TMOS Review & Speculation Thread (Spoilers) - Part 4

[MAN O STEEL]

Also just wanted to add that I saw this movie with my mother and grandmother today. Who are general superman fans but in no way obsessed with the character like I am. My mother is 64 and my grandmother is 90 and although my mother and grandmother grew up with a different superman in a very different time (george reeves and christopher reeve). They both were crying and clapping at the end. Something I have never seen then do for any movie in my lifetime. They also both gave the movie a 10/10 and described it as flawless in their eyes. A prefect 21st century superman movie. The reason I bring this up is because they both given the times they grew up in could not see past their own respective supermen. And I fully expected them to hate it. I was shocked. I'm glad that they were able to find a new superman that they can look fondly towards.

 

[sf2]

Because Zod knows that Lois know Superman's identity and maybe where to find the Codex. Her information leads them to Smallville. Or am I wrong there. Not sure only seen it once.

and that's what he says? I thought it was "You love these people so much, you can mourn for them."

U got them 100% correct.

 

[br0adband]

The proper line is "If you love these people so much, you can mourn for them!" but you got the gist of it.

Kal begs him to stop several times but Zod refuses and the final "NEVER!!!" is the breaking point for Kal, both literally and figuratively.

And as for Lois and Kal both, they had their memories probed during their time on Black Zero - we don't see it but when Kal saves Lois and they touch down in the wheat field she tells him that she's sorry but "they looked inside my mind" and he says pretty much the same thing happened to him. Perhaps with the DVD/Blu-ray release we might see that footage if that was filmed, with some funky Kryptonian mind-probe thingamabob or whatever.

 

[-Arya-]

Saw the film for the second time last night. Yes, the flaws in the structure of the film were more apparent this time around. It wasn't the actual flashback structure that I had a problem with (I acutally loved this non-linear format), but rather that some of the scenes weren't given enough time to be more fleshed out. That was my only major complaint. I thought everything else about MOS; the performances (I still don't understand where the idea of emotional coldness stemmed from) the action, the overall storytelling, were all great.

Cannot wait for the sequel!

 

[Willi Berg]

I still don't get why zod wanted lois to go with superman and faora to his ship, other than convenient plot devices, however besides those, I loved the story.

Because Zod knows that Lois know Superman's identity and maybe where to find the Codex. Her information leads them to Smallville. Or am I wrong there. Not sure only seen it once.

Zod knows about Lois because of the news article she leaked to Woodburn but I think the info. she gave Zod about Smallville was from when he read her mind when she was on his ship.

 

[Drz]

My Man of Steel Review

Zack Snyder & David S. Goyer team-up for their take on Superman (Henry Cavill), a man who has been insecure about his powers and dreads what harm he could cause, overcomes these obstacles and begins his flight as the Man of Tomorrow.

The story starts on Krypton in its last days. Here we see a planet that has become woefully entrenched within dystopian social norms. Enter Jor-El (Russel Crowe), Lara El (Ayelet Zurer), and the Last Son of Krypton. Kal-El is sent to Earth, Krypton is destroyed. Kal-El is raised in Kansas by the Kent family (Kevin Costner & Diana Lane) and becomes Superman.

Lois Lane (Amy Adams) is no damsel in distress and more like Princess Leia instead; headstrong, beautiful and intelligent, this gal will adventure in space alongside Superman as a worthy partner.

General Zod (Michael Shannon) is the once proud military commander of Krypton and friend to Jor-El, now nothing more than a renegade with his fellow criminals. Lieutenant Faora-Ul (Antje Traue) is incredibly sexy, there is nothing sexier than a warrior goddess annihilating everything on her path from her faster than a speeding bullet finishing moves as she dukes jabs & uppercuts mercilessly.

Hans Zimmer’s score for the movie is rather forgettable as everything sounds so majestic; there is nothing different with the tunes you hear from the movie.

The plot left me cold, because I feel there are no real characters and things just keep happening in that typical Summer blockbuster way, but that still doesn’t stop me from being keen to see where the sequel will take, because this movie as a whole is a big origin story for Superman, Krypton and how Earth gets a new status-quo as they know they are not alone in this universe.

Zack Snyder has however successfully told us a story, that despite how great your father might be, he still might have some incredibly horrible friends.

 

[JAK®]

This was not a typical dumb summer blockbuster. Whether you liked it or not, that simply was not the case.

To be honest, when people list platitudes such as "No character development" "Too much action" and "All style, no substance" I just assume they are going through a checklist of accepted criticisms to justify why they don't like a movie. It shows very little actual critical analysis.

