TMOS Reviews Thread - Non Spoiler Review and Discussion - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd take something deathly serious over something as horrifically lighthearted as Iron Man 3 any day.

Besides overly serious comes off as unintentionally funny, right?
smiley-scared004.gif
 
I don't take the humor/too serious thing. Every superhero movie need humor? Since when?
They didn't insinuate that the film should be a comedy. Just that the film should've had moments of levity to undercut the overwhelming weight and drama if only for it to not choke on its own seriousness.
 
I'd take something deathly serious over something as horrifically lighthearted as Iron Man 3 any day.

Exactly. While I did like most of IM3's humor, it was too overdone. Batman, Superman, Punisher, Wolverine, etc should mostly be serious. Leave the humor to Spidey, Iron Man, and Deadpool.
 
This is what I have being saying in previous post. Older generation who grew up loving Superman the movie are having a hard time moving on from this and is slamming MOS because it is nothing like it. From those that I know have seen it all loved it.

I saw Superman I and II in the theater when I was a kid and I think this movie looks great. Even my mom (whose Superman was George Reeves) wants to see it. She never wants to see these movies.

So don't think us old people can't accept the new one. :cwink:
 
They didn't insinuate that the film should be a comedy. Just that the film should've had moments of levity to undercut the overwhelming weight and drama if only for it to not choke on its own seriousness.

And we have a winner! :up:
 
To those of you oversrutinizing the negative reviews, ask yourself this - Have you called into question the validity, bias, and diction of even one positive review? If not, then you probably need to take a good look in the mirror before you slander a critic for their supposed bias, and take a nice long break from Rotten Tomatoes while you're at it.

Every time I see someone rip into negative criticism without ever pointing that critical eye at the reviews that gush over a film, I can't take them seriously. Seems like a lot of folks ironically want their preconceived notions validated, all while anything less than glowing praise is dismissed as biased and unfounded. As others have stated, this happens every summer, yet we still haven't learned.
 
I'm shocked Roeper was so harsh on it. His biggest criticism of it basically seemed to be that it was retelling the origin.

I still have a feeling this will divide critics way more than it divides the fanbase. Particularly the older critics. This is Superman for a new generation.

That's the same problem TASM dealt with. Donner's Superman and Raimi's Spider-Man both did a very good job telling the origin stories for those two characters. Burton left a nice little window of opportunity for a Batman origin movie, so BB had a pretty big advantage over TASM and MOS in this regard.
 
Humor is a must in superman movie.
 
Really? Is this your educated guess? :doh:

Yes, actually it is! Lmao, lighten up would yah? Humor at its finest in a very up-tight environment. Just joshin'.

In all seriousness (which is obviously a bad thing) all of the negative reviews that I've read so far are the words I actually love reading. It's all positive to me because the problem that people have with MOS in those negative reviews is the EXACT things I've always wanted in a new Superman-franchise.

Origin, serious, heart-pumping, action. In all of this, it's an entertaining and interesting position to be in seeing everyone tugging on each other's capes about it. In the end, I win. I hope everybody else does too walking out of the theater within the next few days and stops worrying about a critic who wanted to laugh their ass's off during a Superman flick.

It's all good for this fan:word:
 
I'll admit, it would be somewhat disappointing if this film ended up getting an overall "rotten" score at RT
 
Like I said from what I'm reading MOS seems to suffer from hyperactive overdrive, something very common in blockbusters these days. But hey, the old problem was horrible effects in the 1990s. At least we don't have to settle for that.
 
IMDB is troll central.. You will have tons of Marvel fans there rating it a 1 or 2 for laughs...

A few Marvel trolls, I doubt will have a effect on the overall scores of thousands of ratings.
 
Humor is a must in superman movie.
The guy's ****ing planet blew up and he's the last of his kind. He's an alien outsider. I really don't see where we can add humor here.
 
It's honestly shocking that someone I usually respect like Roeper would be so shortsighted and dare I say selfish to say Superman doesn't need another origin movie. Kids growing up today are NOT necessarily familiar with Superman's origin story, that is the whole point. It's been 35 years since that story has been given the epic big screen treatment.

I'm not even trying to get on the bandwagon of naysaying every criticism that comes this movie's way, but faulting it for being an origin movie seems to demonstrate a real lack of cultural awareness. I'm a bit surprised at Roeper for that. That is where I feel critics ought to try an be more objective.

That's the same problem TASM dealt with. Donner's Superman and Raimi's Spider-Man both did a very good job telling the origin stories for those two characters. Burton left a nice little window of opportunity for a Batman origin movie, so BB had a pretty big advantage over TASM and MOS in this regard.

Very true, but even so...with Spider-Man you only had 10 years of separation. You would think the 35 years of separation would help earn it a bit of good will in that regard. Literally anybody under 35 right now (which is pretty much the movie's target audience) has never seen the Superman origin story on the big screen.
 
Last edited:
I'm shocked at Roeper too. The man is usually so depressingly easy going and conformist; especially to franchise films.
 
This is off the yahoo review and it seriously pissed me off:

Flying men in capes is grave business in Snyder's solemn Superman. "Man of Steel," an origin tale of the DC Comics hero, goes more than two hours before the slightest joke or smirk.

Da hell are these people expecting? A freakin' comedy? :cmad:
 
I found the mic making that noise and Supes saying that he had to go was a bit funny. I'm not sure if it's like that in the final film though.
 
It's honestly shocking that someone I usually respect like Roeper would be so shortsighted and dare I say selfish to say Superman doesn't need another origin movie. Kids growing up today are NOT necessarily familiar with Superman's origin story, that is the whole point. It's been 35 years since that story has been given the epic big screen treatment.

I'm not even trying to get on the bandwagon of naysaying every criticism that comes this movie's way, but faulting it for being an origin movie seems to demonstrate a real lack of cultural awareness. I'm a bit surprised at Roeper for that. That is where I feel critics ought to try an be more objective.

I don't think it's just that the origin is being retold. It kinda sounds like the editing isn't very good during that part of the film. Jeremy Jahns complained that it felt like they were going through the motions to get to the action scenes.

Multiple forum posters I've talked to have said there were pacing/editing issues during the origin part of the film. I'm just not getting the vibe that this part of the film was put together as well as BB or S:TM (the two movies that influenced MOS more than anything else). But bright side is it sounds like the action is amazing, even if it does drag on longer than necessary.
 
Obviously, The Iron-Man franchise and dorky, campy but action'y Avengers is what critics want in their super-hero films. I just say let RDJ don Big Blue and give out funny one-liners for 2 hours straight. 100% rating it would be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"