Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Apr 22, 2016 14:16:30 GMT -5
Hard to argue with any of that. Good points.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Apr 23, 2016 17:33:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Apr 25, 2016 1:05:31 GMT -5
Love it! Where'd the "Kurt Russell as Aquaman" idea come from, though? That one kind of felt like it came out of nowhere...
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Apr 27, 2016 18:14:04 GMT -5
I'm not really sure. I...sort of like it. It's not what I'd expect though. I picture him playing it like the brave and the bold Aquaman mixed with Captain Ron.
Anyway. I was thinking of how BvS just totally wasted Mercy. She's there just to get blown up and for us not to give a crap about it. I think I might have combined her role and with the guy who played KGBeast. I'd leave her as Lex's assistant but expand her part to include the beasts role in the story. I'd make her badass bodyguard and assistant. I'd even keep the illegal fighting scene in where Beast meets Wayne but sub Mercy for him. She'd be he one trying to bring the Kryptonite at the docks.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 2, 2016 12:31:17 GMT -5
Got the blu ray for this yesterday as a blind buy--I did not see it in the cinemas.
Overall it played pretty much the way I expected it would. Like most of Snyders's flicks(IMHO) It just feels flat.
The most dramatic moment personally for me.......when Lois is trapped under the water trying to retrieve the kryptonite/spear. Reminded me of Lois trapped in the car during the earthquake in STM.
It was the one moment in the film where Supes gets to do the thing he does best---save people with a bit of tension applied. the other dramatic moment where Batman saves Martha was just an excuse to show cool batman fight moves....but I never felt Martha was in any danger. The other scene where Lex pushes Lois off the helicopter pad.....and Supes saves her....happened too quick to have any dramatic weight. heck Supes saving Ricky in the wheat fields in SIII had more dramatic weight!
yes there were the other moments where Supes saves the girl trapped in the fire,the rocket and the people in the floods.
The problem was that because there was absolutely no exposition regarding these people getting saved(before they get saved) those scenes just fell flat(there is that word again)---it is as an accusation i could level at some of the Marvel flicks too.
As for Supes getting killed in the end.....bit of a mixed bag. Definetely felt for Supes getting stabbed by Doomsday so credit to Snyder......BUT it could have been better if there had been reaction shots from Batman WonderWoman and Lois whilst he was getting stabbed.
the fact the fight took place in an abandoned area so no innocents get killed actually and ironically(given the deserved backlash to the wanton destruction in MOS) harmed the storytelling.......the reactions of the innocents to Supes getting killed(as he is getting killed as opposed to after he is dead) is what would have completed/balanced the dramatic equation.
So overall a solid 4.5 out of 10 for me. Well below STM,SII and SIII as well for that matter. My opinion of course!
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 2, 2016 21:14:17 GMT -5
I thought the montage looked cool but my whole problem with it is it felt like Snyder felt like he had to gloss over Superman saving people. It just came off as Snyder not being interested and wanting to get through that kind of stuff ASAP. I think it was somewhat sucessful but why not do whole sequences of superman saving people?
