Superman 1 is an unbeatable classic

[crazy_asian_man]

If Lester had done it they would have been even bigger hick stereotypes.

There probably would have been some kind of a gag like one of em dropping a moonshine jug on his foot as Superman flew over. Real Hee Haw stuff.

Agreed. Donner's shot was fun.... but keeps the reverence for the character. Lester has fun at the expense of making the character less godlike.

[theoj]

Finally saw STM on the big screen when I was 16 in 1994 at a local Saturday morning matinee for £1 - loved it - original, unaltered version.

But the best experience ever was in 2008 at the London BFI National Film Theatre for STM 30th Anniversary - great cinema, big screen, amazing sound (it was the 2001 new version) - but it was sold out and the atmosphere was brilliant - all the laughs and cheers in the right places - and I started everyone clapping at the end as Reeve smiles at the camera!

Please bring this back to the NFT more regularly!
It's a Wonderful Life gets an annual Xmas release... do the same with STM!!!

[ye5man]

Theo, which performance did you go to, Mid week (think it was on a Monday) or the Saturday matinee?

[crazy_asian_man]

Footnote:
Recently showed STM to a couple of young relatives (6 and 7)--- They LOVED it--- Laughed hysterically at all the right spots, in breathless awe during some of the rescues, and got nervous, shouting at the screen "Hurry Superman, hurry!" when he was going to save the kids on the schoolbus and particularly when he was going to try to save Lois....

But then got a little confused and less enthusiastic- more puzzled than anything else by the time reversal. One of them said, "If you spin the world around, you can reverse time?". After this emotional rollercoaster of the end, ("Is she dead or not dead?"), it didn't seem to give them the 'yea!' moment of victory, but more of a 'huh/wth?' moment on their faces.

They still love STM now.....but not thrilled about the time-reversal ending. Hm.

[booshman]

Apr 8, 2012 18:27:42 GMT -5 theoj said:

But the best experience ever was in 2008 at the London BFI National Film Theatre for STM 30th Anniversary - great cinema, big screen, amazing sound (it was the 2001 new version) - but it was sold out and the atmosphere was brilliant - all the laughs and cheers in the right places - and I started everyone clapping at the end as Reeve smiles at the camera!

I took my brother and sister with me to that showing! Special times, it was an amazing experience.

[Conor]

Myself, Indo and Ral went to a showing two years ago. Was brilliant! I still have a photo I've been meaning to post! Where is the thing though is the question!!

[crazy_asian_man]

Myself, Indo and Ral went to a showing two years ago. Was brilliant! I still have a photo I've been meaning to post! Where is the thing though is the question!!

I don't know how others post their pics- I used photobucket, a free service, then copy/paste the image link... (If this is what you mean)..

I wish I took photos of the lines around the block for when Superman came out at the theatres here. Was definitely a different time. No cellphones at the time, just people who were all excited about waiting for the event, forced to eventually chat about it with the person next to them. Was very cool.

[theoj]

I think I went to the STM screening on the Monday (it was definitely a weekday) evening at the London NFT.

Does anyone know of any other classic movie screenings in cinemas around London soon?

Cos at the moment it's all crap!! (Besides the new Norwegian film Headhunters which was brilliant - better than Dragon Tattoo!)

[monkeymagic]

They tend to do not bad stuff at the Prince Charles Cinema. Link below:
www.princecharlescinema.com/index.php
See if they have anything that takes your fancy.

[theoj]

Just checked it out thanks!

Damn - missed the Flash Gordon Quote-Along screening tonight!
Upcoming events...

Indy Trilogy, BTTF Trilogy, Die Hard Trilogy, Bugsy Malone!

[crazy_asian_man]

Just viewed a commercial with a review quote saying that the Avengers was "The greatest superhero movie of all time".

It is a pretty awesome film.....BUT.... it made me think of this thread.
Does it beat the classic STM?

And, I"m thinking- 'well, not really...'- in at least a few ways...not the least of which is the knee-jerk thought: "Apples and Oranges"- but even so, if one were to compare the two...

#1: The filmmaking is fast, fun, and great in Avengers- but not all the sequences are as sharply shot/edited as STM, where the producers were complaining about Donner being SUCH a perfectionist about every shot.

#2: The tools of filmmaking were/are different. I don't know if Whedon made the most out of everything gotten directing-wise, (I'd argue his writing skills are legendary, but directing wise, his images and sequences aren't quite on the level of James Cameron or Speilberg, whereas Donner on a good day I think can go toe to toe with either)- but the action sequences had the benefit of CGI technology that Donner didn't have, so that Donner and Baird arguably had to do double-duty in making sequences gripping and jaw-dropping without necessarily all the tools that could be conceived and executed far more easily today.

