Man of Steel (2013)

[crazy_asian_man]

Very cool, Booshman!

It keeps bringing up the idea to me, though- that NOTHING was wrong with the original Reeve suit design, and that there was no need to change it.... unless the powers that be had a lack of imagination.

Oh well...

[Metallo]

That suit still looks good. I mean I understand updating but the things that work about the design still work. I don't expect Lycra but dammit thew still threw the baby out with the bathwater with the bland looking onesie of steel suit.

[crazy_asian_man]

Mar 30, 2014 13:53:33 GMT -5 Metallo said:

That suit still looks good. I mean I understand updating but the things that work about the design still work. I don't expect Lycra but dammit thew still threw the baby out with the bathwater with the bland looking onesie of steel suit.

Oddly, I like the top half's texture- but making it a one-piece Ultraman suit I didn't like either. Pointless to change what wasn't broken, I agree.... but even with that said, I still think that the new 52's design is even less effective than the MOS design, with the high collar & all....

[Metallo]

Lol. I didn't even think about that. You're just backing up my Ultraman/justice lords Superman idea.

[crazy_asian_man]

As an aside: it's funny how it was mentioned that Snyder might have been perfect for Green Lantern instead of MOS- but if the Rock is rumored to be GL in MOS 2- then maybe even THAT idea might have been a bad thing..... though I have to admit that I don't think MOS is nearly as awful as is the Reynolds' GL movie. (though understandably less sacriligeous).

[theoj]

I watched half of Green Lantern and switched off!
I even thought the 90s TV version of The Flash was better!

Whereas I've seen MOS six times and still love it.

So I can't wait for this damn sequel, though not sure if I'm glad or worried that they're still working on the script, and planning to start shooting imminently!

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 3, 2014 4:36:33 GMT -5 theoj said:

I watched half of Green Lantern and switched off!
I even thought the 90s TV version of The Flash was better!

Whereas I've seen MOS six times and still love it.

So I can't wait for this damn sequel, though not sure if I'm glad or worried that they're still working on the script, and planning to start shooting imminently!

Green Lantern is amazing in how misguided it is- and universally disliked.

For MOS- it doesn't seem like the best plan to have a script in-the-works while shooting it...... but the more I read/hear, the more it sounds like the norm rather than the exception. (Gladiator which won best picture had the same situation; Thor 2 I understand didn't have a finished script, either)
Though.... the 'news blackout' does feel a little odd. Did they stop shooting entirely? I remember a lot more 'spy shots' during the shooting of MOS than I'm noticing here- unless they're REALLY good at keeping everything under wraps/ and/or are shooting in a green screen room for the rest.

In any case...

Also wanting MOS 2 to be great. Will see....

[Metallo]

GL was one of he biggest CBM diss appointments of the decade. It could have been so good. Corporate thinking and too many cooks in the kitchen killed that movie. I don't anticipate the gritty Nolanesque reboot though.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 5, 2014 10:03:11 GMT -5 Metallo said:

GL was one of he biggest CBM diss appointments of the decade. It could have been so good. Corporate thinking and too many cooks in the kitchen killed that movie. I don't anticipate the gritty Nolanesque reboot though.

It's a pity that the director didn't do a commentary--- would love to know who was responsible for what over there. Oddly, Geoff Johns was promoting it greatly (and genuinely seemed to love it) at the Wondercon prior to its release. He didn't need the cash, I'm guessin he genuinely thought it was good.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 5, 2014 10:03:11 GMT -5 Metallo said:

GL was one of he biggest CBM diss appointments of the decade. It could have been so good. Corporate thinking and too many cooks in the kitchen killed that movie. I don't anticipate the gritty Nolanesque reboot though.

It's a pity that the director didn't do a commentary--- would love to know who was responsible for what over there. Oddly, Geoff Johns was promoting it greatly (and genuinely seemed to love it) at the Wondercon prior to its release. He didn't need the cash, I'm guessin he genuinely thought it was good.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 5, 2014 10:03:11 GMT -5 Metallo said:

GL was one of he biggest CBM diss appointments of the decade. It could have been so good. Corporate thinking and too many cooks in the kitchen killed that movie. I don't anticipate the gritty Nolanesque reboot though.

It's a pity that the director didn't do a commentary--- would love to know who was responsible for what over there. Oddly, Geoff Johns was promoting it greatly (and genuinely seemed to love it) at the Wondercon prior to its release. He didn't need the cash, I'm guessin he genuinely thought it was good.

[Metallo]

A reply so nice you did it thrice. I agree.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 6, 2014 8:54:47 GMT -5 Metallo said:

A reply so nice you did it thrice. I agree.

Yeah..... I don't know WHAT the heck happened in posting. I didn't feel THAT strong about it.