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,134
|
Post by crown on Aug 3, 2016 1:48:17 GMT -5
Because no one wants to see that garbage anymore. It's so anti-climactic. We see some random activity.. there is a problem yea yea yeah.... oh no people are now in danger. Where's Superman.. oh here he is.... he saved everyone. Whelp good times; way to go Superman... I guess.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 3, 2016 10:30:20 GMT -5
They apparently didn't want to see the alternative that BvS offered either.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 3, 2016 13:19:43 GMT -5
Because no one wants to see that garbage anymore. It's so anti-climactic. We see some random activity.. there is a problem yea yea yeah.... oh no people are now in danger. Where's Superman.. oh here he is.... he saved everyone. Whelp good times; way to go Superman... I guess. There COULD be something more interesting with the saves- a sense of humor, a moment of character insight, but it depends on the filmmaker. Snyder chose to make it visually dynamic in montage form (something that seems to be his strength), but on the flip side, his handle on characters beyond a mtv moment seems to be a struggle for him.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 3, 2016 14:49:00 GMT -5
Because no one wants to see that garbage anymore. It's so anti-climactic. We see some random activity.. there is a problem yea yea yeah.... oh no people are now in danger. Where's Superman.. oh here he is.... he saved everyone. Whelp good times; way to go Superman... I guess. There COULD be something more interesting with the saves- a sense of humor, a moment of character insight, but it depends on the filmmaker. Snyder chose to make it visually dynamic in montage form (something that seems to be his strength), but on the flip side, his handle on characters beyond a mtv moment seems to be a struggle for him. I forgot to mention the 1st Lois "save" in BvS......when Lois is held hostage by the terrorist. That had a bit of tension and suspense...even an ironic sense of humor as Supes sweeps away the bad guy with ease. More stuff along those lines and I personally believe we could have had a stronger story.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 3, 2016 15:05:10 GMT -5
I thought the montage looked cool but my whole problem with it is it felt like Snyder felt like he had to gloss over Superman saving people. It just came off as Snyder not being interested and wanting to get through that kind of stuff ASAP. I think it was somewhat sucessful but why not do whole sequences of superman saving people? Indeed.....either he felt the need to gloss over the saves.....or as CAM says....he just does not have the cinematic skill to show those saves in a more balanced way. Bryan Singer understood this aspect better but just could not convey it in a charismatic way(IMO). Unfortunately the main consensus at the moment is for Superheroes to save people by having an almighty fight(with a super villain) in the process.Not that there is anything wrong with that. But harking back to STM.....Supes performs conventional saves without raising a fist in the entire movie( a full 2.5 hrs without one fight---quite remarkable)---ok there is the bit where he threatens Luther "alright Luther where is the detonator".....but that barely counts. It also added to the dramatic impact in SII when Supes did have to raise his fist for the first time. STM & SII taken together, that was nearly 3 and a half hours of viewing time before Supes raises that fist(or leg ---when he does that acrobatic kick into Non) Which is the other problem with BvS.....Supes already took good thrashings from Zod, Zod's big henchman and Faoura in MOS...so the dramatic impact of seeing him get whacked by Batman and then Doomsday in this flick was severely diminished to my mind.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 3, 2016 15:29:34 GMT -5
Because no one wants to see that garbage anymore. It's so anti-climactic. We see some random activity.. there is a problem yea yea yeah.... oh no people are now in danger. Where's Superman.. oh here he is.... he saved everyone. Whelp good times; way to go Superman... I guess. Donner (and yes Lester!) never lost sight of this "save" factor in Supes I ,II & III. It is the core of Supe's raison d' etre. Lose this aspect and you lose Supes. Unfortunately even Singer succumbed to this contemporary method of not revealing the person(or people) who need to be saved. The guy falling of the crane , the people under the shattering glass...even the guys at the electric/gas plant come to mind from SR. To be fair at least Singer got Lois in Airforce1,Kitty in the car,Lois,Richard and the kid trapped in the boat,,Perry and Jimmy under the falling Daily Planet globe ect....which is more than Zac Snyder has given in nearly 2 movies.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 3, 2016 16:10:01 GMT -5
