DaBeast on 26/6/2013 at 22:06
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Yeah Zod was great. Good casting. Film was so so with a much stronger start than end.
The effects were probably the best I've seen though. Even Ironman, Avengers et al suffer from occasional cartooning (and don't get me started on After Earth's Babylon 5 style rubbish) but this was just rock should.
And Zods sub Commander was smoking.
3/5
Zach Snyder can't seem to do pacing. His films are either too long drawn out or feel like its rushing along too quickly. Maybe another way to think of it is as there being so much filler in between action scenes, not enough of the right build up to make them pay off, or making it more violent to make it satisfying, which in Superman just doesn't work too well.
The characters of Zod and his chums seemed to depend on the viewer having seen the Donner movie. Like the chick in it has a sexy, dark almost gothic dominatrix thing going on. In this she gets what, two lines of dialogue, but you feel you already know the character since you've seen the old one. While the beardy dude didn't get much if any dialogue in the old movie, just serves as a big dumb thug warrior so we don't really need to see him talk or do anything other than hulk smash things.
If Zod is effectively birth programmed to defend Crypton/Cryptonites at all costs, why wouldn't he do anything to ensure Superman never dies, since he's carrying that genetic stuff? Or instead, collect and bend all the worlds scientific power into finding a way to extract and use that data to rebirth Crytonites? Just make him have a rage fit of vengeance because the film needs that extra fight scene?The lighting, some costume design and definitely the score(run through a Zimmer filter) made me think of Mass Effect. Particularly the lighting in ME3; anyone else get this?
I didn't hate the film, but I expect it to be as memorable as the last attempt at a reboot. It also could have done without those one or two cheesy scenes. Iron Man 3 was more enjoyable.
SubJeff on 26/6/2013 at 23:13
Quote Posted by DaBeast
If Zod is effectively birth programmed to defend Crypton/Cryptonites at all costs, why wouldn't he do anything to ensure Superman never dies, since he's carrying that genetic stuff?Honestly, I don't mean to be a jerk but
if you missed this plot point, the fact that he doesn't need to be alive for them to get it all out and use it in the birthing chamber then I have to start wondering how much attention you were paying to the film at all and therefore how much weight one should give to your assessment of the pacing.For the record - I thought the pacing was fine. The more I think about it the more I realise I liked this film. It had a certain atmosphere, a serenity and solidity, and Superman himself was perfectly cast. I really like his take on the role; its much calmer and somehow chilled out than the previous two actors. Its like he won't hit someone who is being a jerk and threatening not because he knows its the wrong thing to do but because he's just outright above that crap, because he IS, not because he has some moral code he
thinks he has to stick to. In that way he's more of an alien than Reeves ever was, and less of a preppy do-gooder.
DaBeast on 27/6/2013 at 00:15
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Honestly, I don't mean to be a jerk but
if you missed this plot point, the fact that he doesn't need to be alive for them to get it all out and use it in the birthing chamber then I have to start wondering how much attention you were paying to the film at all and therefore how much weight one should give to your assessment of the pacing.For the record - I thought the pacing was fine. The more I think about it the more I realise I liked this film. It had a certain atmosphere, a serenity and solidity, and Superman himself was perfectly cast. I really like his take on the role; its much calmer and somehow chilled out than the previous two actors. Its like he won't hit someone who is being a jerk and threatening not because he knows its the wrong thing to do but because he's just outright above that crap, because he IS, not because he has some moral code he
thinks he has to stick to. In that way he's more of an alien than Reeves ever was, and less of a preppy do-gooder.
It's example of the kind of bad writing in too many films. Not Star Trek bad, but its close enough to irk me.
He might not hit a guy who's being threatening etc, but he can destroy his truck, possibly ruin his livelyhood when a slap in the face might have set him straight. Again, I didn't hate the film, but I didn't see much actual character in the characters.
SubJeff on 27/6/2013 at 04:58
You can rubbish any film in that way. Even Alien has a massive plot hole, like huuuuge, if you want to be finicky.
No one has vehicle insurance in Super world? Being duffed up by a tough guy would change that guys behavior? Over the wonder and awe he'd feel over what did happen? Ooookay.
And what days about getting to Superman's body quickly is not implied in the film at all, and is completely at odds with what you first said. Big backtrack bro.
You didn't want to like it and probably never would have. Don't watch these films.
I'm not saying it was great (I only give it 3/5 after all) but if you're going to criticise a film at least do it for more than huuurrr no good.
froghawk on 27/6/2013 at 05:17
You guys really think the writing in the new ST film was THAT bad? Go watch ST: Generations or ST: Nemesis again. At least the new one doesn't even pretend to take itself seriously.
