Also, we know the script and deleted scenes show the trio survived to be arrested, so although we didnt see it, we know the movies intent for them wasnt death.
Deleted scenes that are in.... no available format. Including the Donner Cut. If it was meant for them to be in there... why aren't they in the completely remastered, re-cut, original Directors version?
Cut scenes... are cut. If in a few years from now we see a cut scene where Zod lives in Man of Steel, we couldn't go back and say "SEEEEE! He was supposed to live!"
Also, we know the script and deleted scenes show the trio survived to be arrested, so although we didnt see it, we know the movies intent for them wasnt death.
Deleted scenes that are in.... no available format. Including the Donner Cut. If it was meant for them to be in there... why aren't they in the completely remastered, re-cut, original Directors version?
Cut scenes... are cut. If in a few years from now we see a cut scene where Zod lives in Man of Steel, we couldn't go back and say "SEEEEE! He was supposed to live!"
Thats interesting; did anyone actually say Zod was killed? Couldn't it be implied, but in MoS3 be shown he was just paralyzed by Kent. Something so drastic is why he cried.
Also, we know the script and deleted scenes show the trio survived to be arrested, so although we didnt see it, we know the movies intent for them wasnt death.
Deleted scenes that are in.... no available format. Including the Donner Cut. If it was meant for them to be in there... why aren't they in the completely remastered, re-cut, original Directors version?
Cut scenes... are cut. If in a few years from now we see a cut scene where Zod lives in Man of Steel, we couldn't go back and say "SEEEEE! He was supposed to live!"
Thats interesting; did anyone actually say Zod was killed? Couldn't it be implied, but in MoS3 be shown he was just paralyzed by Kent. Something so drastic is why he cried.
Way late on this one. Just saw it on BR and didn't like most of the film. Didn't care about any of the characters and the actor who played Superman can't act. Also, he's juiced up on steroids. Most of the women I know hate that look. Amy Adams was a terrible choice. The whole film was a "I'm sorry we didn't include a lot of fighting in Superman Returns so here's what you asked for. Fighting, fighting and more fighting." Disappointing as Zack Snyder's take on Watchmen was amazing. I'll take Superman Returns any day for it's character development and humanity. Then again I prefer the first Hulk movie by Ang Lee over the second one where we got more fighting, fighting and more fighting. I hope Singer's next X-Men flick retains the character development found in Superman Returns but I doubt it. The studio, and viewing audience, want fighting over any semblance of a coherent story and in order to get more work, Singer will have to deliver what they want.
I know we've dissected this movie like its a crime scene. And I will be the first to admit I could do with a little less disaster porn, but where was the character development overly lacking?
Its a nitpick on my part, but I'm not sure how Cavill's (reportedly by you) steroid use is a slight against the movie. If accurate, I doubt he's the only actor to do so. In fact, I'm sure it doesn't matter to as much to women anymore then fake boobs matter to men.
I'd also like to throw out there, I'd argue how much 'good' character development we got in that sequel. I think Singer tried to add a little too much to the Superman mythos & it backfired.
Matt, I found the relationship triangle between Supes, Lois and Richard interesting and complex in Superman Returns. Yeah, some people didn't like this "soap opera" angle but it was played out in the minds (and in our minds) of the characters. They were all good, decent people, caught up in a difficult situation in terms of their relationships. Lois was committed to Richard but loved Supes. Richard knew there were sparks flying between Supes and Lois and knew he couldn't compete. Superman respected Lois and Richard's relationship and despite his feelings, he would never force them to break up. All of this heart break was "shown" in the actions and faces of the actors. I thought it was a subtle performance.
In Man of Steel, I thought it was Jor-El's movie, not Kal's. Great action stuff but I think of Superman not as an action hero but as a person with compassion and who represents the best of humanity. He's an alien but he tries to be the best "man" he can be. All of that is based on his upbringing, how he was raised by Jonathan and Martha. I think they failed to illustrate how much of a positive influence his parents were.
Concerning the use of steroids, his physical appearance is just a matter of preference. I simply prefer the "swimmer's" look (Superman and Superman Returns) which I think enhances Supes humanity: he looks like a normal person, yet he is an alien. Others might say he should look like a bodybuilder since he is so strong. That makes sense too. I just don't like it.
While I tried not to let my fondness for the original Superman movie interfere with my enjoyment of Man of Steel, it just wasn't my cup of tea and I didn't even think it was a well scripted or acted film. I would have titled it "Hulk Smash!"
