Just saw it... the family and I drove ~100 miles to see it at the Harkins theatre in Tempe, AZ. 70'x30' Screen with Dolby ATMOS sound! I've been reading Superman comics since the early 1970s, I saw Superman: The Movie in the theater when I was kid...
My verdict: L-O-V-E-D it!!
I got choked up in parts, got tense during some scenes, cheered (like when he punched Zod and said "you dare threaten my mother!?"), was tickled by the comic book nods, and was in awe of the spectacle of it all. I was so impressed by all the actors. And there were some great lessons for fathers about loving and believing in your kids. I also appreciated the respect the movie had for people of faith and the theme of man's need for redemption.
Did I ever tell you guys I initially had reservations about an 8yr retired Batman & the ending of The Dark Knight Rises? To me, Batman shouldn't stop until he dies...and then only if he didn't have a contingency plan to return. As Superman said in the Batman Beyond episode "The Call" "Bruce will outlive us all. He's too stubborn to die."
So, I don't want to see that happen...ever. In the theme & context of TDKR, I understand why it happened & why it had to be that way. Again, I don't necessarily agree with it (as a Batman comic book fan), but I understand it in the movie.
M
Dont get me started on DKR. the whole 8 year hibernation whatever was absurd. It only occurred to allow the cop kid to grow to adulthood. that was only one of dozens of problems with that movie. I look at DKR as a really good bad movie.
I'm not understanding the Amy Adams is too old comments... The actress is only 38.
38 is only too old when she looks 10 years older than supes. im happy to see actual adults used for a change, but they didnt fit.\ I think adams would be a perfect Lois for a superman done in a 1940s take.
I saw the movie today and I generally liked it. I have a couple of annoyances with my movie going experience. One a kid (8 to 10) sat next and could not sit still for five minutes.
similarly i had some guy several rows away that seemed to have snuck in family size bag of cheetos or something that he spend a good 20 minutes it seemed battling with opening before passing it down the isle for his brood to maul throughout the movie. I wouldve gone apeshit were I sitting any closer. I also cant remember the last time it seemed so many people in a theater seemed to come and go during a movie. but that didnt bother me half as much as the crinkling of that motherf&#_^# bag!
I was going to wait til Tuesday AM but reading these posts have made me ramp up the plans. As soon as I am off the clock I'm waking the kids, up eating IHOP and going to the 1100 hours show by me. I look forward to being disappointed by an all action finale.
Happy Father's Day to me and to you fathers out there and when my sons grows up I hope they would snaps Zod's neck if presented with a General Zod.
I just hope your sons would have the sense to get him out of the populated area first.
Ah, David D, ever the King of the Straw-Man post. My post was only in response to Superman does not kill comment. Besides which my sons are not that smart so they would do it over Metropolis for sure!
I was going to wait til Tuesday AM but reading these posts have made me ramp up the plans. As soon as I am off the clock I'm waking the kids, up eating IHOP and going to the 1100 hours show by me. I look forward to being disappointed by an all action finale.
Happy Father's Day to me and to you fathers out there and when my sons grows up I hope they would snaps Zod's neck if presented with a General Zod.
I just hope your sons would have the sense to get him out of the populated area first.
Ah, David D, ever the King of the Straw-Man post. My post was only in response to Superman does not kill comment. Besides which my sons are not that smart so they would do it over Metropolis for sure!
It's not a straw man argument as I'm not actually arguing with you. All I did is tack on modifier. I'm actually agreeing with you- I would want a child of mine to stop a monster. I would just want them to do a better job of protecting people WHILE they do it. To me, that would make them more of a Superman.
That was it. Not every quoted response is a disagreement or an argument. Sometimes it is simply a "yes and..."
I love how clark, who had seemingly never been in a fight in his entire life, was able to defeat a number of trained soldiers who not only had untold amounts of actual combat experience but were actually genetically engeneered for battle physically and mentally. Even better, the leader and presumably best of the best of that group was capable of defeating anything... except a headlock. lol. im just enjoying nitpicking.
