Man of Steel

[Batman]

Saw this. Good movie.

very actioned packed, mind

[Saint_clark]

I thought it was awful, couldn't wait for it to end.

[Glasgow_Saint]

superb film

[Latheal]

Amazing film. Can't understand some of the critics reviews. It's almost as if some of them either haven't watched the film, or just had it in for it since the start.

 

Easily best film of the year so far for me.

[Batman]

it was certainly a spectacle.

Sets up the next one with the little hints to Lex Luthor

 

one thing though, thought the Lois Lane element was not that well done

[pap]

Just back from watching this myself. I really enjoyed it. It's the first Superman film that actually makes sense. The first Richard Donner film is very good, but lets itself down massively in the final act due to the way Supes saves the world ( spinning it backwards by flying really fast to reverse time ). I thought the second film was amazing when I was a nipper; as I've grown older I can see its flaws, and even as a kid, I hated the magic "snog" power Supes has at the end, causing Lois to forget everything. Superman III is enjoyable, but isn't very serious and is largely Richard Pryor's movie. ms pap says we are not to talk about Superman IV. I'm inclined to agree. Superman Returns was so in love with the Donner films it offered nowt new except the unfulfilled promise of doing something with Superman's nipper.

 

So, Man of Steel. I'm not going to spoil too much, but let me say that immediately, it addresses one of the biggest problems with the Superman universe, the fact that no-one seems to know that Clark Kent is the man in the cape, something that seems particularly ridiculous with some of his closer colleagues. The comics were always a lot more savvy about this; Superman was made out to be a bit of a genius, so was able to make decoy robots to fool his colleagues. None of the other films really did too much to address this big problem. In Man of Steel, some people know and won't tell. He does a reasonable job of out-foxing the authorities, but even if they did find out, what are they going to do?

 

The film is largely about Krypton and its legacy. As many will have seen from the trailers, General Zod is the antagonist. I really enjoyed the Kryptonian opening; the lore they establish makes a lot of internal sense, especially with regard to Zod's motivations on Earth. Anyone expecting a retread of Superman II is going to be pleasantly surprised. Despite sharing many similarities, Michael Shannon's Zod is a different animal to the character that Terence Stamp made famous. The whole thing makes a hell of a lot more sense than most other blockbusters I've seen recently. At no point did I feel that something was happening just to facilitate the next cool thing happening, although at times, the fight scenes get dangerously close to overlong, but then something very inventive happens and all is forgiven.

 

As much as I loved the comedic punch of Ned Kelly's "Otisberg" in the first movie, I'm a lot happier with what has been achieved here. This is the first Superman film that does the scope of the character and his world justice. His is a broad, big budget universe. Snyder did a mostly top job of depicting that, better than anyone else who has approached it (especially Singer's effort). Difficult not to give this both thumbs up.

Edited 16 June, 2013 by pap

[pap]

it was certainly a spectacle.

Sets up the next one with the little hints to Lex Luthor

 

one thing though, thought the Lois Lane element was not that well done

 

Was done loads better than any other movie.

[Saint J 77]

Just back from watching this myself. I really enjoyed it. It's the first Superman film that actually makes sense. The first Richard Donner film is very good, but lets itself down massively in the final act due to the way Supes saves the world ( spinning it backwards by flying really fast to reverse time ). I thought the second film was amazing when I was a nipper; as I've grown older I can see its flaws, and even as a kid, I hated the magic "snog" power Supes has at the end, causing Lois to forget everything. Superman III is enjoyable, but isn't very serious and is largely Richard Pryor's movie. ms pap says we are not to talk about Superman IV. I'm inclined to agree. Superman Returns was so in love with the Donner films it offered nowt new except the unfulfilled promise of doing something with Superman's nipper.

 

So, Man of Steel. I'm not going to spoil too much, but let me say that immediately, it addresses one of the biggest problems with the Superman universe, the fact that no-one seems to know that Clark Kent is the man in the cape, something that seems particularly ridiculous with some of his closer colleagues. The comics were always a lot more savvy about this; Superman was made out to be a bit of a genius, so was able to make decoy robots to fool his colleagues. None of the other films really did too much to address this big problem. In Man of Steel, some people know and won't tell. He does a reasonable job of out-foxing the authorities, but even if they did find out, what are they going to do?

 

The film is largely about Krypton and its legacy. As many will have seen from the trailers, General Zod is the antagonist. I really enjoyed the Kryptonian opening; the lore they establish makes a lot of internal sense, especially with regard to Zod's motivations on Earth. Anyone expecting a retread of Superman II is going to be pleasantly surprised. Despite sharing many similarities, Michael Shannon's Zod is a different animal to the character that Terence Stamp made famous. The whole thing makes a hell of a lot more sense than most other blockbusters I've seen recently. At no point did I feel that something was happening just to facilitate the next cool thing happening, although at times, the fight scenes get dangerously close to overlong, but then something very inventive happens and all is forgiven.