Matt, I found the relationship triangle between Supes, Lois and Richard interesting and complex in Superman Returns. Yeah, some people didn't like this "soap opera" angle but it was played out in the minds (and in our minds) of the characters. They were all good, decent people, caught up in a difficult situation in terms of their relationships. Lois was committed to Richard but loved Supes. Richard knew there were sparks flying between Supes and Lois and knew he couldn't compete. Superman respected Lois and Richard's relationship and despite his feelings, he would never force them to break up. All of this heart break was "shown" in the actions and faces of the actors. I thought it was a subtle performance.
In Man of Steel, I thought it was Jor-El's movie, not Kal's. Great action stuff but I think of Superman not as an action hero but as a person with compassion and who represents the best of humanity. He's an alien but he tries to be the best "man" he can be. All of that is based on his upbringing, how he was raised by Jonathan and Martha. I think they failed to illustrate how much of a positive influence his parents were.
Concerning the use of steroids, his physical appearance is just a matter of preference. I simply prefer the "swimmer's" look (Superman and Superman Returns) which I think enhances Supes humanity: he looks like a normal person, yet he is an alien. Others might say he should look like a bodybuilder since he is so strong. That makes sense too. I just don't like it.
While I tried not to let my fondness for the original Superman movie interfere with my enjoyment of Man of Steel, it just wasn't my cup of tea and I didn't even think it was a well scripted or acted film. I would have titled it "Hulk Smash!"
I find the character development of Kent as a stalker with a love child to have pushed me past the point of enjoying Returns. The love triangle was okay, but eliminate the kid & the movie jumps leaps & bounds.
I actually found this version of Superman to be most relatable. It also 'solved' some of the issues I had with the original movie.
As toward Cavill's look, his Kent traveled the globe looking for answers & working various jobs. I could easily buy his mass physique.
Its about 10 minutes into the disaster porn I find the movie to suffer. I would've liked to see less & more resolve with the climax of the fight.
In Returns, its just hard for me to overlook that damn kid.
In regards to "character development" or arc or lack thereof in MoS. personally I agree there was very little. Not that there nec needs to be or can be much in a superman movie at this point. But for mos, nobody learned anything, developed or changed. Lois was 2D and fake throughout. Pa kent lived and died a paranoid fearful man. Ma kent was a side supporting character with little to do but "support" but thats ok. Clark was pushed and pulled through the movie by everyone else. He didn't learn anything. Didnt learn to be a hero. He didn't decide to present himself to the world. He didnt become super or learn any life lessons etc. He simply declared in the end he'll help the world but on his own terms. I guess thats a sort of growth for him, but not very superman-ish. Did he learn anything from pa? that pa was right or pa was wrong? The villains were villains who just grew more villainous. Nobody else in the movie mattered enough to have any kindve arc. The only people effected by anything or that "learned" anything were the aweful humans and officials who needed to get past their xenophobic prejudiced ways (ungh). I dunno. I think MoS wasted a lot of potential and was just pretty empty in the end.
In regards to "character development" or arc or lack thereof in MoS. personally I agree there was very little. Not that there nec needs to be or can be much in a superman movie at this point. But for mos, nobody learned anything, developed or changed. Lois was 2D and fake throughout. Pa kent lived and died a paranoid fearful man. Ma kent was a side supporting character with little to do but "support" but thats ok. Clark was pushed and pulled through the movie by everyone else. He didn't learn anything. Didnt learn to be a hero. He didn't decide to present himself to the world. He didnt become super or learn any life lessons etc. He simply declared in the end he'll help the world but on his own terms. I guess thats a sort of growth for him, but not very superman-ish. Did he learn anything from pa? that pa was right or pa was wrong? The villains were villains who just grew more villainous. Nobody else in the movie mattered enough to have any kindve arc. The only people effected by anything or that "learned" anything were the aweful humans and officials who needed to get past their xenophobic prejudiced ways (ungh). I dunno. I think MoS wasted a lot of potential and was just pretty empty in the end.
I'm not THAT familiar with Superman in general, but isn't the "super" aspect more how he's perceived then how he feels? Wasn't the name "Superman" given rather then self-proclaimed?
I know I'm beating a remnants that use to be a dead horse, but his journey from being an outcast & trying to find his place in the world to finding it was character development. Through flashbacks involved situations where he wasn't like everyone else.
