Too much action?

[bluearth]

Yes, there is :Superman takes Gral. Zod away from his mother flying, Superman flies to avoid the helicopter's shots, the tall Kryptonian attacks a plane flying, Faora does too but Superman flies to stop her, Faora goes to the bank flying and Superman takes her out flying as well, and the subsequent battle has some flying too, then Superman flies to save a soldier that's falling, Faora flies to fight the soldiers and Superman and the tall Kryptonian also fly while fighting, Superman saves Col. Hardy flying.

Thanks gods for the first true Superman live action fight. You overdid it a little bit and by the end it was more loud than dramatic but thanks.

Nam Ek and Faora never, ever fly. They are jumping. Arent we talking about the fighting? Superman flying to knock someone down to save a person is not considered fighting. Even when he pulls Zod away from his mother its completely one sided and can hardly be considered a flying fight. Zod was simply along for the ride. If you are comparing any of these sequences to the fight between Zod and Superman after Zod masters his senses and learns to fly himself after dropping the armor, then I strongly disagree.

Seeing Superman punch Zod twice between the buildings or him chasing Zod while both are flying is totally different to any fight sequence shown earlier in the film. What exactly did you want the Zod fight to be? When Zod says "Either you die or I do" thats not enough tension?

As for mocking seeing Superman display such powers, I think you and many others will grow to appreciate it as I think it will be a long while before Superman has any reason to ever cut loose again on anyone or anything. You know, you could have had another 'superman lifts' film. Oh well, Van Gogh never sold a single painting while alive. Some people cant appreciate some nice things, I guess.

As for the action, the only thing that bothered me was the World Engine settling over and destroying some skyscrapers. But my reasoning for disliking is different then most others. It felt too much like something I've seen before already. In fact almost immediately I remembered the Star Trek Into Darkness skyscraper destruction. I didnt like how every Hollywood film nowadays has to feature some sort of large scale urban destruction. It wasnt the carnage that bothered me, but the 'I've seen this before' feeling that did. Also I did not like the World Engine defenses on first viewing, but have come to really appreciate them. They give the film a great sci-fi comic feel. Its like those tentacles were ripped straight off a comic book page. Im actually glad Snyder decided to use them as they were his addition.

 

[Batmannerism]

As for mocking seeing Superman display such powers, I think you and many others will grow to appreciate it as I think it will be a long while before Superman has any reason to ever cut loose again on anyone or anything. You know, you could have had another 'superman lifts' film. Oh well, Van Gogh never sold a single painting while alive. Some people cant appreciate some nice things, I guess.

As for the action, the only thing that bothered me was the World Engine settling over and destroying some skyscrapers. But my reasoning for disliking is different then most others. It felt too much like something I've seen before already. In fact almost immediately I remembered the Star Trek Into Darkness skyscraper destruction. I didnt like how every Hollywood film nowadays has to feature some sort of large scale urban destruction. It wasnt the carnage that bothered me, but the 'I've seen this before' feeling that did. Also I did not like the World Engine defenses on first viewing, but have come to really appreciate them. They give the film a great sci-fi comic feel. Its like those tentacles were ripped straight off a comic book page. Im actually glad Snyder decided to use them as they were his addition.

I agree with you about the current Hollywood obsession with smashing skyscrapers, although you have to admit the Gravity beam was a pretty cool way of doing it ( a little bit independence Day, but I liked that it took its time and slowly expanded outward).

As for the tentacles, I didn't really like them either on a first viewing. Still possibly not one of my favourite elements of the film. Now I loved Superman flying up the terraforming beam, that was cool - what I think would have worked was if Zod was at the World Engine, overseeing its operation, he and Supes fought, Zod chucked Supes into the beam, thinking it would have crushed him. Then Zod buggers off in the scoutship, back to Metropolis, to get the genesis chamber back to Black Zero.


Again, that would have worked just as well, if not better than the tentacles and might have put more tension in the final Supes v Zod Smackdown.
Just IMO.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I had heard that the final 20 minutes were just destruction, before I saw MOS.