In an earlier post, I talked about some of the smaller things I liked, so putting aside my problems with all of Superman's recklessness in the ending, there was a few smaller things that bothered me (call them nitpicks, if you want)--
- The portrayal of the press and Perry White: so Perry White- who we can presume in this film version is a lifelong newsman if he has risen to the position he is at the Planet- becomes aware of a story about the existence of alien life, BELIEVES the reporter. . . and then supports the reporter's decision to bury the story because he thinks the people of the world will panic? Rubbish. That is character assassination for a character that is supposed to be a journalist. His job is to inform. His place is not to paternalistically decide what the public is or isn't ready to know. He is a journalist. If he thinks a story is factual, then his priority should be to inform the public.
It reminds me of a storyline I really hated in, this is a long time ago now, but I think it was Civil War Frontline. Basically Ben Urich uncovers information that implicates Tony Stark as profiting from the events of the Civil War, and basically he agrees to bury the story because there has already been enough conflict, or something dumb like that. Something that basically violates the soul of a character that is supposed to be an honest and ideologically sound journalist. And the way Perry White is written in this movie is the same. And, at the point where Lois decides that she would rather help hide Superman's existence rather than report what she has witnessed, she, too, is made to be a terrible journalist.
I also think it was lame that- having found themselves right on the front line of the events in Metropolis- none of the Daily Planet characters we watch in the movie even try to take a picture, or stand and try to report. They just run. Lame. Lame in a movie that is ostensibly about people trying to be brave and at their best. The best kind of reporter would be like a first responder-- they would run towards the danger.
- The military: A lot of the way that the military is played is similarly silly and convenient. Really, the US military is going to find an unknown, potentially alien or pre-human history object in the ice, and they are going to let a reporter anywhere near it? I know there is some throwaway line Lois has about a court injunction or something, but I don't buy it. Also, there seems to be a tiny, skeleton crew of staff on hand to study and guard the object. I mean, movies like E.T. and Close Encounters gave us a convincing portrayal of what it would be like when the authorities converge on something and surround it. More recently, Thor gave a strong image of the government absolutely surrounding an object they don't understand. Here, the scenes (like so many in the movie) just seem conveniently understaffed. Clark, and then Lois, can just wander right up to the ship. The military are dozing by their monitors and in having hot cocoa or something.
- Not enough characters: Speaking of understaffed, this movie sometimes felt like there just weren't enough characters in it. I mean, every time there was a scene with the military, it was Colonel Meloni in the middle of it. I actually laughed when he was the one flying the plane. Of course he does that, too! He does everything. Sometimes he is at NORAD, and sometimes he is five minutes away by helicopter when something crashes in Kansas.
And some characters (e.g. some of the Daily Planet staff, or most of Zod's people) were just a face without a character. It would have been nice if there were more room for more characters to pop, and fill out the world of the story more.
Again, small points in the scheme of things, but ones that stuck with me. Not to be filed under complaints about whether or not the movie was "dark". Rather, these were just things that made it not as smart as I wanted it to be. I think it could have worked harder to justify some of the ways the the real world forces in the movie (the military, the press) would have responded to things.
Did I ever tell you guys I initially had reservations about an 8yr retired Batman & the ending of The Dark Knight Rises? To me, Batman shouldn't stop until he dies...and then only if he didn't have a contingency plan to return. As Superman said in the Batman Beyond episode "The Call" "Bruce will outlive us all. He's too stubborn to die."
So, I don't want to see that happen...ever. In the theme & context of TDKR, I understand why it happened & why it had to be that way. Again, I don't necessarily agree with it (as a Batman comic book fan), but I understand it in the movie.
M
Dont get me started on DKR. the whole 8 year hibernation whatever was absurd. It only occurred to allow the cop kid to grow to adulthood. that was only one of dozens of problems with that movie. I look at DKR as a really good bad movie.
So you think they should've rounded it off to an even 10yrs too? They "won" the war. Gotham was saved. That's not something than can happened overnight (or in a year or 2.)
Did I ever tell you guys I initially had reservations about an 8yr retired Batman & the ending of The Dark Knight Rises? To me, Batman shouldn't stop until he dies...and then only if he didn't have a contingency plan to return. As Superman said in the Batman Beyond episode "The Call" "Bruce will outlive us all. He's too stubborn to die."
So, I don't want to see that happen...ever. In the theme & context of TDKR, I understand why it happened & why it had to be that way. Again, I don't necessarily agree with it (as a Batman comic book fan), but I understand it in the movie.