 

[BlueLantern]

Stating there's little critical analysis behind those statements and then not justifying them is a cheap declaration in itself. Credit to most people here, they've appropriately explained their criticisms as have a majority of critics. The difference is most fans are just mad that the critical acclaim on this film was non-existent. Furthermore stating that it's not 'just another dumb blockbuster' doesn't mean the filmmakers should get credit for trying something different and failing. Normally they would, but the difference is they barely innovated. They just took elements from franchises outside of Superman and ingratiated them into the character. It might be new to this mythos but isn't to the genre or world around it. Dumb or not, it's not original so no real commendation can be made for trying not to make it 'dumb'.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Stating there's little critical analysis behind those statements and then not justifying them is a cheap declaration in itself. Credit to most people here, they've appropriately explained their criticisms as have a majority of critics. The difference is most fans are just mad that the critical acclaim on this film was non-existent. Furthermore stating that it's not 'just another dumb blockbuster' doesn't mean the filmmakers should get credit for trying something different and failing. Normally they would, but the difference is they barely innovated. They just took elements from franchises outside of Superman and ingratiated them into the character. It might be new to this mythos but isn't to the genre or world around it. Dumb or not, it's not original so no real commendation can be made for trying not to make it 'dumb'.

It's more complicated than that. There were special obstacles to overcome, and in doing so, it had to sacrifice a degree of positive critical reception.

For example, this reboot broke from the style and continuity of the Donner films. It was the first Superman film to do so. But as SR proved years earlier, it had to be done. Batman in 1989 faced similar nostalgia-rooted backlash from those who grew up with Adam West.

MOS was a painful, messy birth. The first scene in the film was the ultimate analogy. Now we have to see if it grows to something incredible.

In other words, there were some unfair complaints leveled at the film. Some posters here are doing damage control.

 

[BlueLantern]

Breaking from what's been done before is fine, but making a blatantly derivative film really isn't the way. I'm okay with imperfect starts, but notes need to be hit.

Honestly, I can't think of any credit to give this film as a whole. There were a few bits in the film that resonated, but only in the moment. And that was just down to said scenes being very good. But the film as a complete product? Nope. Extremely underwhelmed is what I felt. The more I've seen the film, the worse it's gotten.

It wasn't Superman. Not by the Donner standards but by the comic book standards. Even the animated standards. It made this moody and introspective Superman that I'd never want to be. And Superman should be a guy I want to be.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

The film has its share of flaws (pacing being the most glaring, IMO), but there's a nonsensical complaint to go right along with every legitimate one.

 

[BlueLantern]

To be honest I haven't had a chance to go through every complaint, but the ones I had have been corroborated by others in regards to portrayal and subtext.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

my Man of Steel review:

The movie had terrific ideas, and despite showing the origin, felt like something I haven't seen before. Geekvolution's cap Logan said that he always wanted a Superman movie that's completely science fiction and that the origin story had so much potential to be that. I totally agree, and I'm glad that they did it here.

The action and effects were spectacular. While common sense tells that a lot of the action was CGI, my mind never seperated the CGI and shot footage as I was experiencing it. Nothing felt fake in the movie, and the concepts were so believably handled that I do think this Superman could co-exist in the same universe with Nolan's Batman

Clark as a character was a bit different than what Superman usually is imo. But a good character is a good characer none the less. I do wish that he had gotten a tad more development. Lois on the other hand was exactly what I was expecting which is not bad at all. Shannon as Zod really surprised me in the role, especially when people say that his character doesn't have dimension. The way I saw it, Zod's personality in the film was deliberatly like that, he was what he was genetically made to be and he portrayed that beautifully

over all, it's a 9.4/10 for me. The music is a tad too repetitive but it's still very good music. Similar nitpick with the action: there's numbingly much action in the movie, but it's still really good & thrilling action that I'm invested in. Besides those things, this movie is brilliant and I have no idea why it's score is so low on RT

 

[BlueLantern]

If you've seen Independence Day, The Matrix, Serenity and Star Trek, you've seen it all before.

 

[br0adband]

over all, it's a 9.4/10 for me. The music is a tad too repetitive but it's still very good music. Similar nitpick with the action: there's numbingly much action in the movie, but it's still really good & thrilling action that I'm invested in. Besides those things, this movie is brilliant and I have no idea why it's score is so low on RT

Because we're dealing with humans, obviously.

 

[BlueLantern]

By that logic you should be accepting of criticism instead of being such an intolerant fanatic. Oh wait, I'm dealing with humans.

 

[br0adband]

I am accepting, even in spite of your condescending attitude that I'm not.

But at least you finally admitted what pretty much every post of yours about this movie reeks of:

Honestly, I can't think of any credit to give this film as a whole.

We get it: You don't find this movie appealing on any level. But when every post you make bashes it, tears it to shreds, and basically hammers that fact out every time we see you making a post about this movie and nearly any thread discussing it, well...

In this particular situation, such repetition is not the Mother of all skill, I assure you.

 

[PacificBoy]

If you've seen Independence Day, The Matrix, Serenity and Star Trek, you've seen it all before.

Thought Independence Day pulled off the alien invasion angle better. You could see how it impacted the world, the stakes were higher and I was more emotionally involved. With the world engine attack on Metropolis, Man of Steel seemed to focus more on Superman's "truth, justice and the American way", but even then that didn't come across very strongly or well.

 

[Willi Berg]

I saw it again in IMAX 3D. It was really in your face in IMAX and the 3D didn't add much but I have to say I loved, loved the 'learning to fly' sequence. It choked me up. I got emotional there and it was my favourite part of the movie.