But when you watch the Supes vs Zod fight, it's barely more than 5 minutes.

I know that some people complained that the last half hour had so much destruction and noise that it wasn't enjoyable.
For myself, I thought it was great, Nolan and Snyder set out to show us what it would look like if Superman got into a scrap in downtown, and that's exactly what they did.
I have no idea why people complained.

Personally, I thought the Battle of Smallville set a new high in terms of Superhero vs Supervillain fights, and was the best action piece of the film. Now that was just magic, in terms of its brutality and pace.

Supes vs Zod was good, and I liked the speed at which it took place, in fact it goes so fast that there are lots of little things I missed on the first viewing. As far as fights go it feels a bit shapeless, well compared to Smallville anyway (maybe cut it by a minute and have a bit more choreography of them going toe to toe, although I loved the exchange of blows in orbit, nice, very nice - and I guess flight was an important part of that fight, as they wanted to show Supes fighting someone on even terms.

So, all in all, I had no problems with the action.

BTW I liked that Krypton didn't just blow up, the Kryptonians were responsible for their own demise, and I really liked the brief Kryptonian Civil war - love that shot where Jor El runs out of the council chambers and just stops and looks, his jaw drops as he sees that all out war has erupted. I call that the "**** gets real on Krypton" shot.
As an opening action sequence it set the pace and tone for the film. Nice Snyder, very nice !

Another quote for truth.

 

[NeoRanger]

I wouldn't say there is too much action, I'd just say it's unevenly spread throughout the film-- a point I find hard to argue against. It makes it seem longer and heavier than it otherwise would've been.

I, too, would've cut out the tentacles thing out, though. It was unnecessary and not exactly engaging or impressive. I'd have Clark collapse near the World Engine, cut back to Metropolis getting pounded (perhaps even add a few Kryptonians to the ground punching civilians' skulls off), then back to Clark flying against the beam.

Having said that, my problem with this scene was less the action and more the tentacles. You have alien technology that can spawn anything and the first thing you think of is tentacles? How about guns, or blasters or giant chainsaws? Something more creative and comic-book-friendly?

 

[Batmannerism]

Another quote for truth.

Thanks dude ! Just got to call it like I see it.

Man, the battle of Smallville gets better every time I watch it.
The fight is so fast paced, and brutal - you really feel like Supes
is fighting for his life - that bit where he punches Nam-Ek
left-right-left-right, then fly up in the air and POW, left into the
train-yard. Now THAT is how I've always imagined Superman
fighting live-action would look, and ......of course there's Faora, Faora, Faora, she's slinky, cool and badass, ( Faora 1 US Army/Airforce 0,
although I suppose when Hardy crashes into Black Zero, that levels
the score at 1:1 ) if WB put her in a future MOS or JL film, no doubt
it will lift the box office returns.

Would love to see Faora go toe-to-toe with Gadot's WW.
(Snyder, are you listening ? got a winner here buddy !)

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Thanks dude ! Just got to call it like I see it.

Man, the battle of Smallville gets better every time I watch it.
The fight is so fast paced, and brutal - you really feel like Supes
is fighting for his life - that bit where he punches Nam-Ek
left-right-left-right, then fly up in the air and POW, left into the
train-yard. Now THAT is how I've always imagined Superman
fighting live-action would look, and ......of course there's Faora, Faora, Faora, she's slinky, cool and badass, ( Faora 1 US Army/Airforce 0,
although I suppose when Hardy crashes into Black Zero, that levels
the score at 1:1 ) if WB put her in a future MOS or JL film, no doubt
it will lift the box office returns.

Would love to see Faora go toe-to-toe with Gadot's WW.
(Snyder, are you listening ? got a winner here buddy !)

