Man of Steel wraps; deemed "toss up" as a success

[crazy_asian_man]

Sept 10, 2013 11:33:27 GMT -5 atp said:

Which flopped more: SR or MoS?

imo:
financially, SR 'flopped' more.
creatively, MOS 'flopped' more.

[theoj]

We are being way too unfair on MOS.
Personally I love it and it's much more enjoyable, entertaining and watchable than SR, yet perhaps not as well made... If you know what I mean.

Maybe SR had a better script and a better director. But MOS has so many great things going for it, and at the top of that list is Henry Cavill who I think is brilliant in an understated way and will only prove to be even greater in MOS 2.

One disappointing thing about the MOS universe is that we will never get as far down the line as where SR 2 may have taken us. And although its great to see a reboot of the origin story, I think most of us are satisfied enough with the origins told in S1&2 and would have been pleased to see how the story developed in SR 2.

I feel bad for Brandon Routh.

[EnriqueH]

I need to see MOS again.

My first impression was that Cavill did good, but the more I think about it, the less memorable he seems.

[Rod]

i am just feeling indifferent to MOS now that some time has passed.
MOS 2...whatever.

i have watched 4 times.
2 of them with a girl. we were exausted at the end of the movie.

then we watched pacific rim last week. 2 times also.
man, we had a great time, laughs, some lines that we remembered, even remembered the song (!!)
it is such a positive, simple movie with a iron man feeling.
i couldnt avoid to think "this is the feeling of a movie i wanted to see superman in"

i dont think superman needed to be like an iron man wannabe movie but it needed to be more uplifting, especially at the end.

and the use of cgi in pacific rim looked much better.

this is undeniable to me.

[Metallo]

Sept 10, 2013 19:11:47 GMT -5 EnriqueH said:

I need to see MOS again.

My first impression was that Cavill did good, but the more I think about it, the less memorable he seems.

I liked Routh more. I actually expected Cavill to be much better on talent and experience alone but...I didn't think he was.

[EnriqueH]

I can see that.

Routh had more of that likeable presence despite his obvious inexperience.

He channeled Reeve without imitating.

Unfortunately, they wrote him as a creepo and that didn't help.

[Ollie W]

It's funny but the release of Man of Steel has made me feel better about Superman Returns.

It's not necessarily any better a movie but I appreciate more of what Singer was going for.

The similarities are obvious though in that both films set to portray a more worldly character and failed.

[EnriqueH]

I stand corrected:

MOS didn't have a 61% decrease after Week 1.

MOS had a 64% decrease after Week 1.

[Shane]

the more i think about it the more i think i enjoy SR more

[EnriqueH]

SR and MOS are the SIII and SIV of this generation. The problem is they skipped STM and SII and went straight to the flawed Superman movies.

SR was a bad idea done well; MOS was a good idea done badly.

[atp]

Now that MoS has also failed, maybe there is still hope someone will fund an SR2 with Routh.

[ye5man]

ST had a great first week unlike SR, which flopped on its first day

[Deleted]

After watching Tomahawk's edit, I'm liking SR better.

[Metallo]

I think at the very least SR might be boring but all that "unSuperman like" behavior doesn't look as glaring after MOS. The excuse in that movie actually makes sense even if people don't like it. With MOS the rookie excuses don't fly. They just gloss over so much for a bunch of loud cgi shit on the screen to draw in the teens and kids. And Snyers explanations only compound the bullshit and make it look worse.

[atp]

Sept 22, 2013 9:00:42 GMT -5 Metallo said:

I think at the very least SR might be boring but all that "unSuperman like" behavior doesn't look as glaring after MOS. The excuse in that movie actually makes sense even if people don't like it. With MOS the rookie excuses don't fly. They just gloss over so much for a bunch of loud cgi shit on the screen to draw in the teens and kids. And Snyers explanations only compound the bullshit and make it look worse.

MoS pisses me off more than SR because it really had no excuse for being so disappointing.

[EnriqueH]

MOS really had no excuse.

The last 3 Superman movies prior, (SIII, SIV, and SR), were an exercise in what NOT to do. And on the 30th anniversary of Superman III, MOS made it apparent that Hollywood still hasn't figured out how to make a GREAT Superman movie.

Since Superman II, Superman has an absolutely AWFUl track record: 0-4 in truly satisfying fans.

What makes it worse is that MOS not only had 3 previous lessons in what not to do, its flaws were amateurish and easily fixable. I heard prior to the release of the movie that Nolan pretty much left it all up to Snyder. And it shows. I don't know what the heck Nolan did for MOS, except lend his name, because the movie had NONE of the sparkle, energy, elegance, or intelligence of his Bat movies.

Essentially having Nolan produce is the same as having "Quentino Tarantino PRESENTS" on the cover: it's meaningless.

