Man of Steel (2013)

[Metallo]

Apr 17, 2016 5:14:37 GMT -5 dejan said:

Apr 10, 2016 11:03:47 GMT -5 Metallo said:

The tone deaf kissing scene in MOS

LOL....but spot on.
earlier in MOS .....Jorel specifically tells Supes:" you can save them Kal.....you can save them all"

Oh dear......not only did he not save them all.....he did not give a flying frack about not saving them.

I hated that BvS made it seem like Superman was Jonathan Kents hope for Clark when MOS made it obvious Jor El told him he could use his powers to help people. Jonathan was never that specific. He just said he'd change the world. Snyder can't even keep his own story straight.

[atp]

Apr 19, 2016 13:40:28 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Apr 17, 2016 5:14:37 GMT -5 dejan said:

LOL....but spot on.
earlier in MOS .....Jorel specifically tells Supes:" you can save them Kal.....you can save them all"

Oh dear......not only did he not save them all.....he did not give a flying frack about not saving them.

I hated that BvS made it seem like Superman was Jonathan Kents hope for Clark when MOS made it obvious Jor El told him he could use his powers to help people. Jonathan was never that specific. He just said he'd change the world. Snyder can't even keep his own story straight.

Jonathan was poorly written and contradicted himself. First he told Clark he's going to change the world and stand proud in front of the human race blah blah blah. But then he says he must be a farmer because five generations of his family were farmers.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 19, 2016 14:33:50 GMT -5 atp said:

Apr 19, 2016 13:40:28 GMT -5 Metallo said:

I hated that BvS made it seem like Superman was Jonathan Kents hope for Clark when MOS made it obvious Jor El told him he could use his powers to help people. Jonathan was never that specific. He just said he'd change the world. Snyder can't even keep his own story straight.

Jonathan was poorly written and contradicted himself. First he told Clark he's going to change the world and stand proud in front of the human race blah blah blah. But then he says he must be a farmer because five generations of his family were farmers.

"You're here for a reason, son... Now go out and shovel that maneur!"
(*with all due respect to farmers. My friend's dad runs one. Not that It's not respectable work for Kryptonians, but...)

[atp]

He didnt even come across as a farmer. Seemed more like a mechanic, from what we saw of hin in MoS.

Glenn Ford had so much more impact with probably less screen time.

[Metallo]

Agreed. Ford had the right kind of presence and tone in the role. Costner was a good choice but the script fails him. They don't really show us who Jonathan Kent really is. Like you said there's a lot of contradictory stuff going on. Conflicted would be fine. That makes sense in the kind of world Snyder built but we don't know what really drives the character. Who is he? What are his ideals? John Schneider had a similar take on the role but his was a thousand times better because he and the writers figured out who that Jonathan was and how to articulate it.

Snyders take on the character was a little too vague and under developed. It's like he does the bare minimum for character development instead of really diving in there.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 19, 2016 15:17:07 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Agreed. Ford had the right kind of presence and tone in the role. Costner was a good choice but the script fails him. They don't really show us who Jonathan Kent really is. Like you said there's a lot of contradictory stuff going on. Conflicted would be fine. That makes sense in the kind of world Snyder built but we don't know what really drives the character. Who is he? What are his ideals? John Schneider had a similar take on the role but his was a thousand times better because he and the writers figured out who that Jonathan was and how to articulate it.

Snyders take on the character was a little too vague and under developed. It's like he does the bare minimum for character development instead of really diving in there.

Sometimes good writing can just have one scene or two and an audience can 'get' a character.

Other times, the writing can have a zillion scenes written for a character and the audience can still feel like they're not sure what a character is supposed to be.

In a third case, a great actor can bring their own backstory and 'invent' their character so solidly without help from the writer or director, that the characters are convincing even when the script is lacking. (I'm thinking of Nicole Kidman in Batman Forever and Liam Neeson in Phantom Menace as a couple of examples).

[atp]

On paper, Costner should have been the ideal Jonathan Kent. When I read he had been cast it was my dream casting.