An aside--- are you planning to go see MOS 2 anyhow?

Personally, growing up with the horrible superhero adaptations on tv way back when, I make an effort to see almost every superhero/comic adaptation on the bigscreen.... regardless.
No matter what, nothing could be as horrible as some of those past tv adaptations....

[Metallo]

Honestly I'd take some of those horrible tv adaptations over MOS right now. At least there could be some imagination and ingenuity in there somewhere. I still say the Corman produced 1994 FF caught the FF spirit more than the 2005 film and in a lot of ways Nic Hammond is still the best Peter Parker.

I'll probably see MOS 2 by "some" means *cough* but I'm not overly enthused to go out and spend money on a ticket ASAP. My enthusiasm for DC based properties is pretty much dead and that's a sad thing. They've done what even the likes of Schumacher couldn't. Even most of the tv cartoons have no appeal to me. WB/DC just seems to be too obsessed with reinventing the wheel to make sure the product is good.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 6, 2014 12:52:27 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Honestly I'd take some of those horrible tv adaptations over MOS right now. At least there could be some imagination and ingenuity in there somewhere. I still say the Corman produced 1994 FF caught the FF spirit more than the 2005 film and in a lot of ways Nic Hammond is still the best Peter Parker.

I'll probably see MOS 2 by "some" means *cough* but I'm not overly enthused to go out and spend money on a ticket ASAP. My enthusiasm for DC based properties is pretty much dead and that's a sad thing. They've done what even the likes of Schumacher couldn't. Even most of the tv cartoons have no appeal to me. WB/DC just seems to be too obsessed with reinventing the wheel to make sure the product is good.

I agree with what you're saying with the cheap FF film vs. the mostly horrible big budget FF film.

I have to admit, though, that it's getting harder and harder for me to watch the older tv show/movies with the lowered production values.

Interesting comment on Nicholas Hammond. He had a kind of a young 'Mark Hamill'-ish appeal as Peter Parker I think-

But in an ideal world, I'd have loved Raimi directing Garfield as Spiderman and having free rein over the movies.

Cameron said he envisioned a young John Cusack back in the day, but I think Garfield looks closer to the comics.

[Metallo]

Cusack would have been a pretty good choice. To me--Garfield is a decent Spidey but an awful Peter. MaGuire was a so so Spidey but a good Peter. I think we've yet to see that definitive Parker/Spidey in live action.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 9, 2014 12:42:25 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Cusack would have been a pretty good choice. To me--Garfield is a decent Spidey but an awful Peter. MaGuire was a so so Spidey but a good Peter. I think we've yet to see that definitive Parker/Spidey in live action.

After reading Cameron's 'scriptment' of Spiderman, as much as I enjoyed Sam Raimi's first two Spiderman movies- I would still would have killed to have seen James Cameron's version of Spiderman.

Garfield's performance under Raimi I think would be a little bit different than what we saw in the reboot- I like what Tobey did, but physically I thought Garfield fits much closer to what I remember from the Ditko/Romita days.

Still..... I wish the studios listened to us and continued forward with recasting not rebooting. *sigh*

[doomsday1]

All you've done is quote one of Enrique's posts, what does that prove? He's a dick, acted like a dick, and will get no apology from anyone. That's why everyone's over there and there's a small few over here. That will be why you glossed over most of what I said in my previous posts.

You must realise that everyone on the Facebook group is in agreement with regards to Enrique. The only reason you're glossing over his behaviour and licking his hole is because his opinion haven't to match your and your agenda.

But honestly, you need to let it go and find something better to do with your time, it's absolutely tragic. 

[Metallo]

Apr 9, 2014 23:12:29 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

Apr 9, 2014 12:42:25 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Cusack would have been a pretty good choice. To me--Garfield is a decent Spidey but an awful Peter. MaGuire was a so so Spidey but a good Peter. I think we've yet to see that definitive Parker/Spidey in live action.

After reading Cameron's 'scriptment' of Spiderman, as much as I enjoyed Sam Raimi's first two Spiderman movies- I would still would have killed to have seen James Cameron's version of Spiderman.

Garfield's performance under Raimi I think would be a little bit different than what we saw in the reboot- I like what Tobey did, but physically I thought Garfield fits much closer to what I remember from the Ditko/Romita days.

Still..... I wish the studios listened to us and continued forward with recasting not rebooting. *sigh*

He is. He's taller and lankier. Physically he's a good fit for Parker. It's just a shame he's not heading to the MCU and Civil War. His run ends just as he was coming into his own as Spiderman. To me he'd fit better than a new guy but Sony shit the bed so bad it's necessary to replace him so Marvel can do it their way. I've got high hopes for Holland though. The kids got potential.