 

As much as I loved the comedic punch of Ned Kelly's "Otisberg" in the first movie, I'm a lot happier with what has been achieved here. This is the first Superman film that does the scope of the character and his world justice. His is a broad, big budget universe. Snyder did a mostly top job of depicting that, better than anyone else who has approached it (especially Singer's effort). Difficult not to give this both thumbs up.

 

Good review, thanks pap. I am hoping to go and see it soon. The soundtrack sounded really epic in the trailers. What was it like in the film?

[pap]

Good review, thanks pap. I am hoping to go and see it soon. The soundtrack sounded really epic in the trailers. What was it like in the film?

 

It's going to take me a few views before I really appreciate the soundtrack. The old theme tune is so iconic that it won't easily be displaced, but I also understand why it had to go. Put it this way; as giddy as I was hearing John Williams score during the opening credits to Superman Returns, I was less happy with getting a 1980s style Superman film afterward. One of the briefer comments on aintitcool is beautifully succinct - what the f**k was Singer (director of Returns) doing?

 

Clean break, innit?

[Saint_Jonny]

Watched it last night. Got so bored by the end my arse fell off. IT FELL OFF.

 

Load of over produced tosh. There are only so many times you can see a couple of invincible dudes going at it hell for leather.

 

Shame, because I liked the cast, it just is severely lacking the human touch. By the end I just didn't give a toss, I just wanted it to end.

[iansums]

Just back from watching this myself. I really enjoyed it. It's the first Superman film that actually makes sense. The first Richard Donner film is very good, but lets itself down massively in the final act due to the way Supes saves the world ( spinning it backwards by flying really fast to reverse time ). I thought the second film was amazing when I was a nipper; as I've grown older I can see its flaws, and even as a kid, I hated the magic "snog" power Supes has at the end, causing Lois to forget everything. Superman III is enjoyable, but isn't very serious and is largely Richard Pryor's movie. ms pap says we are not to talk about Superman IV. I'm inclined to agree. Superman Returns was so in love with the Donner films it offered nowt new except the unfulfilled promise of doing something with Superman's nipper.

 

So, Man of Steel. I'm not going to spoil too much, but let me say that immediately, it addresses one of the biggest problems with the Superman universe, the fact that no-one seems to know that Clark Kent is the man in the cape, something that seems particularly ridiculous with some of his closer colleagues. The comics were always a lot more savvy about this; Superman was made out to be a bit of a genius, so was able to make decoy robots to fool his colleagues. None of the other films really did too much to address this big problem. In Man of Steel, some people know and won't tell. He does a reasonable job of out-foxing the authorities, but even if they did find out, what are they going to do?

 

The film is largely about Krypton and its legacy. As many will have seen from the trailers, General Zod is the antagonist. I really enjoyed the Kryptonian opening; the lore they establish makes a lot of internal sense, especially with regard to Zod's motivations on Earth. Anyone expecting a retread of Superman II is going to be pleasantly surprised. Despite sharing many similarities, Michael Shannon's Zod is a different animal to the character that Terence Stamp made famous. The whole thing makes a hell of a lot more sense than most other blockbusters I've seen recently. At no point did I feel that something was happening just to facilitate the next cool thing happening, although at times, the fight scenes get dangerously close to overlong, but then something very inventive happens and all is forgiven.

 

As much as I loved the comedic punch of Ned Kelly's "Otisberg" in the first movie, I'm a lot happier with what has been achieved here. This is the first Superman film that does the scope of the character and his world justice. His is a broad, big budget universe. Snyder did a mostly top job of depicting that, better than anyone else who has approached it (especially Singer's effort). Difficult not to give this both thumbs up.

 

Saw it yesterday and thought it was fairly good, agree with much of Pap's review. However I would say that IMO the action scenes were way too long, I found myself losing interest.

[pap]

Saw it yesterday and thought it was fairly good, agree with much of Pap's review. However I would say that IMO the action scenes were way too long, I found myself losing interest.

 

I'm almost with you on the action scenes. I left Matrix Reloaded feeling much the same way; but I've grown to love them on re-watches. The freeway chase is probably my all time action scene of all time; and that's purely through rewatch.

[Batman]

talking about action films

 

Terminator 5 is going to be made

why the fuk for?

[Glasgow_Saint]

talking about action films

 

Terminator 5 is going to be made

why the fuk for?

 

He did say he would be back

[pap]

Watched it last night. Got so bored by the end my arse fell off. IT FELL OFF.

 

Load of over produced tosh. There are only so many times you can see a couple of invincible dudes going at it hell for leather.