Then again, Spacey as Luthor was everyones dream casting too....

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 20, 2016 12:32:25 GMT -5 atp said:

On paper, Costner should have been the ideal Jonathan Kent. When I read he had been cast it was my dream casting.

Then again, Spacey as Luthor was everyones dream casting too....

Yeah...

I think what was sad was that before- WB was pretty much the only one doing major superhero films- and they'd take FOREVER to greenlight or decide something.

But, thanks to Singer's X-men and Raimi's Spiderman- and then Marvel Studios, reboots are coming out faster and (for the time being) superhero films are getting greenlights.

So, I guess what I'm getting at is- there's probably more likelihood of ANOTHER Superman reboot, maybe done better, and we'll have another Pa Kent in the near future.

Especially if WB ends up selling the rights to Marvel Studios or makes a deal to have them help produce a reboot, if some of these new movies under WB disappoints box office wise....

[atp]

A wasted opportunity in MoS was that wholw battle against the world engine in the indian ocean.

Instead, superman should have escorted the air force planes to metropolis and helped to protect the bomber plane. He could have also broken away to save people in metropolis.

That would have built so much goodwill towards him.

Fighting that machine in the indian ocean was just an excuse for fancy cgi and explosions. It looked over the top. And even worse, no other people were there to see it, so nobody cared about what he did.

On the other hand, if people saw him helping the military and saving civilians in metropolis, that would have helped make him the hero superman that we know.

[crazy_asian_man]

Agreed.

I think that bit where he saves one soldier in Smallville personally was supposed to be where he is looked at as a hero.... But it wasn't enough to offset all the collateral damage he caused/causes in Smallville.

I wonder what goes through Snyder's head with the non-stop string of negative press for so many of his films?

I guess it's good to ignore critics if you're trying your best and have a job to do....

On the other hand..... Are there no talented people out there he can trust to give him good advice on his gaffes in film?

[atp]

How awesome would it have been to have Superman leading a convoy of air force planes?

[Metallo]

Would have been amazing to see. They even could have introed Hal Jordan into their universe that way. It's too bad we don't have some guy in charge who could think things like that through before they made the movie. Some kind of...I dunno...wriiiii-ter. Or that other job. Di rek tor?

I also wonder...why wasn't there more activity around the wreckage of the world engine in BvS? If there was a giant machine that could literally turn one kind of planet into another don't you guys think people would be studying the wreckage and surrounding area for decades? I guess not. It's not like someone was studying that smashed terminator arm in T2 even if it didn't work. Nope.

[atp]

Apr 22, 2016 11:12:12 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Would have been amazing to see. They even could have introed Hal Jordan into their universe that way. It's too bad we don't have some guy in charge who could think things like that through before they made the movie. Some kind of...I dunno...wriiiii-ter. Or that other job. Di rek tor?

I also wonder...why wasn't there more activity around the wreckage of the world engine in BvS? If there was a giant machine that could literally turn one kind of planet into another don't you guys think people would be studying the wreckage and surrounding area for decades? I guess not. It's not like someone was studying that smashed terminator arm in T2 even if it didn't work. Nope.

Interesting that Miles Dyson created metallo

[Metallo]

on Smallville he created Metallo?

In BvS he creates Cyborg



I guess Snyder thought it would be "cool" I like Morton so I enjoyed the reference.

[atp]

How did Clark get the military to retrieve the ship he arrived in, without having them discover his address and identity?

[Metallo]

[crazy_asian_man]

Interesting stuff-

In seeing the visuals from this vid from MOS again, though, it reminded me of how visually 'meh' Avengrs was.... but humanity-wise, Whedon constantly added touches of humor and characterization when/where possible.
On the flip side, I will have to tip my hate to Snyder for his visuals-

So, it does make the upcoming JL movie an interesting thing to anticipate, once again.

[Metallo]

The first Avengers is very tv movieish in the way it's shot but Whedon isn't afraid of color which was appreciated.

