Discussion in 'Man of Steel' started by BLobo, Feb 18, 2014.
Thanks dude ! very kind of you to say.
Well, to me it was the best action I've seen in a CBM, so it didn't bother me at all, nor I felt it was ''too much''.
Top post wonderfully put sir
^Couldnt agree more, that was a joy to read as it brings up many peoples arguments against the action in MOS and disproves many of them, great stuff .
I think what I liked most about it, and I imagine this probably irked others, was how sudden it was. The first hour or so of the movie is kind of slower paced and more introspective , except for the Krypton sequence. By the time the battle of Smallville kicks into gear you're just COMPLETELY thrown for a loop and not expecting something this visceral. Its almost like the tone of the movie completely changes and that's not a bad thing. To be honest, throughout the first hour or so of the movie my reaction was like "Eh, so far this is pretty good, but I wanna see some action. When is Superman going to hit somet--oh-Oh--OH DAMN!!!"
The action was incredible.
As far as there being "too much" of it, in terms of screentime and structure, MAN OF STEEL actually has a comparable amount of action to recent superhero movies, including THE AVENGERS.
If people lack the common sense to answer questions they have about it, that's on them. The movie provides enough contextual clues to justify its existence, and it is well executed.
Cheers, thanks for that, most kind indeed !
See some people don't realise that its OK to just not like a film. So they feel they need to nitpick and even find faults that aren't even there. It makes me laugh cause then you get great posts like Batmannerism's that just blows them out of the water. They really would be better off just saying they didn't enjoy the film.
Again, that's very kind of you to say, although I'm sure pretty much all of it has been said before by lots of different people. I do feel really sorry for Superman fans who didn't enjoy MOS. It was the Superman film we needed and the one we deserved IMO.
Nitpicking is a funny thing, I know I'm guilty of it too from time to time.
I loved Superman the movie, but even as an 8 year old, I remember thinking "How does flying around the world turn time backwards ? And doesn't that just make him have to save those people all over again ? "
but who cares, it's such a great film and so much fun.
Peace out Super fans !
Close the thread now. I appreciate this movie more and more after repeated viewings.t:
Yeah I've nitpicked myself at stuff and I guess when its something that truly bugs you or disapoints you you will. Its just I don't like when people make things up and point at things as flaws that aren't there. I just would rather see people say it wasn't for me, I didn't care for the characterisations or the pacing or whatever. Its like me I was disapointed by the Dark Knight Rises but I've said its on me why I was because it wasn't the film I wanted. I thinks its OK to have that opinion rather than point at stuff and say this shouldn't happen or he wouldn't do that etc.
I'm currently in the middle of watching it for the first time (yeah, I know) and I have to say, so far...yeah, it's a little too much. I mean, the first half-hour is 90% action scenes and confrontations, and I feel like a lot of it is laid on pretty thick. Like, did we need to see the kids on the bus gasping for air for several seconds before Clark saved them? Did we need a whole brutal rebellion on Krypton before they launch him? Did we even need to see Superman's mother screaming in the throes of birth for a minute and a half (seriously, she doesn't even smile at her baby afterward...or ever, really)? I feel like they could have lingered a few minutes less on the violent stuff and gained a lot more time for developing Clark and stuff like that.
Good post and yes it had alot of action but that is a great thing in a action film.
The Smallville fight went on a little too long for me. But other than that, I thought it was fine.
Great post. They should play that after the credits start.
The best way I would describe the situation is two fold:
In The Winter Soldier, when cap is fully engaged with his equal(and not green), he's no longer in his run around saving people mode that he was during the avengers. Like superman, it begs the question as to why. Did he all of a sudden stop caring about the exploding cars with innocents inside? Stop being someone that puts the little guy first? Or was he simply and obviously otherwise incapacitated.
There was a scene in which he was shot off a bridge by a rocket launcher and lands in a bus..when the equivalent happens to superman people simply can't appreciate the context. Which is a shame.
Secondly, by turning on the gravity beam and not simply threatening to do so, it would be like Hydra turning on those helicarries and firing upon the USA/World and cap having to do his thing after the fact.
A different approach was employed by snyder/goyer. They just chose the wrong character to it with if they wanted fans to appreciate it.
Either way, hardly the in film characters fault.
Yo ! Thanks dude. Very kind of you to say.
Nice analogy between WS helicarriers and the Gravity beam. Yeah, that's exactly what it would have been like. In some ways I kind of wished they had turned on at least one of them, just to make the ending a bit less tidy - as in maybe Cap and his buddies couldn't stop them all.
Cap totally couldn't save anyone when he was engaged with WS, his equal as you say, because he was fighting for his life.
I still like how Goyer/Snyder/Nolan went with MOS though, mostly because I think they were trying to show us what would really happen if Superman had to fight some bad guys of a similar ability level in downtown, things would get broken ! Total delivery on that point.
You're probably right about part of the fan base. It's a pretty big departure from Superman the Movie, in which he gets a cat out of a tree, to Man of Steel, in which he breaks someone's neck with his bare hands - quite a change in tone as well as action. It worked for me, but I can understand why it didn't for some.
Too much action? No way. What did people think was going to happen when Gods fought in the middle of a major metropolitan city? The film makers had to do a 180 after the godawful, and boring, Superman Returns. I'm glad SM was finally able to punch something.
Totally ! My feelings exactly (especially about Superman Returns !).
Nolan and Snyder went out to show us what Superman in a more realistic world was going to look like, and they delivered 100%. Big ups to them for having the balls to do something different and not just imitate Donner's 1978 Superman.
perhaps some just would like to see him punching with care.
It's funny that so many people, especially older film critics, went into MOS thinking they were going to see another Donner SM movie, and hence were disappointed and "nit-picky" in their critiques.
In my opinion, it was refreshing to see Superman finally able to "let go" against an opponent of equal power instead of having to resort to those lame "additional" powers (cellophane \S/, weird white light out of the fingers) in the Donner movies.
FYI: I don't mean to rip on the Donner movies too much. They were great for their time, and I really enjoyed them as a kid, but they have not aged well.
you don't get it. they don't age. they are still as fresh as rose to most.
Here is blog that compares action in films
It seems that the avengers action is rated higher then man of steel.I explained some of the reasons myself for that in another thread and the avengers have more action and man of steel really had less.
It was about the same amount as ironman 3.
The How Much Action Blog
MAN OF STEEL
IRONMAN 3 AND Marvel's The Avengers
Too see other action movies open link below.
I love MOS, but the action was a bit wearying for me because i was so heavily invested in Superman's character, I felt so tired for him...though I feel there was too much action, I think it was more because of the lack of a breather or respite in between action scenes. The brief kissing scene was all too brief IMHO