I thought the montage looked cool but my whole problem with it is it felt like Snyder felt like he had to gloss over Superman saving people. It just came off as Snyder not being interested and wanting to get through that kind of stuff ASAP. I think it was somewhat sucessful but why not do whole sequences of superman saving people? Indeed.....either he felt the need to gloss over the saves.....or as CAM says....he just does not have the cinematic skill to show those saves in a more balanced way. Bryan Singer understood this aspect better but just could not convey it in a charismatic way(IMO). Unfortunately the main consensus at the moment is for Superheroes to save people by having an almighty fight(with a super villain) in the process.Not that there is anything wrong with that. But harking back to STM.....Supes performs conventional saves without raising a fist in the entire movie( a full 2.5 hrs without one fight---quite remarkable)---ok there is the bit where he threatens Luther "alright Luther where is the detonator".....but that barely counts. It also added to the dramatic impact in SII when Supes did have to raise his fist for the first time. STM & SII taken together, that was nearly 3 and a half hours of viewing time before Supes raises that fist(or leg ---when he does that acrobatic kick into Non) Which is the other problem with BvS.....Supes already took good thrashings from Zod, Zod's big henchman and Faoura in MOS...so the dramatic impact of seeing him get whacked by Batman and then Doomsday in this flick was severely diminished to my mind. You make some good points, Dejan. The problem is we really don't have many heroes like Superman in the sense that they suit up just to save people. Most of them suit up for combat. Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, Batman, The X-men, Wonder Woman...they aren't like firemen they're more like soldiers. Spider-Man's really one of the only other superhero characters in films to put on his suit to go out to rescue people from accidents and disasters and not just get into a fight to save people. Even then they've lost sight of that with Spidey recently when they often have bad guys cause those disasters. Donners Superman and Singers to some extent would go out on patrol to stop fires and floods and trainwrecks. Now I'm not saying make Superman movies where he doesn't fight some super-powered bad guy...that's just not going to work in this day in age...but there should be a balance between brawls and rescues like you said. The oil rig rescue in MOS was good but it was before he truly became Superman. He was a mysterious figure. No one knew who or what he even was. He wasn't able to be a symbol of anything good because he was still a mystery to anyone who might have caught a glimpse of him. My problem with the batman and superman fight is superman becomes an idiot. You're right after the FIRST Kryptonite grenade to the face you'd think Superman would be more apprehensive rather than just charge at Batman like a roided up moron. And before that if he was really serious about saving Martha why not just pick Batman up and fly him to the Kryptonian ship and let him see Lex making a killer monster with his own eyes? Nobody could say he couldn't because he literally picked batman up and flew him through a building and then there him down onto the roof and there wasnt thing Batman could do to stop it. I doubt he planned to get taken several stories up even if his plan was to take he fight inside the building.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 4, 2016 0:21:24 GMT -5
Indeed.....either he felt the need to gloss over the saves.....or as CAM says....he just does not have the cinematic skill to show those saves in a more balanced way. Bryan Singer understood this aspect better but just could not convey it in a charismatic way(IMO). Unfortunately the main consensus at the moment is for Superheroes to save people by having an almighty fight(with a super villain) in the process.Not that there is anything wrong with that. But harking back to STM.....Supes performs conventional saves without raising a fist in the entire movie( a full 2.5 hrs without one fight---quite remarkable)---ok there is the bit where he threatens Luther "alright Luther where is the detonator".....but that barely counts. It also added to the dramatic impact in SII when Supes did have to raise his fist for the first time. STM & SII taken together, that was nearly 3 and a half hours of viewing time before Supes raises that fist(or leg ---when he does that acrobatic kick into Non) Which is the other problem with BvS.....Supes already took good thrashings from Zod, Zod's big henchman and Faoura in MOS...so the dramatic impact of seeing him get whacked by Batman and then Doomsday in this flick was severely diminished to my mind. You make some good points, Dejan. The problem is we really don't have many heroes like Superman in the sense that they suit up just to save people. Most of them suit up for combat. Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, Batman, The X-men, Wonder Woman...they aren't like firemen they're more like soldiers. Spider-Man's really one of the only other superhero characters in films to put on his suit to go out to rescue people from accidents and disasters and not just get into a fight to save people. Even then they've lost sight of that with Spidey recently when they often have bad guys cause those disasters. Donners Superman and Singers to some extent would go out on patrol to stop fires and floods and trainwrecks. Now I'm not saying make Superman movies where he doesn't fight some super-powered bad guy...that's just not going to work in this day in age...but there should be a balance between brawls and rescues like you said. The oil rig rescue in MOS was good but it was before he truly became Superman. He was a mysterious figure. No one knew who or what he even was. He wasn't able to be a symbol of anything good because he was still a mystery to anyone who might have caught a glimpse of him. Great point Dejan about STM's lack of 'action'- but it also not mattering for much of STM! Also- about the 'way to show rescues'- by