M
Dont get me started on DKR. the whole 8 year hibernation whatever was absurd. It only occurred to allow the cop kid to grow to adulthood. that was only one of dozens of problems with that movie. I look at DKR as a really good bad movie.
So you think they should've rounded it off to an even 10yrs too? They "won" the war. Gotham was saved. That's not something than can happened overnight (or in a year or 2.)
Did I ever tell you guys I initially had reservations about an 8yr retired Batman & the ending of The Dark Knight Rises? To me, Batman shouldn't stop until he dies...and then only if he didn't have a contingency plan to return. As Superman said in the Batman Beyond episode "The Call" "Bruce will outlive us all. He's too stubborn to die."
So, I don't want to see that happen...ever. In the theme & context of TDKR, I understand why it happened & why it had to be that way. Again, I don't necessarily agree with it (as a Batman comic book fan), but I understand it in the movie.
M
Dont get me started on DKR. the whole 8 year hibernation whatever was absurd. It only occurred to allow the cop kid to grow to adulthood. that was only one of dozens of problems with that movie. I look at DKR as a really good bad movie.
So you think they should've rounded it off to an even 10yrs too? They "won" the war. Gotham was saved. That's not something than can happened overnight (or in a year or 2.)
M
I dont think I understand what youre saying.
Sure, in order for there to be any real change in Gotham, a decent amount of time would've had to pass from TDK. Almost a decade had to pass for Gotham to really be cleaned up & see the changes in the city. Plus, Bruce would've needed a lot of time to pass for him to further give up on life.
In an earlier post, I talked about some of the smaller things I liked, so putting aside my problems with all of Superman's recklessness in the ending, there was a few smaller things that bothered me (call them nitpicks, if you want)--
- The portrayal of the press and Perry White: so Perry White- who we can presume in this film version is a lifelong newsman if he has risen to the position he is at the Planet- becomes aware of a story about the existence of alien life, BELIEVES the reporter. . . and then supports the reporter's decision to bury the story because he thinks the people of the world will panic? Rubbish. That is character assassination for a character that is supposed to be a journalist. His job is to inform. His place is not to paternalistically decide what the public is or isn't ready to know. He is a journalist. If he thinks a story is factual, then his priority should be to inform the public.
It reminds me of a storyline I really hated in, this is a long time ago now, but I think it was Civil War Frontline. Basically Ben Urich uncovers information that implicates Tony Stark as profiting from the events of the Civil War, and basically he agrees to bury the story because there has already been enough conflict, or something dumb like that. Something that basically violates the soul of a character that is supposed to be an honest and ideologically sound journalist. And the way Perry White is written in this movie is the same. And, at the point where Lois decides that she would rather help hide Superman's existence rather than report what she has witnessed, she, too, is made to be a terrible journalist.
I also think it was lame that- having found themselves right on the front line of the events in Metropolis- none of the Daily Planet characters we watch in the movie even try to take a picture, or stand and try to report. They just run. Lame. Lame in a movie that is ostensibly about people trying to be brave and at their best. The best kind of reporter would be like a first responder-- they would run towards the danger.
- The military: A lot of the way that the military is played is similarly silly and convenient. Really, the US military is going to find an unknown, potentially alien or pre-human history object in the ice, and they are going to let a reporter anywhere near it? I know there is some throwaway line Lois has about a court injunction or something, but I don't buy it. Also, there seems to be a tiny, skeleton crew of staff on hand to study and guard the object. I mean, movies like E.T. and Close Encounters gave us a convincing portrayal of what it would be like when the authorities converge on something and surround it. More recently, Thor gave a strong image of the government absolutely surrounding an object they don't understand. Here, the scenes (like so many in the movie) just seem conveniently understaffed. Clark, and then Lois, can just wander right up to the ship. The military are dozing by their monitors and in having hot cocoa or something.
- Not enough characters: Speaking of understaffed, this movie sometimes felt like there just weren't enough characters in it. I mean, every time there was a scene with the military, it was Colonel Meloni in the middle of it. I actually laughed when he was the one flying the plane. Of course he does that, too! He does everything. Sometimes he is at NORAD, and sometimes he is five minutes away by helicopter when something crashes in Kansas.
And some characters (e.g. some of the Daily Planet staff, or most of Zod's people) were just a face without a character. It would have been nice if there were more room for more characters to pop, and fill out the world of the story more.