[crazy_asian_man]

Aug 23, 2015 14:30:24 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Apr 9, 2014 23:12:29 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

After reading Cameron's 'scriptment' of Spiderman, as much as I enjoyed Sam Raimi's first two Spiderman movies- I would still would have killed to have seen James Cameron's version of Spiderman.

Garfield's performance under Raimi I think would be a little bit different than what we saw in the reboot- I like what Tobey did, but physically I thought Garfield fits much closer to what I remember from the Ditko/Romita days.

Still..... I wish the studios listened to us and continued forward with recasting not rebooting. *sigh*

He is. He's taller and lankier. Physically he's a good fit for Parker. It's just a shame he's not heading to the MCU and Civil War. His run ends just as he was coming into his own as Spiderman. To me he'd fit better than a new guy but Sony poop the bed so bad it's necessary to replace him so Marvel can do it their way. I've got high hopes for Holland though. The kids got potential.

I agree.... most people weren't complaining about Garfield- so, much like tossing Routh out with SR, it's a similar scenario imo.

If Marvel's not doing 'origin' movies anymore- then why not just ignore the second film and keep Garfield? But then again.... if Marvel/Sony are thinking long-term franchise, it does make sense for a younger actor and full reboot of sorts.

Pity on Asia Butterfield, I could have seen him as Peter. Jury is out on Holland.

[Metallo]

Yeah he really did get Routh'd. Good pick for the role just in a lousy movie. Not god awful but it wasn't very good. And I wasn't even big on Garfield at first. He really won me over in the second film. I sort of feel that way about Miles Teller in FF. good actor in a poor movie. More Ultimate Reed than traditional Reed but I found myself liking what he was doing despite the character not being fleshed out quite enough on the page. I read on some site that they may have offered the role back to Garfield but he declined. Plus ins recent interview he sounded relieved to not have to be under all that pressure. Much like Routh did for Cavill I think Garfield will be a buffer as far as criticisms on recasting. People are used to it this time out so it won't be as bad on Holland trying to follow someone like Maguire. I think Marvel had to recast to have the freedom to do what they want and like you said a young actor could have a lot of longevity. Holland could easily play Peter Parker for ten years as we watch the character go through life and mature.

[crazy_asian_man]

Aug 23, 2015 17:17:29 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Yeah he really did get Routh'd. Good pick for the role just in a lousy movie. Not god awful but it wasn't very good. And I wasn't even big on Garfield at first. He really won me over in the second film. I sort of feel that way about Miles Teller in FF. good actor in a poor movie. More Ultimate Reed than traditional Reed but I found myself liking what he was doing despite the character not being fleshed out quite enough on the page. I read on some site that they may have offered the role back to Garfield but he declined. Plus ins recent interview he sounded relieved to not have to be under all that pressure. Much like Routh did for Cavill I think Garfield will be a buffer as far as criticisms on recasting. People are used to it this time out so it won't be as bad on Holland trying to follow someone like Maguire. I think Marvel had to recast to have the freedom to do what they want and like you said a young actor could have a lot of longevity. Holland could easily play Peter Parker for ten years as we watch the character go through life and mature.

There's been a couple of incidents where I've read Garfield was accused of upsetting this or that exec by his behavior. (Supposedly he was set to give "Batkid" an award on the Oscars, but it got nixed due to something Garfield didn't agree to do. What could be that bad?)
Still--- I agree that Garfield physically was more 'right' for the classic Spiderman than Tobey.

Having said that- I did see two of the Raimi Spiderman movies recently- and felt that they didn't just hold up, but that they're actually superior to a couple of the Marvel films that have come out, too. (Looking at you, Iron Man and Thor 2)

[Metallo]

I agree they're good movies but those two really don't hold up as well. Well the first Spiderman doesn't. I think Iron Man outdoes the first Spiderman in most ways but I think Spidey 2 edges out Iron Man 1. Spidey 1 has dated more than 2 and it's got some script/dialogue problems. It falls into a lot of comic book movie cliches too. The Goblin suit is good in concept but the execution looks rather silly.

[crazy_asian_man]

Aug 24, 2015 21:12:34 GMT -5 Metallo said:

I agree they're good movies but those two really don't hold up as well. Well the first Spiderman doesn't. I think Iron Man outdoes the first Spiderman in most ways but I think Spidey 2 edges out Iron Man 1. Spidey 1 has dated more than 2 and it's got some script/dialogue problems. It falls into a lot of comic book movie cliches too. The Goblin suit is good in concept but the execution looks rather silly.

Spiderman 2 definitely is a grand improvement over Spiderman 1, but if you took out all the superhero stuff, I think there's still a solid drama there and it felt to me like Raimi treated the original Lee/Ditko comics as gospel (at least in spirit).

[crown]

Gandy had huge expectations for both MoS and the Donner cut. He was let down and let down HARD.