having the hero simultaneously fight AND rescue bystanders- it works imo, (Avengers 2 last act imo arguably works far better than the first because of this). If MOS were more balanced by doing this in their action scenes, the criticism I think would have been much softer imo. The additional problem I think is that Snyder did choose to make Superman more 'Dr. Manhattan' (as Metallo pointed out) from the beginning rather than someone who grew up with a deep love for people in general through his parents. While WB was looking for an alternate take on Superman that was fresh, I'll give Snyder that it did feel fresh.... but Snyder and his writers didn't know how to make the character interesting beyond being a fish out of water internalizing all of his pain. The extended cut of BvS had a number of scenes with Superman/Clark that made some things clearer, but at the same time, just emphasized how limited (to a degree dull) this approach was to Superman/CLark. I don't know if we needed the comical Reeve version of Clark Kent.... but at least it had more personality and contrast than the Snyder version where there's not a lot of visible difference between them.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 5, 2016 12:27:58 GMT -5
Indeed.....either he felt the need to gloss over the saves.....or as CAM says....he just does not have the cinematic skill to show those saves in a more balanced way. Bryan Singer understood this aspect better but just could not convey it in a charismatic way(IMO). Unfortunately the main consensus at the moment is for Superheroes to save people by having an almighty fight(with a super villain) in the process.Not that there is anything wrong with that. But harking back to STM.....Supes performs conventional saves without raising a fist in the entire movie( a full 2.5 hrs without one fight---quite remarkable)---ok there is the bit where he threatens Luther "alright Luther where is the detonator".....but that barely counts. It also added to the dramatic impact in SII when Supes did have to raise his fist for the first time. STM & SII taken together, that was nearly 3 and a half hours of viewing time before Supes raises that fist(or leg ---when he does that acrobatic kick into Non) Which is the other problem with BvS.....Supes already took good thrashings from Zod, Zod's big henchman and Faoura in MOS...so the dramatic impact of seeing him get whacked by Batman and then Doomsday in this flick was severely diminished to my mind. You make some good points, Dejan. The problem is we really don't have many heroes like Superman in the sense that they suit up just to save people. Most of them suit up for combat. Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, Batman, The X-men, Wonder Woman...they aren't like firemen they're more like soldiers. Spider-Man's really one of the only other superhero characters in films to put on his suit to go out to rescue people from accidents and disasters and not just get into a fight to save people. Even then they've lost sight of that with Spidey recently when they often have bad guys cause those disasters. Donners Superman and Singers to some extent would go out on patrol to stop fires and floods and trainwrecks. Now I'm not saying make Superman movies where he doesn't fight some super-powered bad guy...that's just not going to work in this day in age...but there should be a balance between brawls and rescues like you said. The oil rig rescue in MOS was good but it was before he truly became Superman. He was a mysterious figure. No one knew who or what he even was. He wasn't able to be a symbol of anything good because he was still a mystery to anyone who might have caught a glimpse of him. My problem with the batman and superman fight is superman becomes an idiot. You're right after the FIRST Kryptonite grenade to the face you'd think Superman would be more apprehensive rather than just charge at Batman like a roided up moron. And before that if he was really serious about saving Martha why not just pick Batman up and fly him to the Kryptonian ship and let him see Lex making a killer monster with his own eyes? Nobody could say he couldn't because he literally picked batman up and flew him through a building and then there him down onto the roof and there wasnt thing Batman could do to stop it. I doubt he planned to get taken several stories up even if his plan was to take he fight inside the building. Thanks Metallo. I agree that a crop of superheroes are more amenable to saving people through fighting........as opposed to saving people in a conventional way. My main concern(with both MOS & BvS)was the manner in which the saves were configured. No exposition regarding the people who need to be saved denies the audience a connection with these characters in jeopardy thereby reducing the emotional and dramatic impact of Supe's presence when he does make those rescues. The saving of the girl in the Day Of The Dead festival was a classic example of something that looks cool(and very MTVesque as CAM says) but lacks an emotional resonance because the intensity of the girl's predicament(as it was unfolding) was denied to us (The audience)....and all for the sake of looking cool. It was the same with the oil riggers in MOS....the first time we see them is literally when Supe's rips the door open. Snyder instead focuses on Supes's ripped abs as he is holding up the scaffold instead of focusing on the reaction of the riggers. Agreed about Supe's idiotic fighting strategy now i think about it lol. Buy hey......it's cool to see Batman smash a sink on Supe's head and throw him over a railing.....or so Snyder thinks. Agreed about Supe's having the potential to fly Batman to the ship and reveal Lex's intentions....which would have been in keeping with his character. But hey Snyder has a few buildings that Supe's could fly and smash through which is "awesome" and "cool".....lol.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 5, 2016 15:04:37 GMT -5