Snyders films are very cinematic (appreciated) but are overly filtered and desaturated. It's like the sun in his D.C. world has a piss yellow filter over it.

I prefer whedons use of more prcatical stuff. I still don't get why Zods armor was totally cgi when the iron man armor is even partially practical.

[crazy_asian_man]

Aug 28, 2017 16:15:10 GMT -5 Metallo said:

The first Avengers is very tv movieish in the way it's shot but Whedon isn't afraid of color which was appreciated.

Snyders films are very cinematic (appreciated) but are overly filtered and desaturated. It's like the sun in his D.C. world has a piss yellow filter over it.

I prefer whedons use of more prcatical stuff. I still don't get why Zods armor was totally cgi when the iron man armor is even partially practical.

I agree...
Whedon's capabilities as a fast screenwriter and director -AND being a genuine comic fan made him 'the ONLY choice' for the first Avengers, particularly in how fast it had to be rewritten and put together.

With Avengers 2, visually it's more dynamic and it feels a bit more cinematic, as he had more time- but on the commentary, Whedon himself talks about how he generally shoots 'only what he needs to', and actually berated himself for taking too long on one of the more interesting shots in Avengers.

In an ideal world, Whedon in charge of scriptwriting and rewrites, perhaps directors like the Rousso brothers directing.

So,
Again.... will be REALLY interesting to see if we get a mediocre mess in JL or the best of both worlds - great script and visuals- with JL.

[Metallo]

I agree that Age of Ultron was a better looking film. It's got more style and better use of the format. The first one worked because Whedon pulled off what fanboys said couldn't be done. He juggled multiple characters in a team up movie. Marvel studios deserved credit for pulling off what people said couldn't be done in a multi film buildup. Like you said his strength is character work and ensembles. He even worked on the script for the first X-men movie. They used almost non of his material but it's obvious why they hired him.

[crazy_asian_man]

Aug 31, 2017 16:50:31 GMT -5 Metallo said:

I agree that Age of Ultron was a better looking film. It's got more style and better use of the format. The first one worked because Whedon pulled off what fanboys said couldn't be done. He juggled multiple characters in a team up movie. Marvel studios deserved credit for pulling off what people said couldn't be done in a multi film buildup. Like you said his strength is character work and ensembles. He even worked on the script for the first X-men movie. They used almost non of his material but it's obvious why they hired him.

Oddly, I always found the attack of the alien creatures in Avengers 1 to feel very tv movie like- maybe the one-liners softened it up too much, versus the (imo) more effective last act of Avengers 2- (though I would have liked it if Tony had faced more conflict from within the team for unleashing Ultron than that 1/2 second where Thor takes him by the throat). There was one VERY intense deleted scene where Cap stops an alien creature from attacking a station wagon family, that I think REALLY would have added more of a feeling of threat and danger to the whole sequence.

On another note, would love to see the Whedon script for X-men one day.... (As well as his Batman script).... hopefully it gets released.

After seeing a video of how X3's script was adapted, I'm very, very scared at how the "Dark Phoenix" film will turn out. Have a feeling it'll be the film that gets the X-men property returned to Marvel Studios.

[Metallo]

Me too. Kinberg seems to either not get it or fox is pinching pennies and he's having to downsize the scale of it all. Making the Phoenix a split personality tied to Jeans mutation misses the entire point of what the entity is. Setting most of the story on earth instead of much of it in space wastes the whole thing and makes the same mistakes movies like green lantern, motu, and to a lesser extent Thor made.

It's a mistake to do Dark Phoenix now because they haven't built to it properly. I'd be like Marvel doing Infinity War if the Thor and GOTG movies didn't exist. Now fox wants to "ground" it and leave out most of the cosmic elements. Worst of all we don't even know this Jean grey and these new younger Xmen yet. Scott and Jeans love story was a major part of Dark Phoenix saga and that hasn't even been estwbleshed yet.

