|
|
Post by Chancellor Todd on Apr 26, 2009 22:04:47 GMT -5
-Even in the 1970s, the military didn't cart nuclear missles around like that.
-No one's mentioned the "can you read my mind" sequence?
-Who built all that stuff for Lex in his lair? (And who printed up that nice map overlay for him?) Does he have a pool cleaner, or does he just keep dumping chlorine in there?
|
|
|
|
Post by supereagle7 on Apr 27, 2009 8:20:37 GMT -5
I just assumed that events in metropolis occur over a larger period of time, that clark doesnt changed into superman after starting at the planet straight away, maybe a few weeks?? also the interview we see was one of many..kinda like jump cutting over a period of months.
That way when we flies around the city searchin for lex, the people in the city recognise him, also at the power station which is far away from the city they kno him aswell.
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Apr 27, 2009 11:34:39 GMT -5
Yeah, yeah, I know it's like the holy grail around here, but some things just really kill it for me. It's a darn good thing the rest of the movie is perfection, so the movie's not ruined. Anyway... - Lex deducing that meteorites from Superman's home planet are lethal to him. (deadly........to him) "Because of specific level of radioactivity?" How would Lex have even known it was radioactive? He didn't even know it existed until he ripped it out of the book. Lex "deducing" that it's deadly to Superman is literally unlocking the secrets of the universe with a chewing gum wrapper. There's just too many assumptions and happy coincidences. If a planet blew up light years away, exactly what is the likelihood that fragments from it reached Earth? - The only other thing I really hate is the ending, turning the world around. The Nostalgia Critic pretty much touched upon the main points: Stuff would fly off the Earth if that happened. Shouldn't there be a second Superman now? If Superman can fly around the Earth in less than a second, why couldn't he stop the missiles? Lois described earthquakes, meaning the missile still hit the ground, so why didn't the crack appear under her car again? It was a weak plot element to use in any Superman movie. Doubly insulting that it was reused for the Donner cut, but that's another story. - I guess another minor one was the treatment of Jeff East. The new high definition presentation does NOT help that prosthetic nose. And who cares if he didn't sound like Reeve? They still should have used his voice. Yeah, I agree with a lot of what you're saying. The turning the world around made Superman waaay too powerful (lifting NK into space was much better handled, imo). Too much for my tastes, but I still enjoy it in the context of the scene like I said on another post. I don't hate it. Actually, there is nothing in the movie I really hate. There are, however, several things that make me cringe, though, like.....campy Otis, Lex's unending speeches of how awesome he is, their ''bright'' strategy to alter those missiles codes or whatever they did  ... hated how Miss T. managed to seduce and get the attention of all those military officers/soldiers.. Just too silly, imo. But I try to forgive it because like Jor-L said, it could have been worse. So considering the time the movie was made, it was definitely a huge accomplishment that it was a pretty serious film overall. Actually, there is one thing I really hate about this movie, that a lot of the online fandom consider it way superior to SR, when IMO, it isn't. I actually think that SR is superior overall. *hides* ;D |
|
Legsy
New Member
Alright, alright, alright...
Posts: 15,339
|
Post by Legsy on Apr 27, 2009 11:56:28 GMT -5
The 70's were a different time.
There's actually very little I dislike about STM, with the exception of Reeve's sweat stains.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Apr 27, 2009 12:00:35 GMT -5
In S2, at the end when he picks up Zod, there's a sweat stain under his \S/ too.
|
|
Legsy
New Member
Alright, alright, alright...
Posts: 15,339
|
Post by Legsy on Apr 27, 2009 12:03:50 GMT -5
Yep.
When did antiperspirant deodorant become popular? Mid to late 80's?
|
|
Keith
New Member
Posts: 3,238
|
Post by Keith on Apr 27, 2009 12:31:04 GMT -5
Raise your hand if your  |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Apr 27, 2009 13:01:12 GMT -5
STM was supposedly made more/less about the same time Star Wars was, but prior to STM, the biggest comic book adaptation was the campy "Batman" tv series--- Lex is almost a carryover on that (unfortunately).
