Worries About the Snyder reboot

[Kal-El.9859]

Watchmen was as good as Dark Knight, imo.

I think so as well...and nobody laughed in that Comedian's death scene here either...

 

[hopefuldreamer]

ok the story. but what about Snyders directing style? i know that some dont care about visuals,cinematography and lighting. but to some its important. and Snyder's forced slow-mo during emotional senes didnt work IMO. there were a lot of choices from the book that made the movie look weird. you can not translate everything IMO

I really don't get it.

If someone had asked me, before Snyder was chosen to helm this project, who I thought the most visual director was, I'd have said 'that guy who did 300 and Watchmen'.

His visuals, cinematography and lighting are what make-up for a lack in other aspects of his abilities IMO.

P.S I like the slow motion shots. Yes, anything used too much is going to be overkill, but it won't be the case with this film IMO. Because he has said he's approaching it in a different way, and wants to set it in the real world.

 

[KangConquers]

I will defend Watchmen to the death. And I still liked it better than the extremely overrated comicbook.

How can you say that? The movie is just a superficial run through of the comic...it leans so heavily on the comic book for everything; visuals, dialog, pacing.

God the pacing...The difference between a 12 part mini-series and a 3 hour movie is each issue of a mini-series can exist on it's own on some level. When you do it in a film, it feels like 10 short clips sewn together instead of a cohesive film. Imo it's a classic book that made a horrible movie.

The one thing Superman will have going for it compared to Watchmen is there's no single source for Snyder to pilfer every camera shot, every piece of dialog and every plot point from; Superman has a rich history of thousands of comics, and dozens of movies, video games, and animated series to draw from... so even if Snyder can't truly create anything, his Superman will be a work of synthesis instead of mimicry.

 

[Sith Scotti]

While I will not go as far as saying The Watchmen is as good as The Dark Knight I do think its it far better than the overrated comic book , and thank god there was no squid in the film.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I never thought I'd see so much complaining from a fanboy that a director stuck to the material TOO MUCH!

Snyder obviously loved the material, and saw no reason to interfere with it just so the movie could be more original. He just took everything he loved and put it on the big screen. And I loved it.

 

[Rowsdower!]

I never thought I'd see so much complaining from a fanboy that a director stuck to the material TOO MUCH!

Snyder obviously loved the material, and saw no reason to interfere with it just so the movie could be more original. He just took everything he loved and put it on the big screen. And I loved it.

It's mind-numbing, isn't it?

If you don't stick to the source material, it's a bastardization.

If you stick to the source materal, it's "hollow" and you didn't truly understand it or whatever because you "missed the mark."

Fanboys will complain about anything. There's absolutely no way to please everyone. Admittedly, I've had to reassess some of my own views on this stuff over the years because I've realized some of my own expectations for movies were ludicrous at times.

I seriously wonder if the people that find faults in apparently EVERY aspect of these movies are capable of enjoying anything.

 

[El Payaso]

one worry is his love for a slow-mo shot. sometimes it's good, sometimes unnecessary. was watching the legend of the guardians the other day. in the opening right at the title there is a slow-mo shot of some feathers falling off an owl that was gliding down at no particular speed. seemed a bit excessive. if he can keep it down this might be a good movie.

At this point that's just a bad habit.

I never thought I'd see so much complaining from a fanboy that a director stuck to the material TOO MUCH!

Snyder obviously loved the material, and saw no reason to interfere with it just so the movie could be more original. He just took everything he loved and put it on the big screen. And I loved it.

I think the key word is 'superficially,' not 'sticking to the original source.'

If you're a director and going to adapt sopmething you should ask one question, 'why am I doing this?' or 'what's my take going to add to the original?' Otherwise we better read the original and be done with it.

 

[GreenKToo]

I'd love to see a slo mo shot of an explosion of some kind going off...you see the edge of it reaching a crowd of bystanders, fire starts to surround them, and the hair on their heads is even starting to move from the shockwave.
Its then that Superman swoops in and saves them. He would be moving at normal speed from our point of view, but everything else around him would look frozen in place.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I think the key word is 'superficially,' not 'sticking to the original source.'

If you're a director and going to adapt sopmething you should ask one question, 'why am I doing this?' or 'what's my take going to add to the original?' Otherwise we better read the original and be done with it.

It's a screen adaption of a graphic novel. What exactly do you think he should have altered in order to make the movie more worth our time?

Seriously I'd like to know how the film could have possibly been better by straying further from the material.