Also, we know the script and deleted scenes show the trio survived to be arrested, so although we didnt see it, we know the movies intent for them wasnt death.
Deleted scenes that are in.... no available format. Including the Donner Cut. If it was meant for them to be in there... why aren't they in the completely remastered, re-cut, original Directors version?
Cut scenes... are cut. If in a few years from now we see a cut scene where Zod lives in Man of Steel, we couldn't go back and say "SEEEEE! He was supposed to live!"
Not exactly my point or what I meant. Just saying we know what we know and cant un-know it. And what we know shows the kryptonian villains were A- originally meant to live. B- even though that point wasn't made (because they cut it), what we were shown wasn't conclusively "death". A reasonable assumption maybe, but not a certainty as presented. What i was saying is I think with what we know and had been shown to that point, its just as much if not more reasonable to assume they lived. But there is a difference between the two. Donner didn't instead decide to show the villainous trio splattering against the ground. Snyder didn't pull the camera away and just let us assume what happened. Plus they've said Clark killed zod. That they debated on it during the creation process and ultimately decided Clark had to kill him. If in the future they brought zod back saying he didn't die, it would be laughable. if for example in returns they mentioned zod and crew died in pt2, it would be believable. If they said they survived, it would also be believable. Their fate was ambiguous. Not saying its better or worse. Just saying you can't say they are dead period. But I do prefer donners approach even though I don't have a problem with Clark killing zod in mos. just would've liked it handled less gratuitously.
"I find the character development of Kent as a stalker with a love child to have pushed me past the point of enjoying Returns. The love triangle was okay, but eliminate the kid & the movie jumps leaps & bounds."
I have heard the stalker comment a lot but I have to say, more than once in my life, I've experienced that kind of longing for another person after a breakup. That's probably why I relate to that scene. Yes, I could have done without the kid too but he was a necessary story element to complete the "I'm alone" issue.
"I'm not THAT familiar with Superman in general, but isn't the "super" aspect more how he's perceived then how he feels? Wasn't the name "Superman" given rather then self-proclaimed?"
My take on this is that Superman feels the weight of his responsibilities. Also, and I think this was emphasized in one of the DC animated features, he has to hold back his strength constantly. He can't open a door, pull up a chair or shake a hand without restraining his powers. He's constantly reminded of how different he is and that he can't ignore his gifts. Perhaps this is too analytically.
"I know I'm beating a remnants that use to be a dead horse, but his journey from being an outcast & trying to find his place in the world to finding it was character development. Through flashbacks involved situations where he wasn't like everyone else."
Yes, I agree so I should probably give the film another look.
Batlaw summed up the film for me: a waste of potential and empty. What really makes me angry is that Snyder directed Watchmen, one of my favorite comic book films.
If the movie is still being discussed after nearly a year then it can't really be THAT bad. I mean, where are the indepth posts about Green Lantern or Catwoman?!
If the movie is still being discussed after nearly a year then it can't really be THAT bad. I mean, where are the indepth posts about Green Lantern or Catwoman?!
M
To be fair, in at least two threads right now (I think) Ang Lee's Hulk from 10 years ago is getting discussed. So I must be right that it was great! ;)
If the movie is still being discussed after nearly a year then it can't really be THAT bad. I mean, where are the indepth posts about Green Lantern or Catwoman?!
M
Ha ha, you have a point. Then again, Green Lantern and Catwoman really sucked! Maybe we can keep this up until Superman Vs. Batman?
If the movie is still being discussed after nearly a year then it can't really be THAT bad. I mean, where are the indepth posts about Green Lantern or Catwoman?!
M
Or it could show just how bad it was and how more beloved the character is? Also there isn't really any dissenting opinions on catwoman or green lantern. They're both all but unanimously disliked and universally considered failures. But personally I can Watch GL and enjoy portions despite its flaws. It just doesn't hurt as much.
If the movie is still being discussed after nearly a year then it can't really be THAT bad. I mean, where are the indepth posts about Green Lantern or Catwoman?!
M
Or it could show just how bad it was and how more beloved the character is? Also there isn't really any dissenting opinions on catwoman or green lantern. They're both all but unanimously disliked and universally considered failures. But personally I can Watch GL and enjoy portions despite its flaws. It just doesn't hurt as much.
"How bad is was..."
Or how much some fans don't want a different version of the character. I recall people complaining Returns was too much like Donner's version. We finally get something different & people want the same old stuff.