Again, small points in the scheme of things, but ones that stuck with me. Not to be filed under complaints about whether or not the movie was "dark". Rather, these were just things that made it not as smart as I wanted it to be. I think it could have worked harder to justify some of the ways the the real world forces in the movie (the military, the press) would have responded to things.
Well, @David_D, that's because Jimmy Olsen was on assignment elsewhere. He'd have burn through memory cards taking photos if he would've been in Metropolis.
I love how clark, who had seemingly never been in a fight in his entire life, was able to defeat a number of trained soldiers who not only had untold amounts of actual combat experience but were actually genetically engeneered for battle physically and mentally. Even better, the leader and presumably best of the best of that group was capable of defeating anything... except a headlock. lol. im just enjoying nitpicking.
Don't forget those trained warriors were also on Earth for 3 decades and use to their new found powers! Wait, no they were barely on the planet for 2 days. That should give Kal-El some advantage. I enjoy nitpicking the nitpicks. LOL
If anything, it makes Zod the winner in the confrontation, because he forced Superman into giving him what he wanted, instead of being taken down and forced to face punishment for his actions. And he sullied Superman's hands in the process.
I don't blame Superman for this. Really.
I blame the writers.
What punishment could he have possible faced had Superman kept him alive? If you keep him here on Earth there's no prison that can hold him, no possible weapon to kill him short of nuclear bomb (which would cruel and unusual punishment); in other words, no form of justice or punishment is possible. Earth doesn't have the technology or means to send him into space or to the Phantom Zone. Superman does what is necessary and right; Zod doesn't win because Superman isn't brought down in the eyes of humanity. He's just dead.
He would have had to improvise some means of imprisonment. He still had in his possession somewhere the scout ship he found earlier on; I'm sure he could have found or cobbled together something from within to properly bind and restrain Zod or even put him into some form of suspended sleep. We don't know what was on the ship, but I'm sure the writers could have come up with something.
I've been thinking about this idea. Interesting, but I see the flaw in this (which I'm betting we'd be criticizing if it'd be in the movie.)
Just because the scout ship was made from Kryptonian material, doesn't mean a containment unit could've been constructed out of it. Didn't Superman crash through & then burn it with his heat vision? Even if its made into a cube container, Zod would've ALSO been able to tear through it.
Lets say, Kal-El did cobble together a containment cell for Zod. It'd be the same scenario Superman faced in Byrne's issue; if he ever escaped (regained powers in the comic), he'd be able to cause mass destruction again. This time even more personal. He could target both Ma & Lois right away.
I thought Lois could've been written better, but I didn't think she looked either too old or too young in the movie. There was only one scene (where they were in the room discussing his symbol), that I thought her looked seemed like something from the 40s. That was basically because of her outfit.
I love how clark, who had seemingly never been in a fight in his entire life, was able to defeat a number of trained soldiers who not only had untold amounts of actual combat experience but were actually genetically engeneered for battle physically and mentally. Even better, the leader and presumably best of the best of that group was capable of defeating anything... except a headlock. lol. im just enjoying nitpicking.
Don't forget those trained warriors were also on Earth for 3 decades and use to their new found powers! Wait, no they were barely on the planet for 2 days. That should give Kal-El some advantage. I enjoy nitpicking the nitpicks. LOL
M
Except they seemed perfectly capable and competent to me. Kicking supes ass even. I agree they were likely slightly less powerful, but training experience and their armor would make a difference and seemed to. They weren't as aware of their varied powers as Clark, but then nothing but super strength was ever really used offensively or even strategically. With exception of heat vision once? Plus theyre genetically designed soldiers whch i assume includes the ability to adapt quickly. Only zod lost his helmet and had to endure sensory overload and he was shown overcoming that quickly. If Clark had used his slightly superior strength and his other abilities the kryptonians hadnt discovered yet (flight X-ray heat Vision) to his advantage and early it could've balanced the scales. but every fight was just muscle against muscle. When all things are equal, put your money on size and or experience/skill. Besides, Clark may have had his abilities his whole life but he also spent his whole life essentially avoiding them and learning to ignore then, not honing them. Hell, he only learned to fly himself in the same couple days the kryptonians arrived didn't he? To be clear, this issue didnt genuinely bother me nor do i think it needs such dissection. Just a funny nitpick.
