Gandy
New Member
Admiral
Owner & Creator of Superman Cinema
Posts: 17,343
|
Post by Gandy on Jul 14, 2013 8:07:51 GMT -5
I have been watching the first season of Knight Rider. I hadn't seen it properly in twenty years, but I'm surprised how well it played. It's got its problems, but it has charm. There's this scene where a kid gets excited about the car and Michael takes him for a spin. No hint of cynicism, not even political, there was this crystalline purity about it. It had heart and soul. It put a smile on my face. This is what I want from a Superman movie. Put my smile on my face and STOP apologising.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 14, 2013 8:37:12 GMT -5
Knight Rider was cheesy but it was a lot fun. The Hoff and Daniels had great chemistry and Knights story was really cool. It had something special going for it since it outdid all its super vehicle competition in the 80s and none of the KR follow ups lived up to the original show. The 08 KR was trying too hard to be "modern" and "trendy" and ended up being dull.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823 
|
Post by atp on Jul 14, 2013 8:44:22 GMT -5
Was KITT a Cylon?
|
|
|
|
Post by everybodysrockin on Jul 14, 2013 10:20:21 GMT -5
I for one don't think Superman is ruined.
Sure since Superman II the movie's have steadily declined it quality and, in my opinion, hit rock bottom with Superman Returns. But there's been plenty of other Superman related media to hold up the integrity of the character (S:TAS is the best example).
I did enjoy MOS. The movie has some serious issues and there is a lot I don't agree with, but overall it is not a bad film. Whereas I dislike SR more and more after repeated viewings, I find myself liking MOS more and more with each viewing. For one, Cavill is easily the best actor to portray Superman since Reeve. Is he better? Hard to say at this point, but he's damn good. The cast all around was fantastic. The music, while not on the level of Williams' score, is good. When you sit down and think about, there's a lot to appreciate about this movie. While imperfect, it's a lot better than what we could have gotten. And it will be nice to not have to wait 10+ years for a new Superman movie either.
As it's been said before, Superman gets way more scrutiny than any other superhero. The same things I hear people complain about with Superman are the same things they will then praise in The Avengers (Thor is a god, Superman is godlike, but somehow Thor is more relatable?). It's a shame there's such a double standard, but MOS seems to have at least gotten the ball rolling in having more people think differently about Superman.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 14, 2013 10:31:25 GMT -5
While I don't want Marvel/Disney to own EVERYTHING in the world- at this point, I'd sure like WB to just sell off their characters to any company that knows what they're doing. I don't understand how the investors can be at all happy with WB, given that they own just as many- if not more- properties than Marvel.... and have maybe a tenth* (?) of their success, outside of Nolan Batman. (*Ok, that's just a wild guess on the percentage, but you know what I mean)
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 14, 2013 10:33:52 GMT -5
Thors arrogance and pride was always his (VERY human) flaw. The Marvel heroes of the sixties often had some kind of humanizing character flaw. the criticism (which I don't think has been true about Superman for decades) is that Superman's not just too perfect power wise but character/personality wise too. God like power wielded by a bland goody two shoes and all that. People say they can't relate to him at all. I think that's absurd and I don't think that's accurate or fair but that's what some people usually say.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 14, 2013 10:40:47 GMT -5
While I don't want Marvel/Disney to own EVERYTHING in the world- at this point, I'd sure like WB to just sell off their characters to any company that knows what they're doing. I don't understand how the investors can be at all happy with WB, given that they own just as many- if not more- properties than Marvel.... and have maybe a tenth* (?) of their success, outside of Nolan Batman. (*Ok, that's just a wild guess on the percentage, but you know what I mean) Lol. At this stage I almost wish another big company did own DC as a whole. Almost. I'd also hate to see all the film rights split up but it would at least give other lesser known characters a chance at the big time. It's not like WB has done the shared universe thing anyway so it doesn't matter. If we'd had to wait for WB we'd never have seen anything done with Swamp Thing for years. It was Fox that had the initiative to first do something hugely successful with Batman outside of comics. WB will never sell any film rights to their characters to another studio after what happened with RED. If they can't make movies that make money I'm sure they don't want other studios making money off their characters either. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 14, 2013 11:33:14 GMT -5
I agree.... I think it's all in execution. They don't HAVE to make him an outcast X-man (which he kind of is in MOS)to make him 'interesting'.