The movie doesn't repeat that simple joyous moment of flying because the switching of gears is full-on. There really isn't as an emotionally-moving action setpiece towards the end. It's just really intense. My fave part of the climax is Zod rising up after taking off his armour and when he and Kal-El fly and fight around the city. I do want to see more flying sequences like that in the city, where it doesn't necessarily end into crashing into a building.

I liked all the characters, from Superman to Lois, Perry, Swanwick and Hardy etc.

This movie is the most comic-book like version of Superman in that it goes through the plot points in quick succession, like comic panels, where there isn't much time to breathe and then moves to an all-out destructive finale. I want Zack to give the story more time to breathe. There was that in the beginning before Kal turned into Superman, but it did move very fast from him becoming Superman to having to fight Zod and co. And the villain plot is very comic-booky and resolved that way too.

But I liked all the elements of the movie, most importantly Cavill is a great Superman and the mythology is there to be built up.

Crowd reaction was positive and a lot of people were taking photos of themselves next to the statue of Superman in the lobby before and after the movie.

 

[BlueLantern]

I am accepting, even in spite of your condescending attitude that I'm not.

But at least you finally admitted what pretty much every post of yours about this movie reeks of:



We get it: You don't find this movie appealing on any level. But when every post you make bashes it, tears it to shreds, and basically hammers that fact out every time we see you making a post about this movie and nearly any thread discussing it, well...

In this particular situation, such repetition is not the Mother of all skill, I assure you.

You notice the key notion of my statement being as a whole? There's parts I like, though admittedly it's a stretch. Furthermore, tearing it to shreds implies that I'm doing a good job of critiquing the movie. Thanks. Oh and you're not accepting of my opinion, don't try and pretend. Remember the blah blah blah quote? That's condescension considering others quite maturely responded or corroborated my opinion. By the way, as usual you're good at the ironic posts since you've been nothing but sunshiny about everything regarding this film. So the sentiments regarding repetition and endlessly defending the film goes your way too.

 

[Galactus123]

I liked the movie and Henry Cavill was a perfect choice to play Superman. I would give the movie 3 and half stars. But I don't understand why they had to reveale to Lois that Superman is Clark Kent this early and before he was working at the Daily Planet? It should have happened in the sequels and not in the first movie.

 

[Willi Berg]

I liked the movie and Henry Cavill was a perfect choice to play Superman. I would give the movie 3 and half stars. But I don't understand why they had to reveale to Lois that Superman is Clark Kent this early and before he was working at the Daily Planet? It should have happened in the sequels and not in the first movie.

Snyder said that she would look bad as an investigative reporter if she was fooled by the glasses disguise. And since the plot involved her investigating him, she would have to find out. It is a big change, and that dynamic of the two identities she deals with - Superman and Clark- is gone, but then again, it's already been done in the movies quite a bit.

 

[Dispatch Ninja]

Snyder said that she would look bad as an investigative reporter if she was fooled by the glasses disguise. And since the plot involved her investigating him, she would have to find out. It is a big change, and that dynamic of the two identities she deals with - Superman and Clark- is gone, but then again, it's already been done in the movies quite a bit.

A much needed change imho.

 

[br0adband]

You notice the key notion of my statement being as a whole? There's parts I like, though admittedly it's a stretch. Furthermore, tearing it to shreds implies that I'm doing a good job of critiquing the movie. Thanks. Oh and you're not accepting of my opinion, don't try and pretend. Remember the blah blah blah quote? That's condescension considering others quite maturely responded or corroborated my opinion. By the way, as usual you're good at the ironic posts since you've been nothing but sunshiny about everything regarding this film. So the sentiments regarding repetition and endlessly defending the film goes your way too.

If you think I haven't trashed some of the aspects of the movie you're just not getting it and you're just not paying attention. Seriously. From the moment I joined this forum about a week ago I've consistently had the opinion that it's not a perfect movie, it has flaws, but the opinions I'm expressing aren't meant to bash it consistently and to a degree where I'm doing nothing BUT bashing it which is the point.

I just don't find it necessary to do anything BUT trash it, which has been precisely what you've done from everything I've seen.

Even on those infrequent and incredibly rare opportunities for you to offer anything positive at all you turn it into a slam. I mean the comment you just made is a perfect example:

There's parts I like, though admittedly it's a stretch.

Almost a positive statement then hammered with the bash. You don't like the movie overall, hence "There's parts I like" but they're not even something worth mentioning since it's some super-human effort (pun intended) to point those parts out, apparently.

And the blah blah blah thing is something I do instead of *snip* or quoting entire posts all over again. Been at this a very long time, old habits are very tough to break.

I like the parts as a whole, you dislike the whole save for some parts. Funny how that works...

Opinions... we both have 'em, just like other parts too.

 

[BlueLantern]

I've regularly mentioned the parts I like. The difference is when someone's discussing a certain part of the film, I'll address that instead of going totally sideways.

It wouldn't make sense if someone said the film was unlike any other blockbuster and I just randomly said 'you know what I liked? Hans Zimmer's motif for Krypton!'

For the record, you've been quite gushing about the film. Not as much as sf2 who's essentially selling the Watchtower's Man of Steel edition magazine to folk, but still.