DaveMoral]

OK, but the thing that makes him Superman in the first place, isn't gained by experience so to speak. It's in his character and it's supposed to be there right from the start.

What makes him Superman is his desire to save lives, and that is showcased. It is dampened somewhat by the fear of the world's reaction to what he can do though. By the time he's "out" Zod and Co have already laid waste to Metropolis. I'm not sure there was much to be done other than stop an unhinged Zod.

The tornado scene is, in fact, the very embodiment of the tension between Clark's desire to help people and the fear of being open with what he can do. Both are rooted in Jonathan Kent.

 

[Rock Sexton]

The strange thing, for me at least, is that every time I've seen this film there were a decent amount of laughs at the intentionally funny parts & a round of applause at it's conclusion. I don't see anything grim or gritty about this movie in the slightest, it's just not super cheesy like the older ones.

No round of applause at mine. Everyone just got up and walked after it was over. I swear my sister and I did more talking about what we just saw than people within ear shot of me.

The laughs I can remember were when that trucker attempts to shove Clark and then again when they saw the guy's truck trashed outside. Oh and the scene where he breaks his handcuffs.

But that was it. Crowd was lifeless and I was the lucky chap sitting through a movie I wasn't enjoying while a child behind me kept kicking my seat and making fart noises with her mouth.

 

[BaleISBatman4ev]

I would have preferred if superman had revealed himself and saved a life or two before Zod and the goons got there. In Begins you got Batman going around and tying up the mob contingent before Rhas showed up so there was more at stake and the city knew who Batman was and so did we. Can you imagine if Bruce had just been ambushed by Rhas the second he got back to gotham and he literally had to become Batman right away and the last 45 minutes of the movie just a slug fest/fight for the city?

MOS did a lot right but i think the plot/story were too heavily weighted toward the invasion and action/fighting.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

I would have preferred if superman had revealed himself and saved a life or two before Zod and the goons got there. In Begins you got Batman going around and tying up the mob contingent before Rhas showed up so there was more at stake and the city knew who Batman was and so did we. Can you imagine if Bruce had just been ambushed by Rhas the second he got back to gotham and he literally had to become Batman right away and the last 45 minutes of the movie just a slug fest/fight for the city?

MOS did a lot right but i think the plot/story were too heavily weighted toward the invasion and action/fighting.

Absolutely. You don't introduce evil Kryptonians and his powers to the world before introducing Superman (which I guess will happen in the sequel).

 

[TheBat812]

Man, I loved TDKR before and I think MoS only made me appreciate the Nolan Bat-films even more.

The thing is, even though TDKR and MoS both have that very fast pacing that makes things feel a bit choppy in places...TDKR is able to get away with it, mainly because it's a threequel and we've now spent 2 films establishing the universe and emotionally investing in the characters. Because of MoS was the first film in a franchise, they needed to lay a little more groundwork for the characters. In a lot of ways it feels like an origin film and a sequel smashed together.

Bottom line, TDKR (and all of the Nolan Bat-films) HAD me from frame one to the end. I never stopped being emotionally invested. I don't know if MoS had me at all. It felt like a bunch of amazing images just whizzed by my face. And the emotional flashback stuff there was just didn't land with me. Overall, I just feel like the "Nolan approach" was AMAZING for Batman and less-than amazing for Superman.

So yeah, MoS has finally showed me what people who didn't like TDKR must have felt like. On that note, I respect the opinion of those that felt the movie worked. A second or third viewing might change my mind. I'm listening to the Modern Myth Media podcast and all of them LOVED the movie. I always respect their opinions and usually agree with them. This might be the first time I had a radically different reaction than them.

The more relevant comparison would probably be BB. Both utilized similar structures and every bit of information relates back to the protagonist. I definitely think Nolan pointed them in the right direction, but without him controlling how A goes to B, it ended up lacking any subtlety in its presentation. I mean BB also had blatant transitions but they never felt as forced as MOSs. That's just a testament to Nolan's attention to detail and vision that was missing from this. Goyers wooden and on the nose dialogue returned, but snyders direction didn't help mask it in the same way Nolan did in BB.


Overall I still enjoyed the movie and I'm sure I'll Like it even more with repeat viewing.

 

[Metallo]

I would give this film a 7 out of 10. I enjoyed it pretty much throughout, but the choice to write Superman into a corner that "forces" him to do what he does to Zod, as well as his indiference to the potential collateral damage in certain scenes, definitely bothered me. If the character was called Megadude instead of Superman, i wouldve added a full point. I guess that's a fanboy complaint, but there you go.

