TMOS Reviews Thread - Non Spoiler Review and Discussion - Part 4

[Poni_Boy]

Lots actually! The man had talent beyond Superman and all he will measured up for is playing Superman. I think if he were still here he would have praised Routh and Cavill. I know he enjoyed Welling and the time he was on Smallville. Reeve would not want people to judge someone soley on his past work. He sure the hell isnt Jack Nicholson who even though enjoyed Ledger playing Joker, seemed to want to steal the spotlight from him. Singer never should have tried to make Routh a Reeve type Superman. I praise Snyder and company for going out and getting a fine actor and someone who seems to truly want to make fans happy

What does any of that have to do with your opinion that Reeve is "sadly" only remembered for playing Superman? He was honored and humbled to have been so closely paired with the character. You should read his memoir

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ This thread is slipping :'(

 

[Poni_Boy]

That's not the point. I could care less if they think Reeve is the ideal Superman, more power to them. But don't try and match future Supermen up to Reeve's standards, because you will never give them (and the movie) a chance to show you what it can do.

That's a very obtuse way of thinking. You're assuming people are flat out not giving Cavill a chance when it seems like most of these people just liked Reeve better.

That's like telling someone who has only eaten cheese pizza that they have to try and judge pepperoni pizza without comparing it at all to cheese.

 

[Poni_Boy]

^ This thread is slipping :'(

http://hellblazer.com/media/stages-of-grief.gif

 

[TheVileOne]

I just got out of it. A lot of people are going to have problems with this film.

The less than rave reviews don't surprise me.

It's not a bad movie at all, but Goyer's flawed writing takes its toll.

 

[ares834]

Relevancy is still subjective. I'm a 30 year old male who loves action movies but I didn't find Cavill's performance any more relevant than Reeve's regardless of the timeplace of the films.

He was talking about Reeve's relevance to Man of Steel itself. Basically, he was hinting at the fact that Reeve's performance is totally irrelevant to Man of Steel.

 

[Poni_Boy]

It's not a bad movie at all, but Goyer's flawed writing takes its toll.

This in a nutsell. Its much, much more a Goyer movie than a Snyder movie.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I just got out of it. A lot of people are going to have problems with this film.

The less than rave reviews don't surprise me.

It's not a bad movie at all, but Goyer's flawed writing takes its toll.

Okay. I'll be waiting with rock-bottom expectations :/

 

[LostSon88]

Should've hired Jonathan Nolan to polish it up...

 

[Poni_Boy]

He was talking about Reeve's relevance to Man of Steel himself.

I honestly don't know how to rate Reeve's relevance as Superman in a movie he's not playing Superman in. I prefer Reeve's portrayal because I felt he played the role the best in the films he starred in.

 

[TheVileOne]

Sorry guys, at least with critics this film won't be Superman's version of The Dark Knight .

Maybe Man of Steel 2 if this one is successful.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Should've hired Jonathan Nolan to polish it up...

With Jim Caviezel making a Batman cameo

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ Yep. Let's hoping David Goyer's more of an ideas man this time around

 

[Bruce Malone]

Sorry guys, at least with critics this film won't be Superman's version of The Dark Knight .

Maybe Man of Steel 2 if this one is successful.

Which is a shame because i felt superman needed his Begins at least before he could get to his TDK.

 

[Sup3rman81]

What does any of that have to do with your opinion that Reeve is "sadly" only remembered for playing Superman? He was honored and humbled to have been so closely paired with the character. You should read his memoir

not that he is sad but that that he will only be remembered for that and that people and critics will constantly compare others to him. he never would have wanted that. He would have been fine with someone else getting the chance. But instead too many people are stuck in the past and refuse to move forward.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Yep. Though Man of Steel's "Wrath of Khan" promise sounds more enticing than the SR approach :/

 

[Sup3rman81]

Sorry guys, at least with critics this film won't be Superman's version of The Dark Knight .

Maybe Man of Steel 2 if this one is successful.

who would have assumed this would be as good as TDK? TDK is in a league of its own and it had BB to set it up. MOS should be compared to nothing really as its Snyders movie and not Nolans. Nolan had BB and Snyder has MOS. I feel MOS 2 can have the same influence TDK had and BO potential but I dont think comparing them is fair especially saying MOS wont be TDK

 

[TheVileOne]

LOL, they kind of tried to start with Wrath of Khan here.

You can't force it to be Wrath of Khan though .

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

who would have assumed this would be as good as TDK? TDK is in a league of its own and it had BB to set it up. MOS should be compared to nothing really as its Snyders movie and not Nolans. Nolan had BB and Snyder has MOS. I feel MOS 2 can have the same influence TDK had and BO potential but I dont think comparing them is fair especially saying MOS wont be TDK

Also, what are the odds of a MOS directors cut?

 

[LostSon88]

I find it strange how so many folk who haven't seen the film seem to be throwing up the white flag in defeat based on these critic reviews. Especially when just two days ago this thread was full of excitement over the overwhelmingly positive twitter responses.

How is the opinion of a "professional critic" any more valuable than any others?

I'm still just as excited and hyped for MoS as I was last week regardless of the RT rating or random reviews. No secondhand opinion of the film is going to change my level of anticipation.

 

[BH/HHH]

http://metro.co.uk/2013/06/12/man-of-steel-doesnt-waste-time-on-doomy-naval-gazing-3837541/ Wow, a pretty good review. The reviewer actually seems excited.

Its good that she liked it cause she's normally quite critical of any films.

 

[redhawk23]

Relevancy is still subjective. I'm a 30 year old male who loves action movies but I didn't find Cavill's performance any more relevant than Reeve's regardless of the timeplace of the films.




Personally I found his performance wanting. Would have loved to feel difference but I don't.

Not really what I meant. What I meant was, Reeves is not in this film and his performance wouldn't necessarily benefit the story they are telling.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Also, what are the odds of a MOS directors cut?

Director's Cut or Extended Cut? I believe every ZS film has both a theatrical and DC.

 

[Sup3rman81]

I honestly don't know how to rate Reeve's relevance as Superman in a movie he's not playing Superman in. I prefer Reeve's portrayal because I felt he played the role the best in the films he starred in.

Most critics arent saying Reeve is better. they are just comparing the Donner movie to Snyders visuals. Cavill brought a different touch to the character. A for sure more physical and isolated character who isnt accepted by the world. Reeve played the goofy likeable guy who was a clumsy fool as Clark and a liked and accepted Superman who was all over Lois. MOS builds on the Lois and Clark relationship kind of how the show did. It doesnt just have them all googly eyed and smitten over each other. Donners Superman felt more like a love story with some action here and there much like SR where he was stalking love sick superman. I feel Cavill is more like the comic book character.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Not really what I meant. What I meant was, Reeves is not in this film and his performance wouldn't necessarily benefit the story they are telling.

I understand what you are saying. What I don't get is, what reviewers are claiming that Reeve's portrayal would have suited THIS film better? Because that's what people seem to be claiming is happening.