Kuuso on 27/6/2013 at 18:15
Harmony Korine's Spring Breakers is the best film of the year this far. It is fucking hilarious and oh-so on-point about exploring the hollowness of modern day culture. It's pop poetry. That scene with the piano by the pool... :D
It is even better, when you see all the comments from the people who have completely misread the whole movie.
Nicker on 27/6/2013 at 19:28
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Lego has been rubbish since about 2001. Shan't bother with this at all.
(
http://www.bricktestament.com/home.html) Blasphemy! Although admittedly, the book is usually better than the movie.
Avoid like a plague of zombies warning, (
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2184339/) The Purge. Another first draft which went straight to shooting. A clumsy, heavy-handed, morality play that bashed you so hard with the message that the USA is a dysfunctional society which glorifies violence, you want to punch the director's lights out.
The Purge might find limited utility as a diet aid for bulimics.
I didn't have such high expectations for Star Trek as I did for Prometheus, so the glaring plot holes were not as painful and obvious.
"Star fleet is under attack from a devious insider. Let's convene all the top brass in a glass box atop a stack of glass boxes." Followed by said super criminal... "Now my enemies are conveniently gathered in one vulnerable place I will expose my self to unnecessary danger trying to pick them off by peppering them with 22nd century ammunition that kicks less ass than a 22 cal. target round." Argh! Maybe it was worse than I thought, but I enjoyed it anyway.
Quote:
Morte - Because Hollywood test screens trailers, and then ask audiences what they would've liked to have seen more of. Inevitably, the answer is more of the goddamn movie. So basically a complete failure to understand that advertising is supposed to make you want the product, not provide a substitute.
Case in point, the trailer for The Lone Ranger that played before Star Trek. I think I will stop watching trailers for the same reason I stopped reading back covers. I want to enjoy the story the author wrote.
DaBeast on 29/6/2013 at 17:06
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
You can rubbish any film in that way. Even Alien has a massive plot hole, like huuuuge, if you want to be finicky.
No one has vehicle insurance in Super world? Being duffed up by a tough guy would change that guys behavior? Over the wonder and awe he'd feel over what did happen? Ooookay.
And what days about getting to Superman's body quickly is not implied in the film at all, and is completely at odds with what you first said. Big backtrack bro.
You didn't want to like it and probably never would have. Don't watch these films.
I'm not saying it was great (I only give it 3/5 after all) but if you're going to criticise a film at least do it for more than huuurrr no good.
The first two alien films where such...pinnacle movies(can't think of a better way to put it) and so fresh for the time, people continually reference them to this day. It's maybe a bit easier to be more forgiving of errors in those films. Can't really think of any right now, but I'm sure they're there. Do you think people will be thinking of Man of Steel in 10 years time?
Third time, I didn't hate it. I realise I've kinda shat on it a bit so I'll reiterate:
* I enjoyed some of the action scenes.
*
I like that he chose to go flashback to childhood instead of a more traditional progression. It wasn't what I'd expected from a superman origin story, and I like being surprised. So thumbs up there.
* What I didn't like was the, in my opinion, lack of good character progression and the excessive destruction scenes. A lot of what happens would be better suited to a Hulk film
*
The oilrig scene was great, probably the only time the character showed any emotion as he struggled to save the chopper.* The other emotion scene
when he let his dad die in the tornado, I guess it was emotive, but the whole scene felt so forced.* Pacing, instead of a more thoughtful constructed screenplay, characters appear in scenes for exposition (nothing new, but in a major film it should be done a bit better) or serve no sensible purpose other than to position them for later scenes(again, it should be handled better).
getting Louis on the mothership thing just so Jor'El can tell her how to use the hyperdrive thing, that was a bit weak no?.*
Superman is supposed to have a hard time killing people, its part of what makes him superman. This I guess is why he screams at after the fisticuffs, but they didn't really build up to it at all. There should have been a scene or something to explain why we should care about how Cal feels about it. When the scene happened, for a moment I thought it was an editing issue, that Zod actually killed those innocents.* Some of the cheesy lines of dialogue just made me cringe. My friend walked out at the
He's kinda hot sir scene, not like he missed much since it was nearly over anyway.
We're allowed to have different opinions man. I guess you really enjoyed it, but it didn't rock your world? Thats fair. I enjoyed bits of it, didn't like bits of it. so yea, 3/5 from me too.
froghawk on 29/6/2013 at 21:23
The childhood flashback thing is also used in Batman Begins. So are the cheesy one-liners.
(I haven't seen MoS yet, but i don't plan to in theaters as I hate basically everything Snyder has ever done and everything Goyer writes on his own)
SubJeff on 29/6/2013 at 22:45
This Is The End was much better than I thought it would be.
