Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Man of Steel' started by Thread Manager, Jun 20, 2013.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]459723[/split]
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]459243[/split]
Lmao, such irony that now you know how many of us feel about some of the criticisms of TdKR....
Having said that, I totally agree with you in regards to this film. Multiple viewings will likely clear up many of the more logistical flaws of this film. It's still hardly perfect, but there are so many great ideas within. It's too bad Snyder has no understanding of subtlety, lol.
I FINALLY SAW IT.
*takes a deep breath*
For Henry? Anything.
I'm trying to collect myself to post a proper review. At the minute, in brief - all the ingredients for something truly amazing but fell a bit short.
Basically how I felt...lots of potential, but ultimately underdelivered/-executed.
I thought something more in the lines of
The easy answer is "Clark is still a young man". Young people don't always know exactly what to do in a given situation,
Here's the thing about that scene. I don't think Jonathan's first line, "Get your mother to safety" is an accident. Jonathan wants Clark and Ma to get to safety. Like its his instinct to rescue the dog, it's just the man's instinct to avoid putting people in harm's way, even his (for all they know) indestructible son. And we don't actually know the level of Clark's indestructibility at that point, so it's arguable that Jonathan could well think the tornado might kill Clark, who, as we see, Jonathan considers pretty darn important.
First of all - casting. Top notch. Really, really superb all round. Cavill just is Superman through and through. Adams gave a great turn as Lois, who wasn't wet like in Superman Returns, nor did she verge on annoying as Lois incarnations are sometimes apt to do. Loved Michael Shannon. Whoever played Faora was a real scene-stealer. Laureance Fishburne was also great, if underused. Everyone brought their A-game but I really can't praise Cavill enough.
Contrary to everyone, I didn't find the flashbacks too bad. I thought there was perhaps a couple too many and I was sad that the one flashback I wanted to see - the Kents discovering baby Clark - was the one we didn't get. They certainly needed to be contained to the first hour though, apart from the one at the end, which I loved.
The film looked fantastic, even though I'm not a fan of Snyder's direction style. He gives fantastic visuals but sometimes, frenetic and quite distracting camerawork, but you adjust to it. I thought the suit looked incredibly dull in pictures but it worked onscreen. It could've 'popped' a little more but alas.
I thought Henry and Amy had great chemistry but it was rushed. So very, very rushed. Their relationship seemed to progress at lightning speed but I appreciate the fact that she knows his secret identity. I can't lie, however, in the final scene, I was just yearning for some classic Daily Planet dynamics, which the film did sorely miss.
Jonathan Kent's death was just silly. 'Nuff said. If I could change one thing, it would be that scene. I get the intention behind but it just didn't work for me.
I liked seeing young Clark struggle with his powers. It was something a bit new and interesting.
Dialogue was a major, major issue. The dialogue in that scene with young Clark struggling in the classroom, for example, was painful. Very cheesy, very cliché and needed a good script polish. Conversely, I thought the final scene complete with "Welcome to the Planet" was splendid.
The editing was a bit... umm, messy, to say the least. It absolutely reaked of a film that was probably much, much longer and trimmed down considerably. And you could tell. A lot of odd cuts, few proper transitions and it sort of let itself down in that regard. I'd have happily lost a flashback or two if it meant that several other scenes in the movie had room to breathe.
Speaking of things that could be trimmed - the action. Absolutely adored seeing a Superman film with action after the disappointing SR but the final 45 minutes just veered a little too far into gratuitous. As did the random property destruction. Bizarre scenes as Zod's ship hovered over Metropolis (which, much like Gotham in TDKR felt distinctly underwhelming and lacking in character - this needs to be improved for MOS2) but the Daily Planet was absolutely full of people. Only as the destruction started, did people run. And then when they did began, they seemed to have evacuated in seconds as Superman seemed to be fighting in a ghost town for much of the final battle, until Zod moved the fight to more, undestroyed, streets. My main issue isn't necessarily with the loss of life (people surely died but what saw very little of it, bar deserted building after deserted building - an artistic choice I'm sure, but if you're not wanting to imply mass death, don't set your fights in those kind of areas) but the fact that the near decimation is going to be very hard to top in terms of spectacle. And the Daily Planet was up and running in no time again anyway! Madness.
In regards to Zod's death, I felt it was a little overblown with the slow laser and sobbing family, but strangely, I wasn't as bothered by the neck snapping as I thought. I would like to think that will be the first and only time Superman kills someone in this franchise though, and we get some scenes addressing that act in MOS2.
I actually enjoyed it a lot more than I sound like I did from this review. I thought it was solid and I enjoyed it more than TDKR but as I said, the ingredients for something even better was there.
A solid B.
What dialogue are you referring to in the classroom?
I dunno. I thought this was Goyer's most restrained, appropriately toned, best-written script yet. What dialogue?
I agree with a lot of this review...but I'm just not as angered by it as he/she is. I give the movie a C, 7/10. But all that said...aside from my issues and how I felt it was overall and underachievement as a film...I will give it credit for succeeding with flying colors in what I thought would be the hardest area.
They really did get the right guy to play a new Superman.
And even after a movie that I didn't love, I like watching him as Superman and would like to see him do it some more. He looked strong, assertive, naturally confident, sensitive, and compassionate...his delivery and voice were excellent, he had good presence without hamming it up or swaggering, and he has good timing. A little more humor in the film could have helped, but there's plenty of time for that. For the kind of Superman that they are trying to portray today...he is spot-on. It finally feels like we can comfortably and respectfully move on from Reeve...beloved and eternal as his portrayal is. It feels like a great weight has been lifted in that respect.
After a long wait, Superman fans have finally got 'their guy'. With all the debatable aspects of MOS...I can't imagine anyone not feeling that Cavill's debut as Superman was anything less than a triumph. Going forward...you could change up the creative team, go with other writers or directors...as long as you keep him. With that squared away...the sky's the limit now.
'Cept it's Superman...so...it's not really a limit anymore.
your rating is strange. 7/10 is a B!!!
It's so fascinating to me how someone can think it's his best written script yet (you) and someone can think it's hot garbage (me).
Btw, just so I can sort've get an idea of what you consider quality dialogue .... what are some of your favorite screenplays?
nice take on it
No, it's a C.
59 and below, F
60-69, D- to D+
70-79, C- to C+
80-89, B- to B+
90-100, A- to A+
Did this change recently?
He was younger when he had the instinct of saving the school bus and then go back for Pete Ross. This case being about his father deserves not indulgence. There's no way Clark would have stayed there.
What's "hot garbage" about it?
Yeah...no. Too many to list. Quality dialogue is dialogue that is tonally accurate and sounds varied for characters and realistic relevant to the film its in, and if the writer is really on their game, has more than one meaning and some layering to it, in other words, its story driven and thematically relevant most of the time.
Please don't say Mamet...I'll slap you.
I don't see how anyone could have given that film a C when it was clearly better than any Superman film ever made.
What if the other movies were less than a C? This movie could still be a C and better than the rest. Not my opinion but a matter of logic.
In your opinion. For various reasons, I think it's the third, but more importantly, not as good as many other superhero movies since 2001.
OMG, luckily u r not a teacher or lecturer.
your employees must suffer a lot if u r a boss.
You look seriously ridiculous right now.