You make some good points, Dejan. The problem is we really don't have many heroes like Superman in the sense that they suit up just to save people. Most of them suit up for combat. Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, Batman, The X-men, Wonder Woman...they aren't like firemen they're more like soldiers. Spider-Man's really one of the only other superhero characters in films to put on his suit to go out to rescue people from accidents and disasters and not just get into a fight to save people. Even then they've lost sight of that with Spidey recently when they often have bad guys cause those disasters. Donners Superman and Singers to some extent would go out on patrol to stop fires and floods and trainwrecks. Now I'm not saying make Superman movies where he doesn't fight some super-powered bad guy...that's just not going to work in this day in age...but there should be a balance between brawls and rescues like you said. The oil rig rescue in MOS was good but it was before he truly became Superman. He was a mysterious figure. No one knew who or what he even was. He wasn't able to be a symbol of anything good because he was still a mystery to anyone who might have caught a glimpse of him. Great point Dejan about STM's lack of 'action'- but it also not mattering for much of STM! Also- about the 'way to show rescues'- by having the hero simultaneously fight AND rescue bystanders- it works imo, (Avengers 2 last act imo arguably works far better than the first because of this). If MOS were more balanced by doing this in their action scenes, the criticism I think would have been much softer imo. The additional problem I think is that Snyder did choose to make Superman more 'Dr. Manhattan' (as Metallo pointed out) from the beginning rather than someone who grew up with a deep love for people in general through his parents. While WB was looking for an alternate take on Superman that was fresh, I'll give Snyder that it did feel fresh.... but Snyder and his writers didn't know how to make the character interesting beyond being a fish out of water internalizing all of his pain. The extended cut of BvS had a number of scenes with Superman/Clark that made some things clearer, but at the same time, just emphasized how limited (to a degree dull) this approach was to Superman/CLark. I don't know if we needed the comical Reeve version of Clark Kent.... but at least it had more personality and contrast than the Snyder version where there's not a lot of visible difference between them. I think Snyder got caught with his pants down on the critics(and fans)backlash(regarding MOS's "collateral damage "of Metropolis) Snyder will probably maintain that it was always his intention to cover that angle(as seen in the beginning of BvS when Bruce is driving through the city as it is getting trashed.) But I don't think so. There was plenty of opportunity during that MOS climax when Supes could have exhibited some compassion for the innocent victims of the wanton destruction Supes and Zod were causing . Definitely agree that "Clumsy "Clark ala Reeve's portrayal would not have fit B v S Ilya Salkind rightly claimed in the commentary for SII that Reeve portrayed at least 4 Clarks(Clumsy,De-powered,Kansas and the Clark that takes on evil Supes.) Granted....that was over the course of 3 flicks. Still , Supes saving people coupled with his dual identity are the core factors of his mythos. Snyder fails to emphasize Supes ability to save people with any dexterity and hardly references the Clark/Superman dual identity nuances. I actually like Fishbourne's portrayal of Perry......but jeez how he did not hit on the fact that Clark is Superman is beyond me!
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 5, 2016 15:47:55 GMT -5
That's how I feel. Snyder didn't get it. He missed the whole point. BvS response to all the destruction at the end of MOS and way of avoiding it at the end of BvS was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. The level of destruction at the end of MOS wasn't the problem. The fact that it was hollow, empty, stakeless, video game violence lacking real consequences and casualties and Supermans seeming apathy was the problem.
BvS solution was to keep having Batman and other talking heads say over and over that the scene of the battle was deserted. Snyder is clueless. Both instances show Snyder just wanted to get down to the cgi action and fighting and not worry about addressing any human collateral damage. That's why the endings of his last two films feel so cartoonish.
Snyder could have killed ten thousand people in MOS and I wouldn't have had a problem with it as long as it was adressed as the weighty dramatic development and tragedy it should have been. Snyder is more interested in developing video game fight scenes than drama.
You're right Dejan he was caught totally off guard. And it happened again with BVS. You could tell by the look on his face during press promotion that he just didn't understand what people's problems with the movie were. His movies have less emotional resonance and human feeling than the comics they're based on.