Not to dissect in order to determine how good or bad any of the players were in the making of the movie, I'd like to say that I thought it was interesting that Supes would tell Zod the focus "secret" when he realized that Zod was having problems due to sensory overload. Was Superman feeling bad/sad for him? For what he was going through?
I love how clark, who had seemingly never been in a fight in his entire life, was able to defeat a number of trained soldiers who not only had untold amounts of actual combat experience but were actually genetically engeneered for battle physically and mentally. Even better, the leader and presumably best of the best of that group was capable of defeating anything... except a headlock. lol. im just enjoying nitpicking.
Don't forget those trained warriors were also on Earth for 3 decades and use to their new found powers! Wait, no they were barely on the planet for 2 days. That should give Kal-El some advantage. I enjoy nitpicking the nitpicks. LOL
M
Except they seemed perfectly capable and competent to me. Kicking supes ass even. I agree they were likely slightly less powerful, but training experience and their armor would make a difference and seemed to. They weren't as aware of their varied powers as Clark, but then nothing but super strength was ever really used offensively or even strategically. With exception of heat vision once? Plus theyre genetically designed soldiers whch i assume includes the ability to adapt quickly. Only zod lost his helmet and had to endure sensory overload and he was shown overcoming that quickly. If Clark had used his slightly superior strength and his other abilities the kryptonians hadnt discovered yet (flight X-ray heat Vision) to his advantage and early it could've balanced the scales. but every fight was just muscle against muscle. When all things are equal, put your money on size and or experience/skill. Besides, Clark may have had his abilities his whole life but he also spent his whole life essentially avoiding them and learning to ignore then, not honing them. Hell, he only learned to fly himself in the same couple days the kryptonians arrived didn't he? To be clear, this issue didnt genuinely bother me nor do i think it needs such dissection. Just a funny nitpick.
Right, I'm putting my money on Superman because he has the experience. Remember in Captain America where he was pursuing the Nazi agent right after getting the serum? He tripped & overcompensated for his new abilities. Same with John Carter of Mars. You could have the basics, but not the "super" choreography with your abilities.
I never saw him ignore and/or not hone his powers. We saw him get advice to not display his abilities in public yet, but I never saw/heard either Kent scold Clark for using his abilities on the farm or in secret.
Yes, flight was just learned, but only after Jor-El told him his abilities would increase the more he pushed them. We had already seen him leap distances (like in his original comic version), which developed into flight. Plus, much like the holes in the argument people had for Bruce not being able to get back into Gotham from that prison quickly, there was nothing stating Kal-El spent 10 minutes learning to fly.
Not to dissect in order to determine how good or bad any of the players were in the making of the movie, I'd like to say that I thought it was interesting that Supes would tell Zod the focus "secret" when he realized that Zod was having problems due to sensory overload. Was Superman feeling bad/sad for him? For what he was going through?
I questioned that too. It sounded like he was gloating, which always worked out for Bond villains!
I love how clark, who had seemingly never been in a fight in his entire life, was able to defeat a number of trained soldiers who not only had untold amounts of actual combat experience but were actually genetically engeneered for battle physically and mentally. Even better, the leader and presumably best of the best of that group was capable of defeating anything... except a headlock. lol. im just enjoying nitpicking.
By my reasoning he only defeated one. The others were killed while still in their ship by Chris Meloni and Dr. Hamilton.
I'm not understanding the Amy Adams is too old comments... The actress is only 38.
38 is only too old when she looks 10 years older than supes. im happy to see actual adults used for a change, but they didnt fit.\ I think adams would be a perfect Lois for a superman done in a 1940s take.
I agree. I think for the most part she was fine for this movie. But my problem with her since they first cast her is, IF, and it might be a big if, but IF they get to movie 3 and it takes them a similarly long time to do that as it did with Batman Begins she'll be 45. Just not sure I want an "old" Lois Lane. Same reason I don't want Daniel Craig playing James Bond ten years from now. Unfortunately, because I'm shallow, a character like Lois doesn't have as high of a ceiling.