While I get that character flaws can help make a character seem more exciting-
Superman's personality SHOULD be 'boring'- as the nice guy that always finishes last because he's got a bigger eye on higher ideals. The whole charm to the original Clark Kent design Siegel/Shuster came up with, I thought- was that if Superman had no powers, women might not want to give them a second look, as he's 'too nice', and they'd rather flirt/be with the bad boy who's more exciting.
(Actually, it was one of the cornerstones of the Lois & Clark series. The idea that nice boring guys are worthwhile. It's the women that have to get their act together and look beyond the glasses and the 'bad boys'.)
Thus, why Clark Kent was constantly dissed. Clark was the same guy as Superman, without the flash and the powers, but nobody gave a damn about Clark because on the surface he didn't have a lot to exploit.
People might not relate to SUPERMAN as being able to be that nice and goodhearted in real life, but people should be able to relate to the once-in-awhile rare person who crosses their path that is so nice, it's hard to believe, but is genuine. The type of character who seems non-judgmental of others, but helps out quietly, without too much attention to himself, and stays in the background. We've all met him/her now and then.
It takes longer to pull off on film and in a story right I think than a Wolverine who gets pissed off constantly, but it can be done without changing him. It just needs a proper touch in writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 14, 2013 11:39:55 GMT -5
I for one don't think Superman is ruined. Sure since Superman II the movie's have steadily declined it quality and, in my opinion, hit rock bottom with Superman Returns. But there's been plenty of other Superman related media to hold up the integrity of the character (S:TAS is the best example). I did enjoy MOS. The movie has some serious issues and there is a lot I don't agree with, but overall it is not a bad film. Whereas I dislike SR more and more after repeated viewings, I find myself liking MOS more and more with each viewing. For one, Cavill is easily the best actor to portray Superman since Reeve. Is he better? Hard to say at this point, but he's damn good. The cast all around was fantastic. The music, while not on the level of Williams' score, is good. When you sit down and think about, there's a lot to appreciate about this movie. While imperfect, it's a lot better than what we could have gotten. And it will be nice to not have to wait 10+ years for a new Superman movie either. As it's been said before, Superman gets way more scrutiny than any other superhero. The same things I hear people complain about with Superman are the same things they will then praise in The Avengers (Thor is a god, Superman is godlike, but somehow Thor is more relatable?). It's a shame there's such a double standard, but MOS seems to have at least gotten the ball rolling in having more people think differently about Superman. You thought SR was worse than SIV? |
|
|
|
Post by everybodysrockin on Jul 14, 2013 11:54:09 GMT -5
See Superman IV at least had Reeve, all the original cast, a great score, etc. It is a bad movie and it's more nostalgia than anything else that makes me like the movie, but it at least feels like a SUPERMAN movie. His closing monologue at the end pretty much sums up everything that Superman is supposed to be.
Superman Returns just didn't feel like a Superman movie to me. I really have no interest in seeing a monosyllabic, depressed Superman do nothing for 2+ hours. It's a shame because I think somewhere there is a good movie in SR, it was just handled very very poorly. I kinda laugh when I hear people refer to MOS as being too dark. SR is WAY darker. There's a scene of Superman being beaten to a pulp, borderline tortured, and stabbed for cryin' out loud. Despite all of this though, it at least has a great score.
Don't get me wrong, SIV is bad and there are a lot of bad/cheesy things in it. But it at least gets the character of Superman right.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 14, 2013 12:07:18 GMT -5
Well...I do understand the criticism, even though I loved what they did with it. It definitely did take Superman in a more adult path--- definitely not a kids' film.
It is "Passion of the Christ" meets "Superman", for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 14, 2013 14:48:56 GMT -5
See Superman IV at least had Reeve, all the original cast, a great score, etc. It is a bad movie and it's more nostalgia than anything else that makes me like the movie, but it at least feels like a SUPERMAN movie. His closing monologue at the end pretty much sums up everything that Superman is supposed to be. Superman Returns just didn't feel like a Superman movie to me. I really have no interest in seeing a monosyllabic, depressed Superman do nothing for 2+ hours. It's a shame because I think somewhere there is a good movie in SR, it was just handled very very poorly. I kinda laugh when I hear people refer to MOS as being too dark. SR is WAY darker. There's a scene of Superman being beaten to a pulp, borderline tortured, and stabbed for cryin' out loud. Despite all of this though, it at least has a great score. Don't get me wrong, SIV is bad and there are a lot of bad/cheesy things in it. But it at least gets the character of Superman right. Actually, I don't disagree with you. Christopher Reeve elevates SIV to be sure, though it is a painfully embarrassing movie to watch. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 14, 2013 15:19:11 GMT -5
Some people might disagree that IV got the character right with his disarmament push. Personally I think the point was Superman made a mistake and realized it. The point they were trying to make was in that and what he finally realized
Reeve was the rare actor in this type of role that elevated the material. To be fair to Routh and Cavill thought Reeve had had three movies to know how to play it. His instincts on Superman were pretty fine tuned by IV. BUT on the flip side other actors have nailed it on the first try with one movie. Evans and Chiklis were right on in the FF Movies even though the script was weak and Tim Story was out of his league. There are other examples. Mark Strong was a great Sinestro in a lame film. Routh and Cavill weren't terrible though. Certainly not the worst Supermen.