I was very happy with the presentation of Supe's powers and the action. It is in my opinion the best action any CBM has ever had, and we had an action finale that didn't sort of Peter out at the end. Way too many CBMs tend to do that for my tastes. That being said, I do understand some feeling that there was an "action pile up" towards the end. There is little time to catch ones breath once the Black Zero attack starts. This speaks to the "pacing issues" some have with the film. For myself, I find it to be a strength and not a negative. I love that the film keeps this thrill ride pace until the Swanwick and graveyard scenes. I had no problem, but I could see how it would not be everyone's cup of tea.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Yes, comparisons to Superman Returns do actually get my point across,
as the common criticism of that film is that it's boring, Superman doesn't throw a punch, and is pretty much a *****.

Yes, so? That makes MOS's action good... how exactly?

Still, critics seemed to prefer Superman Returns, mind you I haven't talked to one person who saw it and told me it was a good movie or fun to watch. While plenty of even non-Superman fans who saw MOS really enjoyed it.

Again,... so? How does that make the action in MOS any less repetitive and numbing?

Again, RT scores and critics aren't the ultimate authority on which films are the best, because, as I said earlier, if they are, then Toy Story is a better film than Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Dark Knight, Avengers, Lord of the Rings, and its as good as the Godfather.

So you don't think a critic's opinion proves nothing. Guess what happens when comparing MOS action to a movie that lacks of it. Same thing.

Your point, if we assume there is one, is that MOS action might be crap, but it's good because other movies have no action.

Your analogy is a bit OTT, a better one would have been the Goldilocks porridge metaphor, you know, this one is too hot, this one is too cold....
If you think MOS has too much action, go watch SR and be thoroughly bored, and then go watch some other Superman films till you find one that's just right for you.

Well, if you read my first post properly, you'll see the amount of action is not my problem but the lack of drama drowned in a bunch of noise and super-speed, which became boring long before the movie was ended.

So, why would I get bored with one thi8ng instead of another?

I don't need to see a movie with less action, but a movie with better action.


****************************************

Nam Ek and Faora never, ever fly. They are jumping. Arent we talking about the fighting? Superman flying to knock someone down to save a person is not considered fighting. Even when he pulls Zod away from his mother its completely one sided and can hardly be considered a flying fight. Zod was simply along for the ride. If you are comparing any of these sequences to the fight between Zod and Superman after Zod masters his senses and learns to fly himself after dropping the armor, then I strongly disagree.

No, we're talking about the action, remember the title of the thread? So, Superman flying in the middle of the fight is flying in the action scenes. And Superman did fly while fighting against Faora and the other Kryptonian anyways.

But super-humans jumping incredible distances looks and feels the same as flying and thus has the same effect.

Seeing Superman punch Zod twice between the buildings or him chasing Zod while both are flying is totally different to any fight sequence shown earlier in the film. What exactly did you want the Zod fight to be? When Zod says "Either you die or I do" thats not enough tension?

That sentence should have brought more tension to the scene. But immediately later, the fight between them feels, sounds and looks exactly like the action before it.

It's only when they hit the museum that the action changes, reaching a good tension when Zod is about to kill the family. Then I went, if only they had had more moments like that in between.

As for mocking seeing Superman display such powers, I think you and many others will grow to appreciate it as I think it will be a long while before Superman has any reason to ever cut loose again on anyone or anything. You know, you could have had another 'superman lifts' film. Oh well, Van Gogh never sold a single painting while alive. Some people cant appreciate some nice things, I guess.

I don't mock seeing Superman's powers, but your notion that because it's the first time we see this or that, the scenes should be impervious to any criticism.

As for the action, the only thing that bothered me was the World Engine settling over and destroying some skyscrapers. But my reasoning for disliking is different then most others. It felt too much like something I've seen before already. In fact almost immediately I remembered the Star Trek Into Darkness skyscraper destruction. I didnt like how every Hollywood film nowadays has to feature some sort of large scale urban destruction. It wasnt the carnage that bothered me, but the 'I've seen this before' feeling that did. Also I did not like the World Engine defenses on first viewing, but have come to really appreciate them. They give the film a great sci-fi comic feel. Its like those tentacles were ripped straight off a comic book page. Im actually glad Snyder decided to use them as they were his addition.