And to make matters worse, all the good-will from the Batman films are now ERASED because they replaced Christian Bale.

[atp]

Nolan also probably helped force a nonlinear structure with flashbacks.

[Deleted]

I'm glad you guys aren't in charge and are in a minority, otherwise it really would have flopped and we wouldn't be getting a sequel.

It's cool that we might have the first Bat film in years where Batman can speak and I won't feel embarrassed.

[EnriqueH]

Kris, are you saying you're more embarrassed by Bale's voice than MOS' week 2 box office 64% decrease?

[crazy_asian_man]

Sept 22, 2013 14:35:24 GMT -5 @kris said:

It's cool that we might have the first Bat film in years where Batman can speak and I won't feel embarrassed.

I enjoyed the first two Nolan Batman films, but even I thought Bale's sore throat Batman voice was too much.

On the other hand- we don't know yet if Batfleck will follow with the same throatiness for the Batman persona for Batman vs. Superman.
(Let's hope not)

On another note: I forget.... IS the title officially Batman vs. Superman, Superman vs. Batman, or just the symbol from Comicon?

[crazy_asian_man]

I'm glad you guys aren't in charge and are in a minority, otherwise it really would have flopped and we wouldn't be getting a sequel.

Harry Knowles from aintitcoolnews.com LOVED MOS- but it's odd that he seems to be the only one who ALSO LOVED SR.

Rare to have someone who is in both camps.
I really like parts of MOS, but fell other parts weren't done well (as currently edited).
I love most of SR, but feel like they under-delivered and slightly confused with choices as well.

Anyhow- if a sequel is well done, I'll have more hope for the JL and other sequels.

No advantage at this point to hoping it's a bad sequel.

I am, however, curious what exactly were the parameters (if they had official ones) for 'disappointment', 'moderate success', 'success', 'blockbuster' at WB. Do all superhero films at this point HAVE to make as much as TDK/Avengers?

[EnriqueH]

I find that SR was on the right track by recognizing that a reboot was not absolutely necessary, that Donner laid a great foundation, the music didn't need a fresh start, and that some good drama was at the heart of good Superman movies, but it was a bad idea because they recycled the villain's plot, had no supervillain, injured Superman too many times, and it bored people.

[Jimbo]

Sept 22, 2013 14:35:24 GMT -5 @kris said:

I'm glad you guys aren't in charge and are in a minority, otherwise it really would have flopped and we wouldn't be getting a sequel.

Well, would you call the next movie a sequel? It's a movie that has Superman and Batman. Superman has been relegated to a "Freddy vs. Jason" -style movie. More like a spin-off. WB doesn't have faith in a "MOS 2".

Here comes the drawback of the Nolan-Bats success: Batman = money. Superman didn't reach some plateau the suits had wanted, so in comes Batman, and MOS2 is no more.

[crazy_asian_man]

Sept 22, 2013 16:51:09 GMT -5 Jimbo said:

Sept 22, 2013 14:35:24 GMT -5 @kris said:

I'm glad you guys aren't in charge and are in a minority, otherwise it really would have flopped and we wouldn't be getting a sequel.

Well, would you call the next movie a sequel? It's a movie that has Superman and Batman. Superman has been relegated to a "Freddy vs. Jason" -style movie. More like a spin-off. WB doesn't have faith in a "MOS 2".

Here comes the drawback of the Nolan-Bats success: Batman = money. Superman didn't reach some plateau the suits had wanted, so in comes Batman, and MOS2 is no more.

Well.... it could work, but 'work' isn't exactly the same as making a movie with high artistic ambitions. I recently re-watched an interview with Goyer that was done after Batman Begins, and it's now HILARIOUS what he says about a "Batman vs. Superman" movie, given that he's now in charge of writing one. I'll see if someone has put that up somewhere online and link back to it- but his comments then sound funny as heck now, given the situation....

[crazy_asian_man]

Sept 22, 2013 16:47:07 GMT -5 EnriqueH said:

I find that SR was on the right track by recognizing that a reboot was not absolutely necessary, that Donner laid a great foundation, the music didn't need a fresh start, and that some good drama was at the heart of good Superman movies, but it was a bad idea because they recycled the villain's plot, had no supervillain, injured Superman too many times, and it bored people.

I agree for the most part.

Still- it's not a total loss just because it didn't get a sequel (although it certainly cost the world a Singer-directed Xmen 3)... Again, if Singer didn't try to connect SR to the Donner films, I wonder if we would have gotten the box set, the RDC, & its extras AT ALL.... so SR at the very least seems to have achieved that.

Anyhow, while MOS's strategy of going for the reboot and focusing on the action over the romance and drama may have worked great (enough) for them for one film, it'll be interesting to see if it's desirable for them for the long haul- For sure, focusing on that hasn't hurt the Transformer films (which I'm not a real fan of) at all.....financially, that is...