I had some other issues with the film - the overuse of shaky cam for one - but i did think it had some heart and Cavill was good and should be more than serviceable going forward. I recognized the pacing issues, but it didn't bother me that much. maybe because i was expecting it hearing/reading all the criticism.

Its laughable to put it on par with TA or TDK, but its still worlds better than the Transformers crap. And its a helluva lot better than anything that Snyder's done since Dawn of the Dead. A good time at the movies, with just enough poignancy (barely).

Question: did they EVER refer to the city as Metropolis? If they did, I missed it.

Ditto. I agree with just about all that. I think I even gave it the same rating. Thought the film was ok with some a amazing bits but I just wasn't blown away by the product as a whole. I also preferred TDK and Avengers. MOS was more ambitious in some ways but I felt like TDK and Avengers did a better job with what they presented and achieved their goals as the types of films they were trying to be. To me they were much stronger much better thought out and better written. The stories flowed better throughout.

 

[Doc Samson]

No round of applause at mine. Everyone just got up and walked after it was over. I swear my sister and I did more talking about what we just saw than people within ear shot of me.

The laughs I can remember were when that trucker attempts to shove Clark and then again when they saw the guy's truck trashed outside. Oh and the scene where he breaks his handcuffs.

There were intermittent laughs throughout for me, and I've seen it 4 times. But a serious question, and I'm only asking you because I remember you really liking the Avengers. How do you feel the pace was in relation to that? A lot of criticism of MoS I see is over the pace, and IMO it wasn't worse than the Avengers, probably even a little better. I outlined my issues with that back then here:

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=383001&page=8

 

[Lily Adler]

So we all agree then, Goyer should have his leash pulled.

 

[Joeyjojo72]

Ditto. I agree with just about all that. I think I even gave it the same rating. Thought the film was ok with some a amazing bits but I just wasn't blown away by the product as a whole. I also preferred TDK and Avengers. MOS was more ambitious in some ways but I felt like TDK and Avengers did a better job with what they presented and achieved their goals as the types of films they were trying to be. To me they were much stronger much better thought out and better written. The stories flowed better throughout.

lol good to know im not alone. i will say that i probably need to see it once more before i settle on a final assessment. not right away, but maybe in a couple weeks.

edit: and yeah one or two more light moments wouldve been a good thing. my audience didnt so much as titter until the "i think he's hot" (in the trailers so no spoiler) line near the end.

edit 2: in this supposedly gritty reality, a pair of glasses isnt gonna cut it as a disguise. not when you're the most recognizable face on the planet and you're working at the newspaper in the city where everything went down. but they have time to figure that out.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

So we all agree then, Goyer should have his leash pulled.

Could I ask you, Lib, if you have written a review of MOS? Did you like it?

 

[Rock Sexton]

There were intermittent laughs throughout for me, and I've seen it 4 times. But a serious question, and I'm only asking you because I remember you really liking the Avengers. How do you feel the pace was in relation to that? A lot of criticism of MoS I see is over the pace, and IMO it wasn't worse than the Avengers, probably even a little better. I outlined my issues with that back then here:

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=383001&page=8

I've said previously in here that I'm a big fan of non-linear storytelling commonly used by Snyder. I rewatched "Watchmen" before going to see MoS in order to get ready for it. However, there were moments in this film where it felt like Snyder was forcing that go-to method of his on a screenplay that didn't fit the bill. In Watchmen he did it because there were numerous characters he had to connect to the overall direction of the plot. With MoS it's just Clark and I felt like after a few times it began to restrain the natural flow that should've taken place. Ok, stare at something and flashback ..... rinse and repeat.

As much as I love the movie, Avengers had some pacing issues too ...... the first act specifically, as well as the way Whedon divied up some of the ongoings after all hell broke loose on the Hellicarrier. I kind of get mad everytime I watch it and Thor/Hulk constantly get interrupted by the parallel editing.

 

[Lily Adler]

Could I ask you, Lib, if you have written a review of MOS? Did you like it?

Not a review, but I did give it a 7.5/10. I thought it had great visuals, good and some great ideas, but the story glossed over too many details, plus the occasional plot hole and clunky dialogue, for me and should have been explored. Personally, I would have cut down on the Metropolis battle and skull scene to allot more time to explore certain details: The Daily Planet Clark Kent persona, Development of Minor Characters, Some Breathing Room Between Action Scenes. I would also liked to have seen Kryptonese spoken on film and Clark taking an interest in Journalism, but those are just my personal preferences. It seemed Goyer was less than enthusiastic to go into greater detail with Superman as he did with Batman, but that could have been Nolan's doing with BB.