Well, the 'I've seen this before' is the thing I'm complaining, so you can relate to that.

 

[Batmannerism]

Yes, so? That makes MOS's action good... how exactly?
Again,... so? How does that make the action in MOS any less repetitive and numbing?

It doesn't make the action in MOS good..... because the action in MOS was awesome. But that's just IMO, and I'm guessing possibly the majority of the people who voted in the poll. If you found it repetitve and mind-numbing fair enough, but that is just IYO.

Clearly you didn't like it, hey fair enough, I don't disrespect your opinion, I don't agree with it, but you're entitled to it.

I loved it, didn't find it repetitive (and I've seen the film probably 50 times, and the action sequences many more times than that, I pretty much know the battle of Smallville Blow by blow, and I don't find it repetitive, or mind-numbing but then that's just my opinion).

There are other people who did agree with you and did find the action repetitive, and I suppose if we broke the scenes down frame by frame maybe we could do an objective analysis of whether that's true (although, again having seen the action scenes many many times, I doubt that) but really who has the time for that ? Anyway, if you didn't enjoy it, and found it repetitive, fair enough that's just YO, so why say more ?

So you don't think a critic's opinion proves nothing. Guess what happens when comparing MOS action to a movie that lacks of it. Same thing.

How many negatives were you intending to use there ?

What you've said is that I don't think a critic's opinion proves nothing, by that logic I must think it proves something.

What I was actually saying was that you can't take critical reaction as the sole measure of a film's quality. Who's not reading who's posts properly now eh ?


The title of this thread is "Too much action ?" nobody asked whether the action itself was good or not, that's a different question, although the conversation seems to have gone that way.

So, my comparison has validity, first because it's a comparison between Superman films (which would be the most logical things to compare, if I compared it to a Batman film, maybe that would be suspect) and second I made a comparison about the amount of action in them (again, directly related to the thread title, "too much action ?" ). The fact that I happen to like the type of action is just
an added bonus for me.

Your point, if we assume there is one, is that MOS action might be crap, but it's good because other movies have no action.

Again IMO the action in MOS was awesome. But that's not my point at all.

No, my point is that because this thread is titled "too much action" people who found there was too much, might enjoy Superman returns (which I hated, precisely because of its lack of action ). People who didn't enjoy Superman Returns, due to its snooze factor, might enjoy MOS.

You complain I didn't read your first post properly, and if I didn't I apologize, but it looks like you haven't read the title of the thread properly.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

It doesn't make the action in MOS good..... because the action in MOS was awesome. But that's just IMO, and I'm guessing possibly the majority of the people who voted in the poll. If you found it repetitve and mind-numbing fair enough, but that is just IYO.

Clearly you didn't like it, hey fair enough, I don't disrespect your opinion, I don't agree with it, but you're entitled to it.

I loved it, didn't find it repetitive (and I've seen the film probably 50 times, and the action sequences many more times than that, I pretty much know the battle of Smallville Blow by blow, and I don't find it repetitive, or mind-numbing but then that's just my opinion).

There are other people who did agree with you and did find the action repetitive, and I suppose if we broke the scenes down frame by frame maybe we could do an objective analysis of whether that's true (although, again having seen the action scenes many many times, I doubt that) but really who has the time for that ? Anyway, if you didn't enjoy it, and found it repetitive, fair enough that's just YO, so why say more ?

Exactly, why say more? Like, "so in this other movie there was no action, go and see that one"?

I asked you what was the point in bringing other movie where the action was too little. I didn't get an answer to that and I suspect I won't.

How many negatives were you intending to use there ?

What you've said is that I don't think a critic's opinion proves nothing, by that logic I must think it proves something.

What I was actually saying was that you can't take critical reaction as the sole measure of a film's quality. Who's not reading who's posts properly now eh ?


The title of this thread is "Too much action ?" nobody asked whether the action itself was good or not, that's a different question, although the conversation seems to have gone that way.

