|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Oct 15, 2012 23:13:09 GMT -5
What's your gut telling you about the film at this point?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2012 23:31:04 GMT -5
I have a feeling it's going to be awesome.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Oct 16, 2012 1:20:58 GMT -5
A few entertaining scenes, but mediocre. And then once the novelty wears out, it will just suck ass.
I hope I'm wrong. The character deserves a good movie.
Zack Snyder, Len Wiseman, Paul WS Anderson, guys like these are one-trick ponies, until I see otherwise. Snyder made some CGI owl movie, fine, which I guess was to suck up to WB and show that he's "versatile". Whatever, Sucker Punch was a huge step back.
If Snyder somehow follows up Sucker Punch with an excellent Superman movie, then I will eat my words. But right now, I can't help but feel it will be like the Total Recall and (I assume) Robocop remakes.
|
|
|
|
Post by eccentricbeing on Oct 16, 2012 1:38:59 GMT -5
I'm with Kevin. When we saw the trailer on the IMAX screen with that sound....when Superman breaks the sound barrier, I felt an immense premonition that we're going to get some amazing stuff we've never seen in a live-action Superman movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt in the Hat on Oct 16, 2012 3:01:15 GMT -5
It'll be solid. Not the best movie ever, but its looking better than anything else Snyder has done. Cavill is probably going to give a decent superman too. It'll be good enough to get a sequel, definitely.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 16, 2012 4:27:18 GMT -5
I give Snyder tons of credit for getting a beautiful- LOOKING Watchmen movie made, after years of filmmakers coming and going. I imagine that MOS may have the same great intent, but just like Watchmen.... it's hard to imagine the drama not falling flat. His best film, 300, was more voiceover music video than anything else.
Nolan and Goyer did a fantastic job with the first two Batman movie, but his last one I thought was terrible.
I HOPE it's a great movie, but I imagine great visuals and cardboard cutout characterizations- much like how Watchmen turned out. Still, I guess it's better than nothing, but I'm definitely lowering expectations.
|
|
Melv
New Member
Posts: 546
|
Post by Melv on Oct 16, 2012 4:58:17 GMT -5
My feeling is it's going to be pretty amazing. Everything about it bar Snyder is great so I think he might deliver with the right people around him.
For action/visuals, I don't think any other Superman film will compare. As an overall package I'm not sure.
But I really think this could be the one to make Superman 'cool' again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Oct 16, 2012 14:00:13 GMT -5
My gut feeling is "solid."
I have very little to base this on. I trust Goyer based on Batman Begins. I have no faith in Snyder, but all accounts are that he isn't making a "Snyder-style" movie with this one.
I expect we'll get good performances out of all of the main characters. Including/especially Cavill.
I expect we'll get enough awesome spectacle of the kind we've never really seen in a Superman flick to keep me interested.
The spoilers from that toy commercial indicate we're going to get at LEAST two absolutely insane set pieces of Kryptonian tech/weaponry, and that doesn't count the actual stuff that will take place on Krypton.
I bet the music will be good. Even damn good.
Anyway, this is my "gut feeling." I'm honestly surprised it's even THIS positive, considering where my head was a year or so ago about this. The bottom line is, MOST big superhero flicks are at least "solid" these days. Disappointments like Green Lantern have become the anomaly, not the norm.
|
|
MerM
New Member
Posts: 6,665
|
Post by MerM on Oct 16, 2012 14:56:50 GMT -5
Yeah, I've got a good feeling. Probably won't be a Batman Begins game-changer, but I think it'll be a worthwhile movie.
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 16, 2012 15:17:20 GMT -5
Cautiously optimistic.
|
|
Shane
New Member
Posts: 2,031
|
Post by Shane on Oct 16, 2012 16:09:08 GMT -5
It will be awesome (i hope)
hopefully supes throws his weight around this time
|
|
|
|
Post by SupermanUF on Oct 16, 2012 16:38:18 GMT -5
It will be awesome (i hope) hopefully supes throws his weight around this time See my post in the Man of Steel thread. From the toy commercials, looks like he may very well be. Minor spoilers. |
|
Shane
New Member
Posts: 2,031
|
Post by Shane on Oct 16, 2012 17:00:10 GMT -5
i will stay clear thanks mate
|
|
Kirok
New Member
"You have failed this city!"
Posts: 3,179
|
Post by Kirok on Oct 16, 2012 19:47:00 GMT -5
I think it's going to be awesome.