 

[Doc Samson]

I've said previously in here that I'm a big fan of non-linear storytelling commonly used by Snyder. I rewatched "Watchmen" before going to see MoS in order to get ready for it. However, there were moments in this film where it felt like Snyder was forcing that go-to method of his on a screenplay that didn't fit the bill. In Watchmen he did it because there were numerous characters he had to connect to the overall direction of the plot. With MoS it's just Clark and I felt like after a few times it began to restrain the natural flow that should've taken place. Ok, stare at something and flashback ..... rinse and repeat.

As much as I love the movie, Avengers had some pacing issues too ...... the first act specifically, as well as the way Whedon divied up some of the ongoings after all hell broke loose on the Hellicarrier. I kind of get mad everytime I watch it and Thor/Hulk constantly get interrupted by the parallel editing.

I'm a fan of non-linear too, maybe that's why I can accept it more than others. I feel it's about the same as BB length-wise and I thought incorporating some sort of visual in most of those flashbacks (young Clark's senses going crazy, the oil rig explosion, the bus crash, the tornado even if a little over the top) helped keep it from being potentially mundane. And I also think the fact that it's Clark's "beginning" kept a lot of the more familiar story beats for a potential sequel, such as the Daily Planet stuff, which will allow for more interaction with Lois & Perry, etc.

And let's face it, Superman Returns is a huge reason for it too. It's the same position Incredible Hulk was in after Ang's film, I question how much patience the average moviegoer would have for another film that took it's time that much, it's a tightrope that I think they pulled off walking. I don't believe Snyder even gets a crack at something this big if not for the criticisms of SR and it's lack of action.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I'm a fan of non-linear too, maybe that's why I can accept it more than others. I feel it's about the same as BB length-wise and I thought incorporating some sort of visual in most of those flashbacks (young Clark's senses going crazy, the oil rig explosion, the bus crash, the tornado even if a little over the top) helped keep it from being potentially mundane. And I also think the fact that it's Clark's "beginning" kept a lot of the more familiar story beats for a potential sequel, such as the Daily Planet stuff, which will allow for more interaction with Lois & Perry, etc.

And let's face it, Superman Returns is a huge reason for it too. It's the same position Incredible Hulk was in after Ang's film, I question how much patience the average moviegoer would have for another film that took it's time that much, it's a tightrope that I think they pulled off walking. I don't believe Snyder even gets a crack at something this big if not for the criticisms of SR and it's lack of action.

Like I said, I didn't mind the use of "some" of the flashbacks. I just think Goyer didn't give Snyder enough weighty material to actually warrant using it as much as it was ..... IMO that was Snyder attempting to cover up for a rushed screenplay by being stylistic in the presentation of it's sequences.

Most moviegoers don't have patient though for non-linear storytelling. It's an attention span thing ..... in a lot of ways it also boils down to how people's minds work and process information .....

 

[Senator Pleasury]

I'm a fan of non-linear too, maybe that's why I can accept it more than others. I feel it's about the same as BB length-wise and I thought incorporating some sort of visual in most of those flashbacks (young Clark's senses going crazy, the oil rig explosion, the bus crash, the tornado even if a little over the top) helped keep it from being potentially mundane. And I also think the fact that it's Clark's "beginning" kept a lot of the more familiar story beats for a potential sequel, such as the Daily Planet stuff, which will allow for more interaction with Lois & Perry, etc.

And let's face it, Superman Returns is a huge reason for it too. It's the same position Incredible Hulk was in after Ang's film, I question how much patience the average moviegoer would have for another film that took it's time that much, it's a tightrope that I think they pulled off walking. I don't believe Snyder even gets a crack at something this big if not for the criticisms of SR and it's lack of action.

Well, SR was criticized because of its Donner references and Jesus parallels too. And they're all back for MOS.

But ultimately I agree. I have said myself that if you don't change SR but only about the amount of action, its reception by GA would have been dramatically different.

 

[Doc Samson]

Well, SR was criticized because of its Donner references and Jesus parallels too. And they're all back for MOS.

But ultimately I agree. I have said myself that if you don't change SR but only about the amount of action, its reception by GA would have been dramatically different.

The Jesus thing is one aspect I'm very tired of, but like Snyder said himself, they didn't create that, it's been there in his stories almost from the start. They didn't need to hammer it home yet again though, especially after SR like you mention.

But yes, the action and perhaps the overcompensation of it, is a direct result of the perceived failure of SR. Even still though, I've waited my whole life to see a live-action Superman that really looked like the comics & cartoons I grew up on. Needless to say I'm more than satisfied...