|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 21:08:41 GMT -5
Give it another couple of months. Till what? Till we come to our senses and join the hecklers? Maybe- just wrap your jason-statham-apologist-mind around this- maybe its good enough to really be happy about, and maybe in spite of real or imagined flaws it has enough merit to get excited about, maybe we got a LOT of what we have craved for a generation, maybe its ...really. not. That. Bad. Maybe its hitting enough of the right buttons we want to see more. Much more, and soon. And you and metallo can say "maybe not" and continue to wait (in vain) for happy fans to come around to your way of thinking. Man of steel is orders of magnitude better than ANY star wars prequel. Not saying much I know, but a little birdie tells me you'll give the prequels a pass. So maybe you get point your piss stream away from those who give man of steel a pass. Ok, well first of all, I was replying to Kevin and not you, but that's my fault for not including his quote to make that more clear. Second, I don't give the prequels a pass and find tremendous fault in them and have stated so on several occasions. I'd be happy to get more detailed with this, but at the moment the issue is MOS. Third, I've never said that I dislike MOS. I like MOS but I am critical of it. I am also frustrated: nobody seems capable of nailing a Superman film. They've come close, but that's it. Close. Superman II came out in 1980. You're telling me that nobody can make a great Superman film in over 30 years? I know it can be done. There were times watching MOS that I thought Snyder nailed it, but by the end it was obvious that this was eye candy. Nothing more. The battle between Superman and Zod illustrates that. The way to do it is the way they did in SII: with innocenets being placed in harms way and having Superman go back and forth between fighting and saving, and sometimes not being able to save. Yeah, the slapstick that came after was too much for some, but everything in that battle was done right. A healthy balance of action, drama and humor.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 20:44:29 GMT -5
Give it another couple of months.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 19:56:55 GMT -5
Kris, it's becoming increasingly apparent that you're not "listening" to other points of view here, and shutting other opinions out, and so this is my final attempt to get you to understand my POV.
Further, if you can't understand and acknowledge why someone would prefer SII over MOS than there is similarly little point in continuing the discussion. Superman II featured Superman acknowledging the danger around him to others, which is what Superman would do as opposed to what we saw in MOS. It added to the drama and it made for an entertaining an iconic superhero film.
As for TDK, Ledger's death may have added to the mystique of the film, but the film was darn good on its own merits. But I think you know that and simply want to persist on the Ledger thing just to annoy people.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 17:07:03 GMT -5
Hey, you can tell me The Godfather is the worst film ever made. That's your priviledge.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 16:24:19 GMT -5
Donner didn't think! He FEEEELS.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 16:13:01 GMT -5
::watching STM::
That's it! How did it come to Donner?
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 16:11:38 GMT -5
Good stuff, ATP.
Unfortunately, I don't have a favorite Zimmer track because I can't remember a single tune. Literally.
Can't remember.
But in its defense, I felt the same way about his Batman theme and that grew on me.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 16:04:48 GMT -5
I haven't seen a lot of the 2000-2006 comics films in years, but here's a crack at it:
1. SUPERMAN II
2. SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE
3. DARK KNIGHT
4. DARK KNIGHT RISES
5. X2
6. Batman Returns
7. Incredible Hulk
8. Iron Man
9. Avengers (I still have only seen it once, so I'm due for a rewatch)
10. Captain America
Yeah, I don't think Man of Steel ranks in the Top 10 at all.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 16:01:21 GMT -5
ATP, I was just thinking about MoS and was thinking it was an exhibition. It needs emotional content.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 12:01:05 GMT -5
Or maybe you need to realize, as I already mentioned to you, that people are not going to agree with you completely. The consensus seems to be is that the movie is good but an unenthusiastic good. What are you on about? I said the FF6 jibe was retarded, which it is. I don't have any problem with anyone n not liking it even hating the film, but over exaggerating it with daft remarks. I think you guys are so offended by people who enjoyed it you don't even bother reading my posts and just jump in with this bullpoop. I can understand, I think, what was meant with the jibe. There was a sequence there that could've fit into a Superman film only it was more excitingly done than anything in MoS.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 11:28:42 GMT -5
Wait, wait.
Dr. Hamilton died?