Both Avengers movies and even Justice League all have the same problem of making the army of bad guys they face faceless disposable Cannon fodder that they can all destroy without responsibility or remorse while keeping the film PG 13. Lots of big movies are doing this now. It's pretty lazy. They can mow down dozens of these facelsss bad guys in cgi sploogefests with no work out into thInking about it.

[crazy_asian_man]

Sept 1, 2017 12:20:30 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Me too. Kinberg seems to either not get it or fox is pinching pennies and he's having to downsize the scale of it all. Making the Phoenix a split personality tied to Jeans mutation misses the entire point of what the entity is. Setting most of the story on earth instead of much of it in space wastes the whole thing and makes the same mistakes movies like green lantern, motu, and to a lesser extent Thor made.

It's a mistake to do Dark Phoenix now because they haven't built to it properly. I'd be like Marvel doing Infinity War if the Thor and GOTG movies didn't exist. Now fox wants to "ground" it and leave out most of the cosmic elements. Worst of all we don't even know this Jean grey and these new younger Xmen yet. Scott and Jeans love story was a major part of Dark Phoenix saga and that hasn't even been estwbleshed yet.

Both Avengers movies and even Justice League all have the same problem of making the army of bad guys they face faceless disposable Cannon fodder that they can all destroy without responsibility or remorse while keeping the film PG 13. Lots of big movies are doing this now. It's pretty lazy. They can mow down dozens of these facelsss bad guys in cgi sploogefests with no work out into thInking about it.

Agreed.... choosing the Dark Phoenix story feels like a misguided 'grab' for what the studios think the fans want to see right away- without a script that supports the context of why those characters and stories were so powerful in the comics to begin with.

They made that mistake with Venom in Spiderman 3,
They made that mistake with using Doomsday in BvS,
It was a bit of a mistake with Black Widow in Iron Man 2,
(though they've come out on top with Marvel's long game with BW)

If Kinberg is promising a cheap X-men, and the studio feels like they can 'guide' him..... what a disaster in the making.

But then again- Fox has renegotiated Jennifer Lawrence's, Macavoy's, and Fassbender's contracts... so it can't be THAT cheap, one would think.'

Hard to see another scaled down Dark Phoenix story working.... and it's hard to see a giant epic being allowed that would work all in one film, too.

Still.... I've said it before, even if it turns out to be a "Superman IV" situation..... I'm glad that we'll be able to see the cast one last time as the characters, if this is the last time.

[Metallo]

Most of the budget is probably going to pay those actors. Lawrence doesn't come cheap and unless she took a pay cut she's not worth it. She's not bringing people to the theater to see these movies. Apocalypses abysmal US box office is proof of that.

I didn't mind black widow in iron man 2. She made a lot of her earliest appearances in iron man comics. I felt the movie just didn't use the character that well. She represented the big problem of the film.

[crazy_asian_man]

Sept 2, 2017 7:02:10 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Most of the budget is probably going to pay those actors. Lawrence doesn't come cheap and unless she took a pay cut she's not worth it. She's not bringing people to the theater to see these movies. Apocalypses abysmal US box office is proof of that.

I didn't mind black widow in iron man 2. She made a lot of her earliest appearances in iron man comics. I felt the movie just didn't use the character that well. She represented the big problem of the film.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall on the decision making for X-men: Dark Phoenix....

While I applaud 20th Century for not rebooting completely at this point- the choice of doing Dark Phoenix so soon seems extremely foolish, and I do wonder if J.Law's threat that all three actors either work together or nobody's in is/was a reality and influenced things at all....

I don't have high hopes at all for the next X-men movie after seeing how the heart of the movie was so gutted in Apocalypse- it had a fine setup, I thought, with Magneto--- but the middle and last act just needed more character scenes for us to care, and it just wasn't paid enough attention to. (The mall scene would have helped, but it needed far more).

Killing off Mystique and/or Quicksilver might have given the movie more of a purpose by the end, but it felt too much like Fox trying to have their cake with all the characters and trying to eat it , too. As a result, the movie has a good buildup for a few characters with insubstantial payoffs- to me, that's what killed the movie the most.