So, my comparison has validity, first because it's a comparison between Superman films (which would be the most logical things to compare, if I compared it to a Batman film, maybe that would be suspect) and second I made a comparison about the amount of action in them (again, directly related to the thread title, "too much action ?" ). The fact that I happen to like the type of action is just
an added bonus for me.

If for comparisons you should have brought Superman II, where Superman fights the same enemies.

Again IMO the action in MOS was awesome. But that's not my point at all.

No, my point is that because this thread is titled "too much action" people who found there was too much, might enjoy Superman returns (which I hated, precisely because of its lack of action ). People who didn't enjoy Superman Returns, due to its snooze factor, might enjoy MOS.

You complain I didn't read your first post properly, and if I didn't I apologize, but it looks like you haven't read the title of the thread properly.

I did read the title, and I think the problem was not the amount of action. And I won't create another thread called "Good action or bad action" because we can debate all the aspects of the action in MOS in here. The title is not "So what movie could we see that has less action" either.

And I have seen you saying stuff like "Yo Super-fans! Just to take the conversation a slightly different direction," so I didn't think it would be a problem that someone else did it.

 

[NeoRanger]

If I understand it right, Senator Pleasury is arguing that the action rang hollow, because there was no drama and emotional connection leading it? If so, as someone who enjoyed the action and loved Man of Steel, he's far from wrong. That pacing thing I mentioned earlier might had fixed that.

I would argue that this has been the exact same case with Superman II as well, but it would still not improve upon Man of Steel's errors. Superman Returns also didn't suffer because of its lack of action-- quite the opposite, it detached the action when it raised that continent outside of Metropolis and that's where the "lifting of things" became ridiculous.

Again, I liked the action. I had fun. It didn't tire me. But a non-stop beat-down, all concentrated in the last half of the film, heavy on the CGI with little tangible collateral damage (the Kryptonians didn't interact with civilians, they didn't directly put in danger anyone we cared about outside Hardy and Hamilton) is a bit heavy.

The action is good, in that it's impressive and well-choreographed. But it doesn't let up, there is no juxtaposition and as such rings hollow. Let's call a spade a spade, otherwise things will not get better; even if some of us think they're already good, there's always room for improvement. From where I stand, as a fan of the movie myself, that's an area where improvement is more than welcome.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

If I understand it right, Senator Pleasury is arguing that the action rang hollow, because there was no drama and emotional connection leading it? If so, as someone who enjoyed the action and loved Man of Steel, he's far from wrong. That pacing thing I mentioned earlier might had fixed that.

I would argue that this has been the exact same case with Superman II as well, but it would still not improve upon Man of Steel's errors. Superman Returns also didn't suffer because of its lack of action-- quite the opposite, it detached the action when it raised that continent outside of Metropolis and that's where the "lifting of things" became ridiculous.

Again, I liked the action. I had fun. It didn't tire me. But a non-stop beat-down, all concentrated in the last half of the film, heavy on the CGI with little tangible collateral damage (the Kryptonians didn't interact with civilians, they didn't directly put in danger anyone we cared about outside Hardy and Hamilton) is a bit heavy.

The action is good, in that it's impressive and well-choreographed. But it doesn't let up, there is no juxtaposition and as such rings hollow. Let's call a spade a spade, otherwise things will not get better; even if some of us think they're already good, there's always room for improvement. From where I stand, as a fan of the movie myself, that's an area where improvement is more than welcome.

I find none of the action hollow. The stakes are clear for all parties involved and are rendered in great detail. I agree that one could make the argument that there is indeed an action pile up near the end, but I think it's far from some objective "spades a spade" situation. It could turn some people off. I think it did. But there are plenty that it did not. Plenty. I find the movie infinitely watchable, and unlike say TDK, the pacing is a prime reason why, as to my eyes the pacing in TDK, along with certain plots I felt no emotional connection to (most anything Racheal and Harvey. The scene in the hospital with the Joker is a great piece of film making and a crackerjack performance from Ledger... But I just gave two flying copulations about Dent or Racheal so in the end... Big whoop.) makes it drag in comparison to MOS. And there are more characters than Hardy or Hamilton involved in those scenes. Hamiltion and Hardy are involved as are Perry, and Jenny, Lombard and Lois, the last four of which are part of Metropolis' population. The battle is the final piece of the puzzle when it comes to Clark's search for his roots, as he makes the irrevocable choice to side with his adoptive parents homeworld as well as honor Jor-el and Lara's wishes that he break free from Krypton's stagnant culture. ("Krypton had it's chance!!"). I can see how the pacing could be an issue, but I can't see how any of it is hollow. But that is me.