It NEEDS to be.
|
|
Shane
New Member
Posts: 2,031
|
Post by Shane on Oct 16, 2012 23:58:36 GMT -5
please?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2012 13:20:23 GMT -5
I dont have enough to go on to make an informed opinion, so very much on the fence.
One thing I will say is I'm pissed off we haven't even had a new publicity still since the original photo that was released.
|
|
Rod
New Member
Believe it or not
Posts: 498 
|
Post by Rod on Oct 20, 2012 20:20:11 GMT -5
i think its going to be awesome.
somehow this video i've just seen reminds me of superman...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2012 20:47:07 GMT -5
I have a good feeling. The first trailer and the leaked convention footage allayed some of my biggest concerns. It looks phenomenal, and not in a totally CG blockbuster way. That shot from the camera mounted on the side of the bus in the leaked footage looks great, and chances are good they actually crashed a bus to get it. There are aerial and crane shots of real ships and armies. I think, at the very least, we're going to get a technical achievement. How everything else unfolds is a question mark; Goyer has delivered all-time great work in the past. His weakest work is.....pretty weak, but his best work is superb. The director's previous films are mostly the opposite of good, but I'll give him credit for really stretching himself for this. Man of Steel certainly doesn't look like a typical Zack Snyder film.
Michael Shannon as Zod. I can't even begin to properly describe the amount of goodwill I have for this movie, just based on that casting decision alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 20, 2012 23:37:44 GMT -5
Regardless of who's cast as Supes, I'm still seeing this and hoping for the best... But at the same time, I have to admit if Routh were kept for the reboot as Supes, I'd feel the same thing that you feel about the movie going in as you feel about Shannon being cast as Zod. Snyder I know has said repeatedly that he's changing his style for the film, but I'm thinking that he AT LEAST has to make the movie look as visually stunning as most of his other films, even if the dramatic scenes are a giant question mark at this point. One thing that I do wonder aloud: Was casting against the norm with a redhead for Lois and Fishburne for Perry White his decision or WB's? That's one of the things that just feels like change for the sake of change, rather than something that changed because it's integral to the script, (kinda skeptical if it is) but --- like everything else, I guess we'll see soon enough if the movie at the end is so good that it justifies any questionable decisions ...  |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Oct 21, 2012 1:23:44 GMT -5
any bets on whether krypton explodes?
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Oct 21, 2012 8:45:24 GMT -5
Can anyone here give me an instance of when change ISN'T "change for the sake of change?"
No?
Didn't think so.
OH! I know! It's not "change for the sake of change" when it's a change that the person crying about it approves of! I got news for everyone:
Jor-El having white hair in STM? Change for the sake of change. Jor-El wearing white jammies and not a green and yellow version of the Superman costume? Change for the sake of change. The Superman symbol not being a giant "S" but being a Kryptonian family crest? Guess what? Change for the sake of change!
How about the Marvel flicks! Bucky not being a child, but being Cap's best friend who defends him from bullies? CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE. Man, that really sucked, didn't it? I really wish that Bucky was just a Robin rip-off and a dubious early teenager who for some reason gets to hang out on an army base and...oh, wait...no, that didn't suck at all.
Man, I really wish that Thor was truer to his roots as a SHAZAM RIP-OFF and that half the movie was Dr. Donald Blake banging his magic stick on the ground to turn into Captain Marv...I mean Thor. That's CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE! It sucked! Oh, wait...no it didn't.
Man, how come Aeschylus didn't ONCE mention Achilles in The Agamemnon? The Iliad is a CLASSIC, and then this hack, Aeschylus comes along and writes this play featuring characters from it, and doesn't ONCE mention the best guy from it. He made Agamemnon way too sympathetic, and he TOTALLY invented that crap about him sacrificing his daughter, which Homer never mentioned ONCE. CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE!!!!!!!1111
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Oct 21, 2012 8:54:57 GMT -5
Can anyone here give me an instance of when change ISN'T "change for the sake of change?" No? Didn't think so. OH! I know! It's not "change for the sake of change" when it's a change that the person crying about it approves of! I got news for everyone: Jor-El having white hair in STM? Change for the sake of change. Jor-El wearing white jammies and not a green and yellow version of the Superman costume? Change for the sake of change. The Superman symbol not being a giant "S" but being a Kryptonian family crest? Guess what? Change for the sake of change! How about the Marvel flicks! Bucky not being a child, but being Cap's best friend who defends him from bullies? CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE. Man, that really sucked, didn't it? I really wish that Bucky was just a Robin rip-off and a dubious early teenager who for some reason gets to hang out on an army base and...oh, wait...no, that didn't suck at all. Man, I really wish that Thor was truer to his roots as a SHAZAM RIP-OFF and that half the movie was Dr. Donald Blake banging his magic stick on the ground to turn into Captain Marv...I mean Thor. That's CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE! It sucked! Oh, wait...no it didn't. Man, how come Aeschylus didn't ONCE mention Achilles in The Agamemnon? The Iliad is a CLASSIC, and then this hack, Aeschylus comes along and writes this play featuring characters from it, and doesn't ONCE mention the best guy from it. He made Agamemnon way too sympathetic, and he TOTALLY invented that crap about him sacrificing his daughter, which Homer never mentioned ONCE. CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE!!!!!!!1111 |
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Oct 21, 2012 9:05:32 GMT -5
What's that word you like to throw around? Starts with an R...