I got used to Donner's version of Lex--- and it is hilarious to see how Lex balanced off of Donner's serious Zod- but I would have far more preferred to see a Lex Luthor taken just as serious and as menacing as Donner had intended Zod to be.
Still- as a whole, it's Superman done as pure fantasy (contrary to Jorel's dialogue in the beginning) - from campy villain to turning back time. It's just a pity that the fantasy violates some of its own rules. ;(
About SR being superior to STM--- well, of course it's all opinion and taste.
To me, the perfectionism (filmwise) of all the sequences- whether campy or not- blows my mind away, particularly because things were even harder to achieve then. That STM holds up at all is a testament to that.
SR is a giant class act- but, while it's definitely far better technology-wise (I never thought the effects in STM were all that convincing- but impressive for the scale and the attempt)- to me, it feels like another chapter to more/less the same story and characters.
It's like when people say "Empire Strikes Back" is far superior to the original "Star Wars: New Hope"- It's another chapter that's extremely well done, but is better for being a continuation of artistic choices from the original 'book', so to speak. It's better having both.
((*Also, there are some sequences in STM that can't be topped (the iconic helicopter rescue/ the charm & humor of the 1st appearance by Supes on Lois' balcony)--- though it would have been funny if Singer had done a shot-by-shot remake with all the advantages of today's technology versus the 70's when it was made. To Singer's credit, I think he felt he couldn't top what was already done, and did the smart thing to move on, building on it.))
If Donner had done SR today instead of Singer- The lighting and some of the angles might be different, but I think otherwise it might not have been all that different! (Which begs the question: Did Singer try to 'ape' Donner's style for SR--- or is it just that STM had such an impact, it was hard for Singer to envision it any other way?)
|
|
|
|
Post by fggafagas on Apr 27, 2009 14:12:55 GMT -5
Actually, there is one thing I really hate about this movie, that a lot of the online fandom consider it way superior to SR, when IMO, it isn't. I actually think that SR is superior overall. *hides* ;D It is. Superman's the granddaddy of superhero movies and few have managed to match it's accomplishments since, and it's been over 30 years. Superman Returns didn't do enough to stand on it's own, there's a lot of potential plotlines left mostly unexplored, and they had their shot to show that Lex isn't only interested in land, and they failed. Even Superman IV showed that Lex is more than a real estate maniac. To top it all off, Brandon Routh does not meet the standards that Christopher Reeve set. There wasn't enough diversity in his performance, he hardly had any lines, and he certainly doesn't have the look down like Reeve did. |
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Apr 27, 2009 14:28:22 GMT -5
The only thing I didn't like about STM was that Lex was played up for laughs a bit too often. I would've liked him a bit more sinister, particularly if he ended up being more of a Blofeld type character.
|
|
|
|
Post by adam15 on Apr 27, 2009 14:51:42 GMT -5
Actually, there is one thing I really hate about this movie, that a lot of the online fandom consider it way superior to SR, when IMO, it isn't. I actually think that SR is superior overall. *hides* ;D It is. Superman's the granddaddy of superhero movies and few have managed to match it's accomplishments since, and it's been over 30 years. Superman Returns didn't do enough to stand on it's own, there's a lot of potential plotlines left mostly unexplored, and they had their shot to show that Lex isn't only interested in land, and they failed. Even Superman IV showed that Lex is more than a real estate maniac. To top it all off, Brandon Routh does not meet the standards that Christopher Reeve set. There wasn't enough diversity in his performance, he hardly had any lines, and he certainly doesn't have the look down like Reeve did. Where do I begin? Can an imitation really be better than the real thing?  |
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Apr 27, 2009 14:52:55 GMT -5
In another thread. |
|
Legsy
New Member
Alright, alright, alright...
