TheComicbookKid
Swing n Miss
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 12,800
- Reaction score
- 261
- Points
- 73
Unfortunately the shirt rip was ruined because the scene they originally filmed called for Superman ripping his shirt and finding only a white T-Shirt, this scene should have been shot two ways, only because of the iconic sequence at stake.
It really makes me wonder why they didnt use a great shirt rip scene. I mean after all superman hadnt been on the big screen since 87. It was his triumphant return after numerous stop and goes. You would think they could of at least got that one scene right.
EDIT: ahh well, heres hoping they do it right in the sequel.
Qwerty©;11904214 said:The 'burn' scene in 'For The Man Who Has Everything' would be fantastic. Braniac merging with Luthor like in 'Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow' would also be nice.
But that won't happen, because Singer's Luthr is nothing like the joke you are claiming him to be.Well unless you want braniac dancing around like a prat while saying kryppppppppppppptonite in a pansy styled voice i would suggest otherwise.
and then him flying off to space to keep in the tradition?
thats a to cool shot for singer. he likse more simple scenes.
he gave a simple shirt rip and made something original the elevator scene.The importance of the shirt rip to Superman fans was overlooked, hopefully it will be more triumphant in the sequel.
he gave a simple shirt rip and made something original the elevator scene.
i think this was a positive thing.
if he would do a shirt rip scene it is good. but if he makes something different from other movies than it is a copy. i dont know. the elvator scene was badass and one of the things in SR that was not a direct copy.
my rate is 8/10.Qwerty©;11988841 said:I think dark_b actually liked the movie, but just hates all the missed opportunities.
this is a classic example where the realism argument is taken too far.
what comic was this published dude?
That looks really cool!
No, realism taken too far is when people say the Joker should apply face paint because getting his skin bleached is "unrealistic." Or that Batman should never use a comic accurate suit because it's unrealistic.
Addressing Superman's disguise isn't realism taken too far in my opinion, it's simply logical. When I was a little kid I didn't like Superman, partly because I didn't like the fact that he could pretty much own everyone if he wanted, and because I thought his disguise was silly. And I was only a 5 year old when I was thinking this, so it's logical that other people would be too.
Doesn't Superman do something else that makes people not recognize him when he changes though? I think I've heard that before.