As an example:

I keep looking back that the helicopter rescue and thinking: "Well, frame by frame, would the advantage of CGI make this same sequence any more compelling NOW than back then?"---

And, outside of perhaps making the crowds bigger than they were that gather underneath the daily planet (looking at the sequence a gabillion times for fan cutting ideas makes some things start to stand out a little) & sharpening the fx shots a little- I'd have to say, "not really".

At the same time:

Not every action sequence in Avengers was quite milked for all its money's worth. When looking at a movie like "Raiders of the Lost Ark", every action sequence- like the truck chase towards the end of the film- can be still looked at and taken apart to study for how it's orchestrated.

Avengers runs a lot faster- (and admittedly had a much different set of challenges to deal with)- but the action sequences at times go by SO fast that one gets the impact of the scenes (ie the Thor/Hulk battle), when it could be a longer sequence that could have had more juice/touches to it..... but then again, it's like asking perhaps for too much for a movie that's so full of comic book riches and moments that it's getting a little greedy.... but just saying, about comparing sequences in STM (or Raiders) and Avengers.... different times, different set of circumstances...speaking of which

#3: The style is far different, for a different different time. STM is about MILKING in nostalgia and moments- (which gives it its beauty--- I wonder if the minute or so sequence of Clark and his mom looking out over the wheat fields with the Williams' music in the background and the camera panning would ever survive a cutting room floor nowadays)- whereas with Avengers, it's glorious- but it has so many apples in the air, that it's packing in as much as it possibly can within it's 2 1/2 hour time frame.

Similiar to the Capt. America line in the movie talking about the past, there's stuff gained by a superhero movie made in 2012, but there's also stuff lost from the old-fashioned filmmaking as well, and STM is the crown jewel of that imo.

Also- it's a difference of flavors.
DC was (for the most part) about larger than life heroes and myths,
Marvel was about down the earth, slightly off-beat and irreverent heroes.

Whedon is far too talented to not be able to make a good movie even on a bad day--- but Whedon was sort of like Nick Fury managing the actor Avengers in real life, having the impossible task of managing egos and budgets and story barriers that had to have come up- and making a damn great film at the end with exploding geek dream moments left and right....

But the strongest thing, of couse, was having a writer-director who was completely/hopelessly in love the the characters and having the writing superpower to still give it his own distinct offbeat comedic flavor--- which was not too dissimilar to Stan Lee's quirky aesthetics in designing the Marvel comics to begin with, either.

Whereas with STM was Donner falling head over heels for the character
and committed to making a masterpiece of the life story of Superman*, injecting his own 'heart on his sleeve' sentimentality, fully embracing the opportunity to pull emotional heartstrings to the limit. (I'd compare the heartbreaking death of Jonathan Kent to the suprisingly underplayed death of one of the characters in Avengers)
(*The debatable Lex approach and time travel thingee outside of that)

It REALLY is a 'Richard Donner film'--- just as the Avengers is Whedon's film wholly and completely- but as Donner's STM is/was the first EVER major motion picture adaption of a superhero comic, Whedon's Avengers is the first major motion picture adaptation of a superhero group with its characters coming from their own respective films.

STM had a sense of perfectionism to every frame, but in many ways STM is a love story, and Avengers is a war movie. (Although a brilliantly irreverent and geeky one at that)

Unbeatable in their own way, no small part because of each director's personal heart and touches to it. Nice to see that technology 1000 years from now can't really change it.

[atp]

In 30 years from now, will people still be talking about MOS?

[dejan]

Jul 15, 2022 5:37:01 GMT -5 atp said:

In 30 years from now, will people still be talking about MOS?

[crazy_asian_man]

Jul 15, 2022 5:37:01 GMT -5 atp said:

In 30 years from now, will people still be talking about MOS?

To be fair, if it was a 'good' film- it would be in the context of being in a sea of big budget superhero and fantasy films.

STM came out when making a man fly on screen was impossible and a big budget for this kind of film was unheard of (Star Wars had just come out two years before- while STM was already being made before it was known that a big budget fantasy film could be a box office hit).

Also, it was no longer 'an event' regardless of how good it would have been, with its timing. I do wonder if SR had come out much earlier if it would have gotten more box office- but... that one's an odd case. The story is so introverted and the spectacle was so toned down for its big budget I would have pushed for more spectacle injected into it, myself...