This isn't like Batman or Spiderman where all you have to take are the characters, and you can put them together in a storyline of your own creation.

This is just one story, that they
wanted to see visualised.

 

[The Red Hood]

Would it really be so bad if there's a few slow-motion shots in MoS? I mean, the audience they're going to tap for this movie has probably watched some Smallville, which made use of slow-mo quite often...

 

[KyleDW2]

How can you say that? The movie is just a superficial run through of the comic...it leans so heavily on the comic book for everything; visuals, dialog, pacing.

God the pacing...The difference between a 12 part mini-series and a 3 hour movie is each issue of a mini-series can exist on it's own on some level. When you do it in a film, it feels like 10 short clips sewn together instead of a cohesive film. Imo it's a classic book that made a horrible movie.

The one thing Superman will have going for it compared to Watchmen is there's no single source for Snyder to pilfer every camera shot, every piece of dialog and every plot point from; Superman has a rich history of thousands of comics, and dozens of movies, video games, and animated series to draw from... so even if Snyder can't truly create anything, his Superman will be a work of synthesis instead of mimicry.

When a director makes too many changes to the source material, the fanboys whine about being disrespected.

When a director completely adapts a comic, even taking shots directly from the comic, fanboys whine and call it "pilfering."

I really don't understand this whole being a fan thing sometimes.

 

[Rowsdower!]

When a director makes too many changes to the source material, the fanboys whine about being disrespected.

When a director completely adapts a comic, even taking shots directly from the comic, fanboys whine and call it "pilfering."

I really don't understand this whole being a fan thing sometimes.

Yeah, I've come to accept the fact that it doesn't matter how hard a director tries, some fan out there will denounce the entire movie... not because the movie was bad, but because it wasn't how that particular fan envisioned it.

 

[KangConquers]

When a director makes too many changes to the source material, the fanboys whine about being disrespected.

When a director completely adapts a comic, even taking shots directly from the comic, fanboys whine and call it "pilfering."

I really don't understand this whole being a fan thing sometimes.

You're ascribing two different sensibilities to one person; I really doubt any individual shares both perspectives.

I personally have never given a **** if things are changed for a movie; these are adaptations and things need to be changed to work in a film. Not everything that works in a comic works on the screen.

I'm a huge fan of the first two x-men films and first class, even though they change more things than I can reasonably list here in a single post. It's about making a movie that works, and connecting with an audience. If something from the comic books doesn't work in film, it shouldn't be in the film.

I want to see a quality movie; that's all i expect. I want to see good action, good story telling, and good acting. That to me, far trumps the desire to see the comic come to life.

 

[treeringralph]

Worry: Despite a solid cast, the overall quality of Man of Steel will resemble more Green Lantern than Nolan Batman.

Worry: After watching the trailers for Immortals, Cavill comes off like the lovechild of Tom Welling and Hayden Christensen.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Worry: Despite a solid cast, the overall quality of Man of Steel will resemble more Green Lantern than Nolan Batman.

Worry: After watching the trailers for Immortals, Cavill comes off like the lovechild of Tom Welling and Hayden Christensen.

Sorry to pull out the most obnoxious smiley there is, but well...

 

[Frodo]

I'm not worried about Cavill having seen him in the Tudors though Immortals doesn't look all that great to me. I'm more worried that MOS may suffer the hero fatigue that GL suffered from. 2012 is gonna be a pretty competitive year anyway .

 

[Rowsdower!]

I'm not so much worried about the superhero fatigue thing, exactly. What I mean is, I don't think this notion that "people are tired of superhero movies" will come into play. I don't believe that is necessarily true. But I think that if MOS doesn't knock everyone's socks off with a great story, superb acting and eye-popping effects, it will either 1. get panned like GL and fail at the box office or 2. get an overall lukewarm response and be seen as another failed attempt at reigniting Superman's fanbase, like SR. So in that sense, I think "superhero fatigue" only exists when a new film is released that the public doesn't feel raises the bar or at least lives up to prior films.

And the film needs to be a hit if we want to keep seeing Superman movies. But also, it needs to be engaging enough that we're going to WANT to see Superman movies. I mean, if SR had been a success and they decided to do a sequel to that... I know I would have waited until it came out on Blu-Ray.

 

[Frodo]

I'm not so much worried about the superhero fatigue thing, exactly. What I mean is, I don't think this notion that "people are tired of superhero movies" will come into play. I don't believe that is necessarily true. But I think that if MOS doesn't knock everyone's socks off with a great story, superb acting and eye-popping effects, it will either 1. get panned like GL and fail at the box office or 2. get an overall lukewarm response and be seen as another failed attempt at reigniting Superman's fanbase, like SR. So in that sense, I think "superhero fatigue" only exists when a new film is released that the public doesn't feel raises the bar or at least lives up to prior films.