 

[BH/HHH]

I don't see how the action was hollow at all. There were stakes in every action scene to add to the adrenaline and the tension of the whole thing.

 

[Batmannerism]

I did read the title, and I think the problem was not the amount of action. And I won't create another thread called "Good action or bad action" because we can debate all the aspects of the action in MOS in here. The title is not "So what movie could we see that has less action" either.

And I have seen you saying stuff like "Yo Super-fans! Just to take the conversation a slightly different direction," so I didn't think it would be a problem that someone else did it.

That's fair, it isn't a problem, but it does mean that you and I are answering different questions.

I asked you what was the point in bringing other movie where the action was too little. I didn't get an answer to that and I suspect I won't.

This goes to what I just said about us answering different questions.
I'm answering "was there too much action in MOS?" whereas you're answering "Was the action in MOS any good ?"

Anyway, I did answer your query, but in case you missed it, this thread asks if the action in MOS was too much ? "Too much" implies a comparison, one way of deciding if something is too much, when you compare it to something else that was either just right, or not enough ( which is why I used the Goldilocks metaphor). Anyway, in discussing whether there was too much action in MOS it is therefore worth making a comparison with another film - a Superman film, the Superman film that immediately preceded MOS, (by only 7 years, as opposed to over 30 years for Superman the Movie and Superman II) and which was heavily criticized for being lacking in the action department.

I don't slag anyone off for liking Superman Returns, actually I feel slightly envious of them, as I felt really ripped off by that film, and if I hadn't been on a date, would have walked out.


However, you make a good point about Superman II though, I suppose it would look like the most logical comparison (or more logical than Superman Returns) as MOS covers pretty much the same ground as the first half of Superman the Movie + all of Superman II.

But, given that it came out in 1980 the comparison isn't so easy. Obviously special effects were much more limited then, so the scene where the villains fight Superman in the middle of metropolis isn't anywhere near as flashy.

What would Donner have done, if he had access to the technology we have now ? Would he have done the same stuff or gone more with what Snyder did in MOS ? I haven't read any comments from Richard Donner, on Man of Steel, but it would be interesting to hear his thoughts on it.

It might not be such an easy comparison after all - it would be a bit like comparing Batman 1989 with The Dark Knight, if we follow your logic, because Batman fights the same enemy. The problem is that there are significant differences in tone between the films as well (just like there are between Superman II and MOS), the Dark Knight reflects the trend toward more serious superhero films, but perhaps also more contemporary audience sensibilities.

That's why I went with Superman Returns, which came out in 2006 (directly preceding MOS), I think Superman II vs MOS is possibly a thread all in itself, because any comparison of those films is going to be a lot more nuanced then just looking at the action sequences.

Anyway, I think you are right that this thread is big enough to talk about all the issues with the action - and you're not the only person I've heard making comments about it being mind-numbing, plenty of critics felt the same way.

So what would you have done differently ? I'm talking about the last 30 minutes specifically (not the Smallville battle, because IMO that's what super-hero vs supervillain fights should look like) but as for the final act as much as I enjoyed it, I'm sure there could have been some tweaks (or possibly from your perspective, some very drastic re-shooting/rewriting).

 

[blumatic]

I watch MOS many times. I don't find the action so unbearable. Two guys fighting is more devastating than what happen in the Avengers.

My goodness the city in Avengers was full with people. People all over the place. But MOS clearly has less people in sight yet it was viewed as a more devastating movie.

It's a total short sighted point of view. MOS had two fight scenes with Superman.