 

7Shame, because I liked the cast, it just is severely lacking the human touch. By the end I just didn't give a toss, I just wanted it to end.

 

Not saying you're wrong. I'm even going to pitch in with your defence. RedLetterMedia, those dudes who I often agree with, eviscerated this movie. They really didn't like it. Some of their biggest problems involved the wholesale destruction on offer, and the fact that Superman didn't seem particularly arsed about saving people. They questioned whether the source material was even valid material for a darker treatment, and were quite upset at the notion of Superman just destroying US spy satellites! As always, well worth a view; especially if you don't like the movie

 

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-man-of-steel/

 

This is one of the rare occasions where RedLetterMedia and I deviate.

 

The Superman of the movies has always been a fraction of what the comic book version became. TV adaptations like Lois & Clark or Smallville pulled heavy on the soap opera angle. If you liked those shows, fair play to you. I tapped out on Smallville at season eight. I'd had enough - eight years of watching doey-eyed, increasingly super-powered young adults simultaneously suppress their sexual urges was about my limit. I like the original movies, but they all have major problems. What I'd never got is a live action

interpretation of what this alien was actually capable of, or a true sense of the scope of his universe. The closest I've ever seen off the pages of a comic has been Justice League Unlimited; the animated series. It's all down to budget, of course. In the case of Superman II, especially so; a film abandoned by it's original director. Singer's Returns almost got there, but the final act was a disaster, undoing some spectacular work earlier in the movie.

 

Man of Steel ain't perfect. There are bits that are emotionally heavy handed. Those expecting the chaotic consequences of consecutive chortlesome calamities, such as in Superman III, will be disappointed. There are around two funny lines in the entire movie. Do I buy it as a Superman origin movie? Defo, and more so than anything that came before. There's no Smallville or Superboy ****** here. When we meet Supes as an adult, he's not even aware of his full powers. He doesn't know he can fly. The flashbacks illustrate his great finesse in solving Earth-based problems, but I did not expect him to enter a super-powered battle in the middle of a literal Metropolis and pluck cats from trees or scoop every civilian that happened to be in one of the buildings that came down as a result of the Kryptionian carnage (outsourcing, eh?). The man is in a debut punch-up with a super-powered genetically engineered military nemesis. Don't hate a noob

 

Besides, there's no indication as to whether Supes will get away with being partially responsible for the impromptu re-modelling of Metropolis. Bats certainly didn't get an easy time in any of his movies, and he only wrecked a few roofs and a major public transportation system. The eagle-eyed will have noticed LexCorp was on those trucks. My prediction: Lex Luthor shouting about Superman's destructive capability from the rooftops in the next movie. There may yet be fallout. The Kryptonian's perceived danger to the world, which rests entirely on his goodwill and compliance, is a theme that is frequently explored in the comics.

 

Leads me to my last points. I love the fact that the film-makers did everything they could to separate Superman from the concept of all-American hero. Superman is supposed to represent the best of humanity, not a specific culture, This Man of Steel is an independent! I know this slice of the source material won't feel too familiar to those with an appreciation of other live action interpretations, and I'll admit it's a little harsh - but for this self-proclaimed geek, Man of Steel is a bit of a triumph, and a long time coming.

[Saint J 77]

It's going to take me a few views before I really appreciate the soundtrack. The old theme tune is so iconic that it won't easily be displaced, but I also understand why it had to go. Put it this way; as giddy as I was hearing John Williams score during the opening credits to Superman Returns, I was less happy with getting a 1980s style Superman film afterward. One of the briefer comments on aintitcool is beautifully succinct - what the f**k was Singer (director of Returns) doing?

 

Clean break, innit?

 

Saw it on Sunday Night. Really enjoyed it. This is the tune from the trailer that I thought was very memorable.

 

[Sheaf Saint]

talking about action films

 

Terminator 5 is going to be made

why the fuk for?

 

As long as they don't just do another "Terminator goes back in time to kill John Connor" story then it could be good. Salvation left a lot of scope to explore the future war with the machines aspect I thought, and if it's done well (with due acknowledgement to the original timelines) then it could be very good.

[Batman]

As long as they don't just do another "Terminator goes back in time to kill John Connor" story then it could be good. Salvation left a lot of scope to explore the future war with the machines aspect I thought, and if it's done well (with due acknowledgement to the original timelines) then it could be very good.

 

duane johnson, AKA The Rock from WWE is going to be in it

[pap]

As long as they don't just do another "Terminator goes back in time to kill John Connor" story then it could be good. Salvation left a lot of scope to explore the future war with the machines aspect I thought, and if it's done well (with due acknowledgement to the original timelines) then it could be very good.

 

I like all of the Terminator films. Classic case of people getting p!ssed off because it didn't end the way people wanted it to. Terminator 3 was almost a disaster, but what a final act.