|
|
|
|
Post by everybodysrockin on Jul 14, 2013 16:08:36 GMT -5
While the disarmament thing is a bit out of character, it did work on some scales. As Metallo said, the point of it all was the fact that Superman made a mistake and realized that. Things remained, as he put it, on the brink despite his acting with the best of intentions.
At the end of the day, a Superman movie should be a kids movie. It should have a sense of fun to it. A "Passion of the Christ", more adult Superman just seems fundamentally wrong to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2013 19:46:19 GMT -5
Ugh, I'm sick of kids movies. I'm sick of the idea that movies have to be for all audiences. I'm an adult. I want to watch adult movies (I don't mean porn, although I got no problem with porn either). Why can't I have an adult Superman movie? I don't need him to be dark and brooding, but don't make him a naive children's character. Let Pixar and Disney do that shit.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 14, 2013 21:53:45 GMT -5
Returns tried to be pretty adult in its themes and presentation in a lot of ways. Maybe more than any Superman movie. The execution was just mediocre.
I'd love it if someone had the balls to do a well done and more mature take on Superman. A shame MOS didnt do it either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ollie W on Jul 14, 2013 22:21:25 GMT -5
I think John Williams said it best when interviewed about Superman the Movie in retrospective. He said that there would be Superman movies in the future but he didn't think they would ever get it quite that right.
|
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Jul 15, 2013 0:43:31 GMT -5
There was so much obsessing over relevancy that they lost track of who Superman was and tried to apologize for he is by making him darker.
STM may have imperfections, but SR and MOS make it easy to look back at STM and SII with a lot of admiration.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 15, 2013 7:52:01 GMT -5
I think John Williams said it best when interviewed about Superman the Movie in retrospective. He said that there would be Superman movies in the future but he didn't think they would ever get it quite that right. Hey I agree with him. STM wasnt a Hollywood movie but even Hollywood has changed so much from that era. That's why great movies like the ones from that era would never get made now. We're in a superhero movie golden age but its a shame its happening in one of the most artistically void periods of mainstream cinema. |
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Jul 15, 2013 12:31:04 GMT -5
Agreed. Since when was Superman about people kicking the crap out of him? Biggest mis-fire in the series IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 15, 2013 18:55:26 GMT -5
It depended on the execution, imo.
Mostly I felt Singer got it right, but I know it just rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. The idea of killing off the kid in the sequel, though--- that feels/felt like it was going too far for my own tastes... if it really was what they were going to do....
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 15, 2013 18:57:52 GMT -5
I agree that Superman movies shouldn't have to be just for kids.
And, I'm actually shocked that WB allowed a Batman movie like Dark Knight to happen, and that's certainly not for kids. (Though I'm disappointed WB didn't allow Bruce Wayne to be killed off as Nolan supposedly originally wanted for TDKR).
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Jul 4, 2022 14:35:15 GMT -5
Needs a reboot
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 6, 2022 1:20:07 GMT -5
Agreed. Since when was Superman about people kicking the crap out of him? Biggest mis-fire in the series IMO. Pretty sure Man of Steel and BvS topped that misfire. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 7, 2022 23:48:55 GMT -5
Agreed. Since when was Superman about people kicking the crap out of him? Biggest mis-fire in the series IMO. Pretty sure Man of Steel and BvS topped that misfire. True- but Superman as "Passion of the Christ" seemed to be somewhat of a natural extension of Donner/Mank's push to have Supes' story mirror biblical stories. But- yeah, Man of Steel's casual endangering of others and being oblivious to citywide devastation was a much bigger misfire. |
|
