I mean, I know it's definitely NOT a perfect film but it didn't piss me off as much as Fantastic Four (2005), X-Men: The Last Stand, Superman Returns and Batman & Robin did.
Printable View
I mean, I know it's definitely NOT a perfect film but it didn't piss me off as much as Fantastic Four (2005), X-Men: The Last Stand, Superman Returns and Batman & Robin did.
Honestly I've never understood the hate people have for it either. I liked it just fine. I didn't love it as much as The Avengers or anything, but I certainly liked it way better than, say, Captain America: The First Avenger, or The Hulk.
I think it's just the curse of being a Superman property.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMKA
Well, I think Man of Steel is definitely better than Watchmen, in terms of quality but that's just me.
I haven't watched it yet :shobon:
If you own a Blu-ray player (like I do) you should watch it on Blu-ray. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Freya
Watchmen was great.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_10921
Man of Steel was ok. I didn't hate it or love it. Definitely worse comic book movies out there. Tons worse. I guess the issue people (and myself) have with it is that Superman is just not a very interesting hero on the surface. He has some great storylines but no movie has yet really given Supes the proper treatment. Man of Steel had a nice origin story but it was fairly generic and you also had the generic villain, generic fights of destruction with tons of collateral damage, and generic Lois love angle. That makes for an entertaining film but nothing memorable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del MurderWatchmen was great.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_10921
Man of Steel was ok. I didn't hate it or love it. Definitely worse comic book movies out there. Tons worse. I guess the issue people (and myself) have with it is that Superman is just not a very interesting hero on the surface. He has some great storylines but no movie has yet really given Supes the proper treatment. Man of Steel had a nice origin story but it was fairly generic and you also had the generic villain, generic fights of destruction with tons of collateral damage, and generic Lois love angle. That makes for an entertaining film but nothing memorable.
I blame the so-called writer, David S. Goyer, for not creating a memorable screenplay but then again he is an idea and conceptual man, and nothing more. It's a good thing that Oscar-winner and Argo (2012) writer Chris Terrio is penning the script for Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice, and possibly Justice League Part 1.
By the way, I wanted you guys to look at Browncoat Eric's (a.k.a. blowshimselfupdude's) review of Man of Steel.
Enjoy!
I don't think I hated it but I didn't really enjoy it. I honestly much preferred Brendan Routh's Superman to Henry Cavill. He just wasn't very likeable in Man of Steel at all.
Also, the level of collateral damage in Man of Steel is just ridiculous. If ever a film had special effects just for the sake of it... then this was it.
I won't be watching it again.
I haven't seen Man of Steel (2013) as I'm not much of a film buff, but I enjoyed other superhero movies like Spiderman (2002), Iron Man (2008) and The Dark Knight (2008). I thought The Dark Knight (2008) was better than Batman Returns (1992) but not as good as the all-time greatest superhero film, Batman and Robin (1997). My favourite films are actually The Shining (1980) and Plan 9 From Outer Space (2011).
I don't think you'll find a lot of people here who can't play blurays.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_10921If you own a Blu-ray player (like I do) you should watch it on Blu-ray. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Freya
It was boring, I didnt feel anything from it. I didnt laugh, I didnt cry, I wasnt particularly surprised or wowed by the camera work, musical score or fight choreography. Much like superman himself it was just bland. As has been said it's not to worst superhero movie out there, it was just safe and uninspiring.
I guess the reason why I like Man of Steel (in spite of David Goyer's so-called writing) is because it's about Superman dealing with an alien invasion. In fact when Zod shows up on Earth, it's like a 1950's sci-fi invasion movie but with Superman thrown into the mix.
This movie was just Transformers level buffoonery.
Man of Steel wasn't terrible by itself (and was pretty decent as far as Superman movies go), but what disappointed me most was the missed potential. It could have been a lot better. Between the overly-forced plot points and the damage-for-the-sake-of-damage fight scenes, it just needed to be put together more cohesively.
Also, Watchmen was great.
Superman is boring by default. I liked Lois & Clark, but otherwise, eh, it's hard to really be cheering someone on when they are so freakin' overpowered in the first place. It's like cheering on Usain Bolt for beating a disabled kid in a race. "But this time, Usain Bolt has a broken ankle!" Oh no. Now he might win by less. Whoopdeedoo. With Lois & Clark the focus was more on watching the challenge of him being a normal guy rather than beating the big bad guy.
You know, another way to look at Man of Steel is it's like a modern retelling of Superman II but with more evil Kryptonians trying to take over the world, and Superman has to stop them.
It wasn't Christopher Reeve's Superman. That's what people's main beef was with it as far as I can tell. These people also either forgotten or never watched the cartoon because that show was full of city wide destruction all the time. Man of Steel was probably the first Superman movie to come along that actually had a realistic Kryptonian fight and didn't have to rely on little green rocks to weaken him because believe it or not he DOES have a rogue gallery that canmatch him in strength if we can just get past Zod and Lex Luthor!Well, not match per se, don't know who I'm trying to fool there. But enough to have a half decent fight as long as they don't rely on the whole "I was holding back the whole time" when he makes his comeback. Which they already did with Man of Steel so they're off to a good start there.
They need to develop Clark Kent more as a character. His alter-ego is supposed to be the one we can relate to. Superman is the guy you aspire to be, and they're the same smurfing person. That's why I'm a fan of the guy in the first place, and I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
However, that tornado scene was bad and they should feel bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToriJ
It might have been better if Jonathan Kent had died of a heart-attack but that would've drew comparisons to the first Christopher Reeve Superman movie.