Avengers had so many fight scenes. I venture to say way more action than MOS.

 

[-Arya-]

I personally didn't have too many problems with the action scenes themselves. It was difficult to see what was happening in some of the fights, but not to the point of becoming frustrated with it. The bombastic music wore me down more than anything. I love Hams Zimmer, but he really needed to tone down the score at many points throughout the movie - especially the action scenes.

 

[Daywalker89]

Nah . The action was brilliant in this film. Seing what Superman is capable of , just put a smile on my face. Some poses and action scenes were straight out of the comics. I knew Synder wouldn't let us down with that. I don't want to keep going on about certain aspects in which you guys have covered but my ultimate action scene in MOS is when Zod flings Superman into those buildings. The bit were i focus on is where you the last frame of Zod letting go of Superman and you see his eye for a brief moment also follow his trail of devastation, building after building. Then with Zimmers score in the background, man that scene gets me everytime. To see Supes getting owned like that. On my first watch of that, i shouted out F*** Me . I couldn't hold it in.

 

[Doppelganger]

I watch MOS many times. I don't find the action so unbearable. Two guys fighting is more devastating than what happen in the Avengers.

My goodness the city in Avengers was full with people. People all over the place. But MOS clearly has less people in sight yet it was viewed as a more devastating movie.

It's a total short sighted point of view. MOS had two fight scenes with Superman.

Avengers had so many fight scenes. I venture to say way more action than MOS.

MOS is seen as more devastating because you don't actually see people die in the Avengers. And you only see like one building that collapses and you really need to catch that because its way in the background and the movie cuts away. Avengers is a completly family friendly affair.
You actually see people dying and their remains in a lot of the cut fotage. I think that was a very deliberate decision to exclude these scenes.

MOS on the other hand has so many deaths that are visible even if the people dying are just shapes. Buildings that collapse are all over the screen implying more deaths especially when that scene with the ash cloud comes around it looks and feels way to much like 9/11. I found it rather uncomfortable to be reminded of that day.

Action wise: you have such long scenes of repetitive punching which accomplishes nothing and you know it doesn't. Which just makes it more annoying to watch the punching.
I would have liked less punching and more triumph.

 

[blumatic]

MOS is seen as more devastating because you don't actually see people die in the Avengers. And you only see like one building that collapses and you really need to catch that because its way in the background and the movie cuts away. Avengers is a completly family friendly affair.
You actually see people dying and their remains in a lot of the cut fotage. I think that was a very deliberate decision to exclude these scenes.

MOS on the other hand has so many deaths that are visible even if the people dying are just shapes. Buildings that collapse are all over the screen implying more deaths especially when that scene with the ash cloud comes around it looks and feels way to much like 9/11. I found it rather uncomfortable to be reminded of that day.

Action wise: you have such long scenes of repetitive punching which accomplishes nothing and you know it doesn't. Which just makes it more annoying to watch the punching.
I would have liked less punching and more triumph.

If people are still bothered by the images of 9/11. I understand. But MOS won't be the last to use it nor should they. Movies shouldn't avoid mimicking those events. What I loved about Ironman 1, was the Taliban approach with Stark in the video message. Same thing in the Dark Knight to an extent.

Now what MOS accomplishes is two super powers fighting. With someone needing to win. The fight was won by Superman. And Superman alone.

Nor like in Avengers when all they did was fight with no real plan and accomplishing absolutely nothing. And was only saved by a nuke bomb sent by a third party meant to destroy the city but Ironman used it to end the fight.

I would say MOS accomplished way more in its fight scenes than Avengers.

Now interns of joy and triumph, sure Avengers were able to keep their hands clean with the help of a third party.

Superman had to take a life.

 

[ConnorKon-El]

It wasn't that there was too much action, it was that the pacing made the action feel more abundant than it was. There was barley any time to breathe between the small-ville and metropolis showdown/third act

 

[Elevator Man]

Nor like in Avengers when all they did was fight with no real plan and accomplishing absolutely nothing. And was only saved by a nuke bomb sent by a third party meant to destroy the city but Ironman used it to end the fight.