The ending of MOS should have had the same kind of stuff with real people being hurt and dying that the opening of BVS had. Would have fixed some major issues. And Superman should have been rattled by it instead of making bad jokes and swapping spit with Lois Lane.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,768
|
Post by atp on Aug 5, 2016 16:43:29 GMT -5
You make some good points, Dejan. The problem is we really don't have many heroes like Superman in the sense that they suit up just to save people. Most of them suit up for combat. Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, Batman, The X-men, Wonder Woman...they aren't like firemen they're more like soldiers. Spider-Man's really one of the only other superhero characters in films to put on his suit to go out to rescue people from accidents and disasters and not just get into a fight to save people. Even then they've lost sight of that with Spidey recently when they often have bad guys cause those disasters. Donners Superman and Singers to some extent would go out on patrol to stop fires and floods and trainwrecks. Now I'm not saying make Superman movies where he doesn't fight some super-powered bad guy...that's just not going to work in this day in age...but there should be a balance between brawls and rescues like you said. The oil rig rescue in MOS was good but it was before he truly became Superman. He was a mysterious figure. No one knew who or what he even was. He wasn't able to be a symbol of anything good because he was still a mystery to anyone who might have caught a glimpse of him. My problem with the batman and superman fight is superman becomes an idiot. You're right after the FIRST Kryptonite grenade to the face you'd think Superman would be more apprehensive rather than just charge at Batman like a roided up moron. And before that if he was really serious about saving Martha why not just pick Batman up and fly him to the Kryptonian ship and let him see Lex making a killer monster with his own eyes? Nobody could say he couldn't because he literally picked batman up and flew him through a building and then there him down onto the roof and there wasnt thing Batman could do to stop it. I doubt he planned to get taken several stories up even if his plan was to take he fight inside the building. Thanks Metallo. I agree that a crop of superheroes are more amenable to saving people through fighting........as opposed to saving people in a conventional way. My main concern(with both MOS & BvS)was the manner in which the saves were configured. No exposition regarding the people who need to be saved denies the audience a connection with these characters in jeopardy thereby reducing the emotional and dramatic impact of Supe's presence when he does make those rescues. The saving of the girl in the Day Of The Dead festival was a classic example of something that looks cool(and very MTVesque as CAM says) but lacks an emotional resonance because the intensity of the girl's predicament(as it was unfolding) was denied to us (The audience)....and all for the sake of looking cool. It was the same with the oil riggers in MOS....the first time we see them is literally when Supe's rips the door open. Snyder instead focuses on Supes's ripped abs as he is holding up the scaffold instead of focusing on the reaction of the riggers. Agreed about Supe's idiotic fighting strategy now i think about it lol. Buy hey......it's cool to see Batman smash a sink on Supe's head and throw him over a railing.....or so Snyder thinks. Agreed about Supe's having the potential to fly Batman to the ship and reveal Lex's intentions....which would have been in keeping with his character. But hey Snyder has a few buildings that Supe's could fly and smash through which is "awesome" and "cool".....lol. The other cr.ap thing about the rescues is that Cavill is always expressionless and detached. With Reeve, he would always smile and say something to defuse the tension and reassure the person. "Easy miss, I've got you" or "I'm sorry, only one ride to a customer."