Or how much some fans don't want a different version of the character. I recall people complaining Returns was too much like Donner's version. We finally get something different & people want the same old stuff.
M
It was the wrong kind of 'different'.
Seriously, if someone tries to sell you their car and you show lack of interest because it isn't really different enough from what you've been driving, and he then takes a crowbar to it -- well, the result is that the car is now different, but is it really what you were looking for?
Or how much some fans don't want a different version of the character. I recall people complaining Returns was too much like Donner's version. We finally get something different & people want the same old stuff.
M
It was the wrong kind of 'different'.
Seriously, if someone tries to sell you their car and you show lack of interest because it isn't really different enough from what you've been driving, and he then takes a crowbar to it -- well, the result is that the car is now different, but is it really what you were looking for?
The only way this comment could have been better is if you'd used "crowbar" as a verb.
Or how much some fans don't want a different version of the character. I recall people complaining Returns was too much like Donner's version. We finally get something different & people want the same old stuff.
M
It was the wrong kind of 'different'.
Seriously, if someone tries to sell you their car and you show lack of interest because it isn't really different enough from what you've been driving, and he then takes a crowbar to it -- well, the result is that the car is now different, but is it really what you were looking for?
Completely subjective if it was the 'wrong kind of different.' This was exactly the kind of 'different' I found to finally make the character interesting.
And that's a rough analogy. Fifteen years ago, I was looking to buy a SUV & instead bought a convertible. I had a sedan at the time. Looking for something different from the sedan, got something I enjoyed the Hell out of instead of my initial choice.
Or how much some fans don't want a different version of the character. I recall people complaining Returns was too much like Donner's version. We finally get something different & people want the same old stuff.
M
It was the wrong kind of 'different'.
Seriously, if someone tries to sell you their car and you show lack of interest because it isn't really different enough from what you've been driving, and he then takes a crowbar to it -- well, the result is that the car is now different, but is it really what you were looking for?
And I really doubt that Nolan/Goyer/Snyder's starting point was "Returns". They went back to the drawing board much more drastically for MOS than Singer did for "Returns".
Or how much some fans don't want a different version of the character. I recall people complaining Returns was too much like Donner's version. We finally get something different & people want the same old stuff.
M
It was the wrong kind of 'different'.
Seriously, if someone tries to sell you their car and you show lack of interest because it isn't really different enough from what you've been driving, and he then takes a crowbar to it -- well, the result is that the car is now different, but is it really what you were looking for?
And I really doubt that Nolan/Goyer/Snyder's starting point was "Returns". They went back to the drawing board much more drastically for MOS than Singer did for "Returns".
If the movie is still being discussed after nearly a year then it can't really be THAT bad. I mean, where are the indepth posts about Green Lantern or Catwoman?!
After testing actors over the past couple of weeks, Warner Bros. and DC have tapped theater actor Ray Fisher for the role of Cyborg in the untitled Batman-Superman pic.
Victor Stone or Cyborg, while not a major part in the Batman-Superman feature, is a member of the Justice League, and the role will become much more significant role as Warner and DC develop more films related to the Justice League universe, sources confirm.
That news worries me more than excites me unfortunately. Its like DC are so desperate to build the same kind of connected universe Marvel has that instead of doing it over multiple years and movies we are getting a rush job. I cant see it going well.
That news worries me more than excites me unfortunately. Its like DC are so desperate to build the same kind of connected universe Marvel has that instead of doing it over multiple years and movies we are getting a rush job. I cant see it going well.
...which is really not so different from the way they've been handling it in the comics themselves, since the New52 began.
Comments
Cut scenes... are cut. If in a few years from now we see a cut scene where Zod lives in Man of Steel, we couldn't go back and say "SEEEEE! He was supposed to live!"
M
Seriously, huge comic book retcons are built from as much or less.
Its a nitpick on my part, but I'm not sure how Cavill's (reportedly by you) steroid use is a slight against the movie. If accurate, I doubt he's the only actor to do so. In fact, I'm sure it doesn't matter to as much to women anymore then fake boobs matter to men.
I'd also like to throw out there, I'd argue how much 'good' character development we got in that sequel. I think Singer tried to add a little too much to the Superman mythos & it backfired.