I would say MOS accomplished way more in its fight scenes than Avengers.

Now interns of joy and triumph, sure Avengers were able to keep their hands clean with the help of a third party.

Superman had to take a life.

Actually before Stark pushes the missile through the wormhole and into the Chitauri "mothership", which destroyed Loki's army. Black Widow was about to close the portal by using Loki's scepter to shutdown the generator, which probably would've prevented anymore of Loki's army from getting through and ended the war. So Black Widow and Selvig already had a plan to stop the war before the third party interfered.

 

[Batmannerism]

Nah . The action was brilliant in this film. Seing what Superman is capable of , just put a smile on my face. Some poses and action scenes were straight out of the comics. I knew Synder wouldn't let us down with that. I don't want to keep going on about certain aspects in which you guys have covered but my ultimate action scene in MOS is when Zod flings Superman into those buildings. The bit were i focus on is where you the last frame of Zod letting go of Superman and you see his eye for a brief moment also follow his trail of devastation, building after building. Then with Zimmers score in the background, man that scene gets me everytime. To see Supes getting owned like that. On my first watch of that, i shouted out F*** Me . I couldn't hold it in.

Speak the truth bro ! There were a few moments like that for me as well

 

[The Endless]

If people are still bothered by the images of 9/11. I understand. But MOS won't be the last to use it nor should they. Movies shouldn't avoid mimicking those events. What I loved about Ironman 1, was the Taliban approach with Stark in the video message. Same thing in the Dark Knight to an extent.

Now what MOS accomplishes is two super powers fighting. With someone needing to win. The fight was won by Superman. And Superman alone.

Nor like in Avengers when all they did was fight with no real plan and accomplishing absolutely nothing. And was only saved by a nuke bomb sent by a third party meant to destroy the city but Ironman used it to end the fight.

I would say MOS accomplished way more in its fight scenes than Avengers.

Now interns of joy and triumph, sure Avengers were able to keep their hands clean with the help of a third party.

Superman had to take a life.

Actually there was some tactics in the Avengers battle. They purposefully restricted the fighting to a few blocks around Stark Tower.

I thought the action in MoS was visually spectacular and was so happy to finally see some proper aerial "dogfighting" with two super powered beings.

But i thought all the crumbling sky scrapers was over kill and trying too hard to evoke 9/11. And i'd have liked to see Kal attempt to do more things like force Zod up into the atmosphere, instead of the other way around.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Do you mean the skyscrapers that the World Engine destroys or the one that falls over in front of the Daily Planet crew, which of course happens BEFORE Superman even shows up in Metropolis? Just to point out, in the actual fight that Superman and Zod have after the Black Zero is taken care of ONE, count them ONE skyscraper is totaled and falls over. ONE. All the others are still standing, even when Superman is punched by Zod through them or he and Zod's collision partially destroying the façade of another one, yep, they are still standing. In Zod and Superman's one on one as far as I remember, it's only the building that Zod used his heat vision on that falls over. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[The Endless]

The scout ship levels 4 sky scrapers when Kal for some reason disables it's controls over the city then does nothing to try and divert/catch it.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

The scout ship levels 4 sky scrapers when Kal for some reason disables it's controls over the city then does nothing to try and divert/catch it.

Try more like two, both at the edge of the blast zone of the BZ's gravity beam (and those buildings in the blast zone were A. half demolished already, and B. probably not filled with any one alive and we saw that the BZ's destruction and beam is implied to have or just outright shown to have killed a cuss ton of Metropolitans.). And do we really want to count that as part of Zod and Supes fight since it occurs before either throw a punch at each other?

This is why I do find it a legit criticism to say that some would have preferred a different pacing. For many, events seemed to have blurred together. I agree to a certain extant how one could feel that way, but for myself, my own tastes... I did not mind one bit. Finally I got one of these modern age superhero film that DIDN'T just have action that sort of peters out at the end. But that's me.