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 5, 2016 19:55:24 GMT -5
That's how I feel. Snyder didn't get it. He missed the whole point. BvS response to all the destruction at the end of MOS and way of avoiding it at the end of BvS was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. The level of destruction at the end of MOS wasn't the problem. The fact that it was hollow, empty, stakeless, video game violence lacking real consequences and casualties and Supermans seeming apathy was the problem. BvS solution was to keep having Batman and other talking heads say over and over that the scene of the battle was deserted. Snyder is clueless. Both instances show Snyder just wanted to get down to the cgi action and fighting and not worry about addressing any human collateral damage. That's why the endings of his last two films feel so cartoonish. Snyder could have killed ten thousand people in MOS and I wouldn't have had a problem with it as long as it was adressed as the weighty dramatic development and tragedy it should have been. Snyder is more interested in developing video game fight scenes than drama. You're right Dejan he was caught totally off guard. And it happened again with BVS. You could tell by the look on his face during press promotion that he just didn't understand what people's problems with the movie were. His movies have less emotional resonance and human feeling than the comics they're based on. The ending of MOS should have had the same kind of stuff with real people being hurt and dying that the opening of BVS had. Would have fixed some major issues. And Superman should have been rattled by it instead of making bad jokes and swapping spit with Lois Lane. Agreed 100%. I did not feel any sense of epicness or size .....the final confrontation in BvS is essentially 3 actors against a green screen.No real location footage and hardly any extras. Which deprived Supes of the emotional reactions that bystanders could have given to his demise as it was occurring. Actions and reactions are what balance the dramatic/emotional equation. But Snyder only does the action part.....lol Instead we got people grieving after his death, which was definitely touching but not nearly as powerful as it should have been. When Supes gets crushed by the bus that is hurled at him in SII Lester immediately cuts to Lois's reaction.....that says it all.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 5, 2016 20:08:09 GMT -5
atpRegarding Reeve's re-assuring one liners after someone was saved. Absolutely. Also the film makers (Donner and Lester) were pretty good at rousing the extras into giving lively expressions of awe(clapping or cheering) Singer got this aspect for Supe's rescue of Lois 's plane in the football stadium in SR. But the rest of the film the reactions of the extras were pretty gormless......Supe's rescue of Kitty with the crowd in the background looking either bored or zombified lol. So rather uneven with SR. And Snyder continues this trend with MOS and BvS.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 6, 2016 3:22:21 GMT -5
Thanks Metallo. I agree that a crop of superheroes are more amenable to saving people through fighting........as opposed to saving people in a conventional way. My main concern(with both MOS & BvS)was the manner in which the saves were configured. No exposition regarding the people who need to be saved denies the audience a connection with these characters in jeopardy thereby reducing the emotional and dramatic impact of Supe's presence when he does make those rescues. The saving of the girl in the Day Of The Dead festival was a classic example of something that looks cool(and very MTVesque as CAM says) but lacks an emotional resonance because the intensity of the girl's predicament(as it was unfolding) was denied to us (The audience)....and all for the sake of looking cool. It was the same with the oil riggers in MOS....the first time we see them is literally when Supe's rips the door open. Snyder instead focuses on Supes's ripped abs as he is holding up the scaffold instead of focusing on the reaction of the riggers. Agreed about Supe's idiotic fighting strategy now i think about it lol. Buy hey......it's cool to see Batman smash a sink on Supe's head and throw him over a railing.....or so Snyder thinks. Agreed about Supe's having the potential to fly Batman to the ship and reveal Lex's intentions....which would have been in keeping with his character. But hey Snyder has a few buildings that Supe's could fly and smash through which is "awesome" and "cool".....lol. The other cr.ap thing about the rescues is that Cavill is always expressionless and detached. With Reeve, he would always smile and say something to defuse the tension and reassure the person. "Easy miss, I've got you" or "I'm sorry, only one ride to a customer." Agreed. This was a giant missing ingredient to the Snyder/Goyer version of Superman. As Zod would say, "I found his weakness. He cares. He cares for these... earth people." While Snyder/Goyer may have succeeded in presenting something different in making Superman/CLark Spock--- it's much like the mess DC had in 'reinventing' Superman in the comics for awhile as well. In trying to cater to new fans, the approach sometimes changed up too much of what made the character work in the first place. Imo- BvS was always going to be damaged goods because of MOS, so I expected far less from BvS. Given that (outside of the needless killing of Olsen), I imagined myself trying to 'fix' MOS through the sequel without denying the events of MOS- and it's such a tough writing assignment, that I think it was done well enough, given what they had to work with... but, again, relatively speaking.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 7, 2016 8:28:16 GMT -5
What gets me is all the complaints about Routh ten years ago are true about Cavill and in some cases worse. When Cavill tries to play Superman as tough or righteous he comes off like an assho!e.
Cavill is just as stiff, stilted, bland, and awkward in the role even though he was hailed as a superior actor. Even when he gets moments to do more he comes off as bad. Part of that is Snyder and the script but part of it is him. His instincts and take on the part were wrong from the jump. And he represents a problem with most of his generation of leading men. They're too busy trying to look good and cool instead of letting go and leaving it all up on the screen. Joel Kinnamon is the same. Jai Courtney is the same. Their predecessors weren't afraid to show some passion while at the same time being natural. These guys now all seem artificial. Like you can easily spot the process of them acting instead of it seeming natural and effortless.