[Metallo]

Jul 15, 2022 5:37:01 GMT -5 atp said:

In 30 years from now, will people still be talking about MOS?

Maybe about how bad it is. 25 years later people still talk about what a franchise killing piece of crap Batman & Robin is and the DCEU is arguably the most epic missed opportunity in Hollywood history. When you screw up that big people rarely forget about.

[Metallo]

Jul 15, 2022 9:53:12 GMT -5 dejan said:

Jul 15, 2022 5:37:01 GMT -5 atp said:

In 30 years from now, will people still be talking about MOS?

LOL!

[crazy_asian_man]

Jul 15, 2022 21:30:39 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Jul 15, 2022 5:37:01 GMT -5 atp said:

In 30 years from now, will people still be talking about MOS?

Maybe about how bad it is. 25 years later people still talk about what a franchise killing piece of crap Batman & Robin is and the DCEU is arguably the most epic missed opportunity in Hollywood history. When you screw up that big people rarely forget about.

I'm still shocked how some folks whose opinion I respect really love MOS, though. John Campea seems like a great guy, Kevin Smith, too--- but I really can't comprehend how they feel like MOS is a good Superman film.

I wanted to like it. The trailer was great. Despite Watchmen being a disappointment- I was hoping Nolan was going to be a great mentor and we'd have a successful Dark Knight version of the Superman story as that seemed to be the intent.... but the bad scenes outweighed the good stuff. By a lot.

[Metallo]

Jul 16, 2022 16:22:38 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

Jul 15, 2022 21:30:39 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Maybe about how bad it is. 25 years later people still talk about what a franchise killing piece of crap Batman & Robin is and the DCEU is arguably the most epic missed opportunity in Hollywood history. When you screw up that big people rarely forget about.

I'm still shocked how some folks whose opinion I respect really love MOS, though. John Campea seems like a great guy, Kevin Smith, too--- but I really can't comprehend how they feel like MOS is a good Superman film.

I wanted to like it. The trailer was great. Despite Watchmen being a disappointment- I was hoping Nolan was going to be a great mentor and we'd have a successful Dark Knight version of the Superman story as that seemed to be the intent.... but the bad scenes outweighed the good stuff. By a lot.

Campea’s never been a huge Superman fan. I don’t think he’s looking beyond the superficial when it comes to MOS. LOTS of people didn’t. And remember Phantom Menacing IS a thing. I’ve got a feeling if someone pointed out the real flaws he’d try some counter argument like he always does with the “it was Superman’s first day on the job” bit.

As for Smith…I stopped respecting his opinion a long time ago. Between smoking too much weed, getting old and soft, and becoming a corporate shill you’ll rarely ever get his real opinion. If you get him really high you might get it…like he did when he originally reviewed BVS. He took that back real fast.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jul 16, 2022 20:03:56 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Jul 16, 2022 16:22:38 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

I'm still shocked how some folks whose opinion I respect really love MOS, though. John Campea seems like a great guy, Kevin Smith, too--- but I really can't comprehend how they feel like MOS is a good Superman film.

I wanted to like it. The trailer was great. Despite Watchmen being a disappointment- I was hoping Nolan was going to be a great mentor and we'd have a successful Dark Knight version of the Superman story as that seemed to be the intent.... but the bad scenes outweighed the good stuff. By a lot.

Campea’s never been a huge Superman fan. I don’t think he’s looking beyond the superficial when it comes to MOS. LOTS of people didn’t. And remember Phantom Menacing IS a thing. I’ve got a feeling if someone pointed out the real flaws he’d try some counter argument like he always does with the “it was Superman’s first day on the job” bit.

As for Smith…I stopped respecting his opinion a long time ago. Between smoking too much weed, getting old and soft, and becoming a corporate shill you’ll rarely ever get his real opinion. If you get him really high you might get it…like he did when he originally reviewed BVS. He took that back real fast.

Generally speaking, if someone can put up an opinion and put up what I feel is a reasonable argument for it- at the very least, I won't feel like I wasted time and try to see things from their perspective.

Campea's said things about films and what he felt were story problems at times that made me sit up and take notice. Same with Smith. I don't always agree, but they've said enough things about a variety of films that make me pause at times and ponder. It's not impossible if someone is being paid to have this or that review, but I take everything with a grain of salt anyways.

Those two guys in particular loving the film does seem odd, but even so, if they laid out exactly what they saw in it that strikes any chord, I'll open an ear.