M
In Man of Steel, I thought it was Jor-El's movie, not Kal's. Great action stuff but I think of Superman not as an action hero but as a person with compassion and who represents the best of humanity. He's an alien but he tries to be the best "man" he can be. All of that is based on his upbringing, how he was raised by Jonathan and Martha. I think they failed to illustrate how much of a positive influence his parents were.
Concerning the use of steroids, his physical appearance is just a matter of preference. I simply prefer the "swimmer's" look (Superman and Superman Returns) which I think enhances Supes humanity: he looks like a normal person, yet he is an alien. Others might say he should look like a bodybuilder since he is so strong. That makes sense too. I just don't like it.
While I tried not to let my fondness for the original Superman movie interfere with my enjoyment of Man of Steel, it just wasn't my cup of tea and I didn't even think it was a well scripted or acted film. I would have titled it "Hulk Smash!"
I actually found this version of Superman to be most relatable. It also 'solved' some of the issues I had with the original movie.
As toward Cavill's look, his Kent traveled the globe looking for answers & working various jobs. I could easily buy his mass physique.
Its about 10 minutes into the disaster porn I find the movie to suffer. I would've liked to see less & more resolve with the climax of the fight.
In Returns, its just hard for me to overlook that damn kid.
M
I dunno. I think MoS wasted a lot of potential and was just pretty empty in the end.
I know I'm beating a remnants that use to be a dead horse, but his journey from being an outcast & trying to find his place in the world to finding it was character development. Through flashbacks involved situations where he wasn't like everyone else.
M
Carry on.
But there is a difference between the two. Donner didn't instead decide to show the villainous trio splattering against the ground. Snyder didn't pull the camera away and just let us assume what happened. Plus they've said Clark killed zod. That they debated on it during the creation process and ultimately decided Clark had to kill him.
If in the future they brought zod back saying he didn't die, it would be laughable. if for example in returns they mentioned zod and crew died in pt2, it would be believable. If they said they survived, it would also be believable.
Their fate was ambiguous. Not saying its better or worse. Just saying you can't say they are dead period. But I do prefer donners approach even though I don't have a problem with Clark killing zod in mos. just would've liked it handled less gratuitously.
"I find the character development of Kent as a stalker with a love child to have pushed me past the point of enjoying Returns. The love triangle was okay, but eliminate the kid & the movie jumps leaps & bounds."
I have heard the stalker comment a lot but I have to say, more than once in my life, I've experienced that kind of longing for another person after a breakup. That's probably why I relate to that scene. Yes, I could have done without the kid too but he was a necessary story element to complete the "I'm alone" issue.
"I'm not THAT familiar with Superman in general, but isn't the "super" aspect more how he's perceived then how he feels? Wasn't the name "Superman" given rather then self-proclaimed?"
My take on this is that Superman feels the weight of his responsibilities. Also, and I think this was emphasized in one of the DC animated features, he has to hold back his strength constantly. He can't open a door, pull up a chair or shake a hand without restraining his powers. He's constantly reminded of how different he is and that he can't ignore his gifts. Perhaps this is too analytically.
"I know I'm beating a remnants that use to be a dead horse, but his journey from being an outcast & trying to find his place in the world to finding it was character development. Through flashbacks involved situations where he wasn't like everyone else."
Yes, I agree so I should probably give the film another look.
Batlaw summed up the film for me: a waste of potential and empty. What really makes me angry is that Snyder directed Watchmen, one of my favorite comic book films.
M
Watch GL and enjoy portions despite its flaws. It just doesn't hurt as much.
Or how much some fans don't want a different version of the character. I recall people complaining Returns was too much like Donner's version. We finally get something different & people want the same old stuff.
M
Seriously, if someone tries to sell you their car and you show lack of interest because it isn't really different enough from what you've been driving, and he then takes a crowbar to it -- well, the result is that the car is now different, but is it really what you were looking for?
And that's a rough analogy. Fifteen years ago, I was looking to buy a SUV & instead bought a convertible. I had a sedan at the time. Looking for something different from the sedan, got something I enjoyed the Hell out of instead of my initial choice.
M
According to Variety:
After testing actors over the past couple of weeks, Warner Bros. and DC have tapped theater actor Ray Fisher for the role of Cyborg in the untitled Batman-Superman pic.
Victor Stone or Cyborg, while not a major part in the Batman-Superman feature, is a member of the Justice League, and the role will become much more significant role as Warner and DC develop more films related to the Justice League universe, sources confirm.
FULL STORY HERE