It doesn't matter how good of director you are, Campbell was the wrong director. He has absolutely no idea how to direct a sci-fi comic book space epic with copious amounts of CGI. His talent lies in old school stuntwork and action sequences. He was the wrong man. He had the wrong talent.When i first heard that Martin Campbell would direct GL i was pretty happy cause i know he is a very good director but he is just that. In comic book movies being good is not enough you also have to be passionate. Passion for comics equals a vision.
I know what Waid said, what did Morrison say?Well, we know what Waid and Morrison would have said about Superman killing Zod.
To be honest Marvel is hiring unknown filmakers because it's much easier to control them. Everybody wants to have a big successful movie in his filmography so they're like "Yeah, Ok. I'm fine.".
His implication was that Tarantino sucked, obviously.Yeah i figured when i watched the film :P
BTW : your sig is insane ! I have always been wondering if Godard meant that because if he did he is a sad stramge old man and he has my pitty.
I know what Waid said, what did Morrison say?
For every unknown filmmaker they've hired (Russo Bros., Alan Tylor and perhaps Favs for IM1), they've hired known filmmakers like Branah, Johnston, Shane Black, Joss Whedon and Edgar Wright (for Antman).
None of them made a 150M+ movie.
It doesn't matter how good of director you are, Campbell was the wrong director. He has absolutely no idea how to direct a sci-fi comic book space epic with copious amounts of CGI. His talent lies in old school stuntwork and action sequences. He was the wrong man. He had the wrong talent.
Neither did Scorsese before the Departed and Tarantino before Inglourious Basterds and yet they were household names well before that. For directors, its about how prolific and influential your work is more than cold numbers. I doubt the average Joes know more about Gore Verbinsky than they do the aforementioned, even though Gore has directed all four Pirates movies.
Okay. My point still stands.Gore directed 3 of them.
Well, we know what Waid and Morrison would have said about Superman killing Zod.
Lord, the assumptions and overreactions in this thread.
(Shakes head).
After the magnificent Kingdom Come, Waid just seems disingenuous in this criticism of this particular film:
-Superman turning on the world and leaving cause he's mad(they let lois' killer free).
-Kansas being wiped off the map(Due in major part to superman's self exile)
-Superman throwing heroes and villains in a Gulag without due process(Batman doesn't approve)
-Thousands of heroes being wiped out by an atomic bomb(again superman cased this and also let it happen).
-Superman mad again deciding to kill world leaders.
-Mad superman having to be talked out of his kill rage by a divine and supernatural element/presence.
Lives lost/destruction and superman killing eh.
Sorry waid but the minute you made a penny off that story, you were destined to look fickle in this moment.
imo.
Yeah. That book never clicked for me. It is interesting though how often Lois dying causes Superman to just reject everything he stands for. I mean we had it in that. Plus in the S:TAS episode where Lois enters an alternative timeline where she's died and it's an Orwellian society and Superman is a dictator because of this... Plus recently in that Injustice I believe.After the magnificent Kingdom Come, Waid just seems disingenuous in this criticism of this particular film:
-Superman turning on the world and leaving cause he's mad(they let lois' killer free).
-Kansas being wiped off the map(Due in major part to superman's self exile)
-Superman throwing heroes and villains in a Gulag without due process(Batman doesn't approve)
-Thousands of heroes being wiped out by an atomic bomb(again superman cased this and also let it happen).
-Superman mad again deciding to kill world leaders.
-Mad superman having to be talked out of his kill rage by a divine and supernatural element/presence.
Lives lost/destruction and superman killing eh.
Sorry waid but the minute you made a penny off that story, you were destined to look fickle in this moment.
imo.
^ Yep. While a part of me thinks that was a highlight of the film, another part feels like it's "too soon." Like something that should happen in a trilogy finale or something.
Yeah. That book never clicked for me. It is interesting though how often Lois dying causes Superman to just reject everything he stands for. I mean we had it in that. Plus in the S:TAS episode where Lois enters an alternative timeline where she's died and it's an Orwellian society and Superman is a dictator because of this... Plus recently in that Injustice I believe.
It is interesting to me. I try to think whether that would be all it takes for Superman to snap. I don't think so though...
Morrison lost the right to complain about any violence in comics after what he did to Damian. Waid lost my respect when he insinuated that people who liked the ending were bloodthirsty.
You would've preferred Superman killing Zod to end the trilogy?