And the film needs to be a hit if we want to keep seeing Superman movies. But also, it needs to be engaging enough that we're going to WANT to see Superman movies. I mean, if SR had been a success and they decided to do a sequel to that... I know I would have waited until it came out on Blu-Ray.

Good points.

 

[blueboy2010]

I'm not so much worried about the superhero fatigue thing, exactly. What I mean is, I don't think this notion that "people are tired of superhero movies" will come into play. I don't believe that is necessarily true. But I think that if MOS doesn't knock everyone's socks off with a great story, superb acting and eye-popping effects, it will either 1. get panned like GL and fail at the box office or 2. get an overall lukewarm response and be seen as another failed attempt at reigniting Superman's fanbase, like SR. So in that sense, I think "superhero fatigue" only exists when a new film is released that the public doesn't feel raises the bar or at least lives up to prior films.

And the film needs to be a hit if we want to keep seeing Superman movies. But also, it needs to be engaging enough that we're going to WANT to see Superman movies. I mean, if SR had been a success and they decided to do a sequel to that... I know I would have waited until it came out on Blu-Ray.

What will be cool is seeing teaser trailers for MOS before TDKR. That should hype things up a little.
The problem is that MOS will be coming out the same time as the Hobbit and shortly after Bond so it could be eclipsed. When SR came out it was completely eclipsed by POTC2. The marketing was pretty half-hearted if you ask me but the release date was a disaster.

 

[Sam]

Worry: After watching the trailers for Immortals, Cavill comes off like the lovechild of Tom Welling and Hayden Christensen.

Thats ridiculous! Cavill is a billion times better actor than Welling and Hayden.

Cavill has other projects on his resume, both on movies and TV. You should watch those instead of take an opinion from 2-min trailer.

 

[SuperAl]

wtf tom welling and hayden? you got this from 2 lines in a trailer. im assuming you dunoo what the Tutors is. The guy obviously has some talent since the moment he was done with Tutors he was casted in 3 movies as the main character.

 

[KRIM]

I've liked Cavill in all the roles I've seen him in, though I will have to echo the sentiments that all the Immortals talking footage has yet to put him in a good light at all. He doesn't seem to be a convincing leader. One that yells a lot and is rallying up his troops, anyway.

 

[SuperDaniel]

My only worry is the costume for now. Waiting till i hear more about the story.

 

[Weadazoid]

My main problem with Snyder is after 300, he kinda lost his favor with fans....

Watchman, well recvd by heavy hearted geeks who loved the book, fairly well recvd by critics but not a hit at the box office

The Owls of a Gahooly.... saw it on HBO recently found it terrible.... way to serious to be a kids movie, not sure what mark they were aiming for......but they missed it


Sucker Punch... a flop



so 2 flops with some serious money behind them in a row basicly



but WB gives it to him because of his 'vision' and his past success with what 300?


Sorry but it seems to me directors of franchise changing hits are relatively unknown or more known for indy flavor


Rami???? I mean seriously he was no huge director before Spiderman, his horror flicks were cult classics a strange mix of humor and chills.


Nolan??? Before the Bat was he huge? no about as well known and respected as Rami but by no means considered the monster he is now

Favreau - once again not a huge director, I mean Zathura and that flick that got VInce Vaghn famous - but by no means was he a big time director


Those are your recent mega hits


Thor isn't huge mega bucks in the US, but it scored heavily with the international crowd and I have a strong feeling given the chance, and if Branah were to return the sequal could be huge

 

[Rowsdower!]

What will be cool is seeing teaser trailers for MOS before TDKR. That should hype things up a little.
The problem is that MOS will be coming out the same time as the Hobbit and shortly after Bond so it could be eclipsed. When SR came out it was completely eclipsed by POTC2. The marketing was pretty half-hearted if you ask me but the release date was a disaster.

I'm sure there will be a trailer befor TDKR. We might even have one before then. But yeah, your worries are valid... The Hobbit will be huge and Bond always does well. But at least there will be no more Potter or Twilight to worry about, right?

My biggest worry right now is that they're going to leave Lex out entirely, in favor of Thunderbolt Lane. That's profoundly stupid and if they do that, it says to me that they don't really understand the Superman mythos, which was the problem with the last three Superman movies.