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 21, 2012 13:47:55 GMT -5
I don't get your rage, Val. I can understand it when people put the cart before the horse, and are such sticklers to the original material that they get surface details perfect, but the movie itself doesn't really work or falls flat (ie Snyder's Watchmen), but that's not what we're talking about here... ...at least it's not what I'm talking about. "CHANGE JUST TO CHANGE THINGS"= "IF IT AIN'T BROKEN, DON'T FIX IT". Or... "CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE"="LAZY WRITING BECAUSE THE CHANGES DON'T SEEM TO ADD ANYTHING, BUT JUST TAKE THINGS A STEP FURTHER AWAY FROM THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL FOR NO APPARENT GOOD REASON". Donner's Krypton I wasn't thrilled about... initially. Then, as the movie progressed, and we saw the beautiful image of the starship, and the Fortress of Solitude, and all the images that followed using the crystals as a basis, it MADE SENSE. It wasn't, "CHANGE FOR CHANGE SAKE!!!!" (since you like these caps and exclamation points to this phrase, I'm putting these down).  The same for the giant 's' being a family crest, rather than an unexplained 's' that appears (as it does in the comics) when he first appears. It was an improvement with a creative logic behind it. It gave a logical reason as to why he would appear to the public with this image on his chest, that wasn't there initially with the original comics, but totally could fit. A purpose behind the change. It planted the idea that it was coincidental that it looked like an 's', and it was an improvement. If the costume had been converted to stripes in Donner's adaptation, or a 't' or an 'x', then would I be wrong in saying that you'd also be saying that it was: (a) unnecessary to change it, (b) seeming to have no added benefit to change it.... not an arbitrary change. Donner had reasons that I could see for many of his changes to the comic. Any many of them BETTER than the comic, and most of the times I could see in the scheme of things why he did what he did. Even Luthor- who I HATED as a camp villiain initially in STM- made perfect sense to me how/why he was played as he was in the Donner parts of SII. I didn't agree with all the choices Donner made, but I could see the benefits that came with them. You might feel that they were changed just for change sake, but, I don't agree. I could point to changes that I felt improved the material. In Captain America, things could have gone both ways with Bucky. I would have been fine with him as the young sidekick, but the movie made a good argument as to why it could/should have been done as an older adult friend. For Superman's new costume design: Is it broken? Is it flawed? Does it NEED changing? Or Lois Lane as a brunette? Is it necessary to change it? Does it ADD anything to change it? Or is it just for the heck of it to make things feel fresh and different? As far as Thor not being Donald Blake, it's a matter of preference. I think there was a lot lost in not taking on elements of the earlier Thor comics in their adapting Thor when he WAS Donald Blake, (apparently it didn't suck to comic readers who were buying it for years when he was, too) .... but there are so many years of the comic, I just went along with what they chose to include/ not include in their adaptation. They chose not to complicate their story by leaving out Blake, fine. I understood why they made the change, but I could get the reason. If you gave Thor an Afro or made him bald, I would be screaming: CHANGE FOR CHANGE SAKE!!!!! Anyhow, we don't need to agree on everything of course, but I hope I'm being clear on my view of it: From now on, I'll say, "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" if it's preferred to "change for change sake". And.... I think I've always ended any criticism of the Snyder film with: "if the movie turns out great, any changes might be fine". I have a hunch we're probably agreeing on basically the same things, but perhaps it's my phrasing. |
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Oct 21, 2012 16:11:43 GMT -5
I rest my case.
|
|