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 11:23:44 GMT -5
Yeah it's a pity Michael Shannon didn't overdose or this would be doing TDK numbers TDK was a legitimately great film completely deserving of the praise it got. To blame its success entirely on Ledger's death isn't entirely accurate. Word around socially is that MoS is good to ok. Whereas when TDK came out, I would hear things like, "You gotta see this!" "Movie's awesome!" And "I'm seeing it TODAY because I'm sick of hearing how awesome it is." MoS was good but a very flawed good IMO. TDK kicks the poop out of it on every level: acting, execution, script, drama, emotional content, you name it.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 1, 2013 7:12:02 GMT -5
Or maybe you need to realize, as I already mentioned to you, that people are not going to agree with you completely.
The consensus seems to be is that the movie is good but an unenthusiastic good.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 30, 2013 22:12:54 GMT -5
It's nice to see Superman sitting on the #2 spot for the year.
It's a shame it wasn't as good as the Nolan Bat films and therefore stronger word of mouth.
What else is coming out that could top Superman's boxoffice?
The Hobbit 2? I'm guessing that will do it, even though word of mouth on the last one seemed weaker.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 30, 2013 10:07:43 GMT -5
But as I mentioned in an other, wen SII is good---which is 95-99% of the time IMO---it's SO good.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 29, 2013 12:33:27 GMT -5
I think Cavill was the stronger performer.
Do you guys think Routh will be like Lazenby, where he's maligned then but time was kinder to his performance?
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 29, 2013 12:31:34 GMT -5
It's a shame Singer didn't make a more action-oriented film.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 29, 2013 12:29:57 GMT -5
Oh well, at least they didn't superimpose Clark over a stained glass picture of Christ. Oh wait... Well, I'm sure they didn't hire Snyder based on his subtlety.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 28, 2013 18:09:59 GMT -5
I talked to a girl at work who told she hadn't seem it yet because her friends were split on awesome and just ok.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 28, 2013 8:16:23 GMT -5
Kris, you just need to accept that there are people who just thought the movie wasn't as great as you thought. Period.
I liked the movie but found it didn't really convey the emotion it should have.
The movie wasn't alive the way the Nolan flicks were. And that's unfortunate.
Hopefully they can build on that and make a better sequel, but with Snyder directing, I don't have much hope. I enjoyed most of his films, but his strong suits aren't suited to Superman.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 28, 2013 7:10:34 GMT -5
Yeah, I didn't think of STM either.
MoS was doing well enough to bring me into the film without letting my mind wander over to STM.
|
|
|
MoS vs S3
Jun 28, 2013 7:07:46 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 28, 2013 7:07:46 GMT -5
Ha, I just realized MoS was released on the 30th anniversary of Superman III.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 27, 2013 22:01:52 GMT -5
STM and SII are flawed films, but what it gets right more than compensates for what it gets wrong, which is why they're benchmarks for what to do correctly with a superhero movie---particularly a Superman movie---more than 30 years later and almost 10 years after its leading man passed away.
STM and SII *get* what Superman is about. MoS doesn't quite get there. The emotion and heart of what make Superman special are muted.
I liked MoS, but it doesn't match the quality and understanding of the first two Superman movies. It comes close but doesn't get the cigar.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 27, 2013 20:35:39 GMT -5
Oh, yeah, nostalgia be darned.
Superman II > MOS
It's ironic that even Lester---who is maligned for not getting it---understood and executed this weakness of Superman and invested us in the film.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jun 27, 2013 20:33:49 GMT -5
For all the flack Superman II gets, they did show people getting hurt. And Superman couldn't be around to help them all. As a kid, I always kinda felt bad for the lady sitting in the sidewalk, whimpering, "Superman, help us." But Superman was too busy fighting. Yup. It's called creating drama. THAT'S how you hurt Superman. By putting him in a position where he can't save innocent people. He never wants to see them get hurt and not be able to stop it all. He feels for people. When they suffer he suffers. His empathy is his greatest strength and weakness. From the very beginning of his early days in the comics he fought for the people. That should always be highlighted. SII Got this. He fought for the people and they fought for him. That's how we emotionally invest in all the explosions and crap going on. THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think you just nailed it, Metallo. And you know who said it best??? GENERAL ZOD HIMSELF, BITCHES. "I've discovered his weakness. He CARES. He actually cares for these Earth people." BOOM
|
|