Posts: 15,339
|
Post by Legsy on Apr 27, 2009 15:06:09 GMT -5
Don't discourage him! I kid, I kid... |
|
|
|
Post by adam15 on Apr 27, 2009 15:23:22 GMT -5
Ahhh.... In all seriousness, can anyone really say with a straight face or even listen with a straight face that SR is better than STM? I think that the best you could say about SR is that it is a worthy installment in the Superman series and got the series back on track (debateable points.) I"m sure that SR fans would conceed that there are definate flaws in the film that (they hope) would be rectified in a Singer directed sequel. However, finds flaws in STM, and.... we're kinda grasping at straws! |
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Apr 27, 2009 15:25:44 GMT -5
Yup.
Some people prefer Batman '89 to The Dark Knight (like myself), yet there's no problem. It all comes down to personal taste.
|
|
|
|
Post by adam15 on Apr 27, 2009 15:27:33 GMT -5
Yup. Some people prefer Batman '89 to The Dark Knight (like myself), yet there's no problem. It all comes down to personal taste. ....  |
|
Legsy
New Member
Alright, alright, alright...
Posts: 15,339
|
Post by Legsy on Apr 27, 2009 15:29:26 GMT -5
I think STM is a superior movie than SR. I'm being honest here. I think most people here agree. But, I still love SR. SR is, IMHO, one of the best movies of this decade.
|
|
The Phantom Menace
New Member
Eyes to the stage, pilgrim, she's just warming up.
Posts: 3,325
|
Post by The Phantom Menace on Apr 27, 2009 15:29:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by adam15 on Apr 27, 2009 15:37:40 GMT -5
Reeve not being missed Bosworth being sexier than Kidder Being the SIII that took 26 years Superman returning from a futile outer space search ;D listen to yo' daddy next time He intendeds to create a new uhhh..... continent  ....... This time you really believe a man can fly ;D ;D ;D I think they forgot to put some CGI in there ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Apr 27, 2009 15:40:33 GMT -5
Waitaminute, Bosworth is sexier than Kidder.
Kidder got the role down, but she was not sexy.
At all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Apr 27, 2009 15:48:40 GMT -5
Adam, this is not another soapbox thread for your SR hatred. Cut it out.
|
|
The Phantom Menace
New Member
Eyes to the stage, pilgrim, she's just warming up.
Posts: 3,325
|
Post by The Phantom Menace on Apr 27, 2009 15:50:01 GMT -5
"She's prettier than Kidder, and there's more chemistry in her scenes with her co-star."
The first half of that statement is true, but the second half sure as heck isn't.
Edit: Apologies, Jimbo. I shouldn't encourage him.
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Apr 27, 2009 16:03:17 GMT -5
hehe
|
|
Legsy
New Member
Alright, alright, alright...
Posts: 15,339
|
Post by Legsy on Apr 27, 2009 16:08:48 GMT -5
Adam, this is not another soapbox thread for your SR hatred. Cut it out. Five days. I was off by a few days. |
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Apr 27, 2009 16:15:32 GMT -5
Actually, there is one thing I really hate about this movie, that a lot of the online fandom consider it way superior to SR, when IMO, it isn't. I actually think that SR is superior overall. *hides* ;D It is. Superman's the granddaddy of superhero movies and few have managed to match it's accomplishments since, and it's been over 30 years. Superman Returns didn't do enough to stand on it's own, there's a lot of potential plotlines left mostly unexplored, and they had their shot to show that Lex isn't only interested in land, and they failed. Even Superman IV showed that Lex is more than a real estate maniac. To top it all off, Brandon Routh does not meet the standards that Christopher Reeve set. There wasn't enough diversity in his performance, he hardly had any lines, and he certainly doesn't have the look down like Reeve did. I think that he certainly has it. I actually think Brandon's look is more archetypal than Reeve's. Yeah, I know I'm in the minority here. So be it. |
|
... hated how Miss T. managed to seduce and get the attention of all those military officers/soldiers.. 