I think it's a symptom of Hollywoods changing styles. That's why we get film scores that are generic background music instead of strong memorable themes. They don't want to be too memorable or thematic because thats "not cool" It's "dated" and "cheesy."
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Aug 7, 2016 10:50:06 GMT -5
What gets me is all the complaints about Routh ten years ago are true about Cavill and in some cases worse. When Cavill tries to play Superman as tough or righteous he comes off like an assho!e. Cavill is just as stiff, stilted, bland, and awkward in the role even though he was hailed as a superior actor. Even when he gets moments to do more he comes off as bad. Part of that is Snyder and the script but part of it is him. His instincts and take on the part were wrong from the jump. And he represents a problem with most of his generation of leading men. They're too busy trying to look good and cool instead of letting go and leaving it all up on the screen. Joel Kinnamon is the same. Jai Courtney is the same. Their predecessors weren't afraid to show some passion while at the same time being natural. These guys now all seem artificial. Like you can easily spot the process of them acting instead of it seeming natural and effortless. I think it's a symptom of Hollywoods changing styles. That's why we get film scores that are generic background music instead of strong memorable themes. They don't want to be too memorable or thematic because thats "not cool" It's "dated" and "cheesy." Yeah I think it was Adam Driver(who played Kylo Ren) who said he would have preferred to have been born 30 years earlier. I think there is an awareness among the current crop that they are not hitting the marks.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,848
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 7, 2016 11:59:41 GMT -5
Oh dude...absolutely. It's not that there aren't some amazing actors out there but they aren't getting the big opportunities either because it's not what the studios want or the opportunities simply don't exist.
Anton Yelchin was a talented young guy...but when his most high profile roles are being replacements for Walter Koenig, Michael Biehn, and William Ragsdale in Star Trek, Terminator, and Fright Night I'd ask Hollywood how he had the same chances to make his own mark as those men? All those roles were original roles when the original actors played them.
I agree with Adam Driver. 30 or 40 years ago the chances were there and they were there from big studios. On the flip side would actors like DeNiro, Ford, Pacino, Stallone, etc have made it now? Just based on looks alone I'm not sure. David Huddleston just died. Great character actor. I'm not seeing actors from this current younger generation rise to replace that crop of great character actors as well.
One thing I loved about the Reeve Superman movies hitting DVD is we got to see all those deleted and unused scenes and screen tests and we really got to see the actors process where Reeve crafted and fine tuned his performance. It was fascinating to me to watch the actors process.
I recently watched an interview with Pat Fraley on how he came up with Krangs voice in the 80s Turtles cartoon and make up tests where Robin Williams came up with the Mrs Doubtfire persona and it was amazing to watch the process. They weren't that impressive at first but then they began adding layers and layers of new elements and those characters came to life.
I'd like to see the process of some of these current actors. Do they do all that or do they just roll out of bed say a few lines and then think "boom! Nailed it."
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,768
|
Post by atp on Aug 7, 2016 13:06:21 GMT -5
What gets me is all the complaints about Routh ten years ago are true about Cavill and in some cases worse. When Cavill tries to play Superman as tough or righteous he comes off like an assho!e. Cavill is just as stiff, stilted, bland, and awkward in the role even though he was hailed as a superior actor. Even when he gets moments to do more he comes off as bad. Part of that is Snyder and the script but part of it is him. His instincts and take on the part were wrong from the jump. And he represents a problem with most of his generation of leading men. They're too busy trying to look good and cool instead of letting go and leaving it all up on the screen. Joel Kinnamon is the same. Jai Courtney is the same. Their predecessors weren't afraid to show some passion while at the same time being natural. These guys now all seem artificial. Like you can easily spot the process of them acting instead of it seeming natural and effortless. I think it's a symptom of Hollywoods changing styles. That's why we get film scores that are generic background music instead of strong memorable themes. They don't want to be too memorable or thematic because thats "not cool" It's "dated" and "cheesy." I am still puzzled why it was OK to criticize SR and Routh 10 years ago, yet any criticism of MoS and Cavill resulted in bullying and fracturing of the forum.
|
|