Saw it last night. Liked the Krypton stuff, Jor El and the Zod/Supes fight most of all. Liked Russel Crowe much more than I expected to. Pretty sad I enjoyed and cared more for Jor El and thought he was a better influence than Pa Kent. Liked Supes/Cavil? more than I expected to. Pretty likeable. Never seen him in anything before. He did fine. Disliked the actressand character of krypton mom. dull and not an impressive performance. Didnt care for Diane Lane? /Ma Kent. Didnt hate but she seemed kindve distanced too. If that makes sense. Liked Zod/Shanon? a lot more than I expected. Not familiar with this actor. Liked how insane he was and gave a good performance. Liked Costner less I expected. Not a Costner fan (or hater). I felt so little for his character and didnt care for this interpretation much at all. His death was pretty stupid, unbelievable and poorly written IMO. I felt nothing. Liked Amy Adams far less that I epected. Wasnt right for the role to begin with but I like her as an actress. Hated how they tried so rediculously hard to make her appear tough. Didnt work in the slightest. Too old and had no chemesty w/ superman IMO. Found her voice annoying. Effects were pretty great. Story was pretty weak. Hated the suit as much as I expected... maybe even a little moreso. fortunately they mostly showed him from only the chest up. Too rubbery. texture and color etc constantly changed depending on lighting/setting. alo seemed odd seeing all the visible chest hair at the top in close ups. Loved the heat vision effects. Didnt care for and got kindve annoyed with the flashback/flashforward approach. No problem w/ Lois knowing Supes identity but no way everyone else doesnt know it too. At least the authorities. Had no problem with supes killing Zod. However I did have a problem with how it happened and was shown. I little too violent and graphic and unexpectd for the kids at least IMO. Have trouble with the amount of devestation and the obvious certain death toll and supermans lack of interest and intervention. Liked the Air Force General but hated how he and the Military ingeneral were portrayed... even though totally expected. No problem with Perry White (casting or performance) but nothing to really coment on since he didnt do anything. Metropolis was pretty uninteresting and Krypton needed a little more something. Really shouldve/couldve been more humor.
Wow, I knew when & how Jonathan died & I still found it important and emotional. Pa wasn't as caring as other interpretations, but rather caused Clark to really think about his decisions.
His death (despite Clark's ease at being able to save him) was Jonathan's sacrifice to make Clark ready before presenting himself to the world (since it'll change everything.) All after the last conversation ended with "you're not my father..."
I'd argue Clark wasn't ready to present himself to the world until after his soul searching/heritage discovering journey ended. Pa's death occurred at its beginning. I interpreted this as the push Clark needed to start his journey.
M
I didn't buy Pa Kent's death either. I know what they were aiming for, but it just came off as stupid for me -- and completely contrary to the way that Jonathan has been portrayed in the comics, which really bothered me. I could understand his attempt to teach Clark caution about his powers and to be discreet, but throughout the film it felt to me like he was also dissuading him from ever using them, that keeping Clark's abilities secret was more important than saving lives or doing the right thing during emergencies, and that just felt wrong and off-kilter.
I saw the movie today and I generally liked it. I have a couple of annoyances with my movie going experience. One a kid (8 to 10) sat next and could not sit still for five minutes. Two, unlike some of you I really like 3D, and I was disappointed when I went to the IMAX and they did not show it in 3D. Looking at the website I can see it was my fault for not double checking. I really missed the depth 3D provides.
Back to the movie. I like that Lois figured out who Superman was fairily quickly. Unlike some others I thought Amy Adams looked too young to be playing Lois. Looking up her age now I am shocked she and I are almost the same age. She looked like she was in her 20s. It annoyed me that Superman never moved the fights outside of public spaces. It did not make sense for him to go through building after building without considering a change of venue. He unintentionally killed/hurt more people than he saved in the movie. That being said the action scenes were good. What they got right was the speed of the fights more than anything else for me. I like the flashbacks to his childhood. It gave the move some meat without having to sit through is childhood in sequence. There was some logic flaws near the end, but it did not kills the movie for me.
This movie reminded me a lot of the Incredible Hulk. It even had that conveniently cleared off arena for Superman/Zod to fight in.
I saw the 3-D version, as I'm a big fan of 3-D films; it was quite good.
I get what they wanted to say and I could deal but it didnt work for me. it was silly. Pa Kent dies trying to save a damn dog? really? sacrifices himself for clarks secret? Clark stands there and watches him die? no way. not in this scenario as it was staged. too many believable options and other choices. fear of people fearing him really outways his fathers certain death? and after risking his secret to save countless others his entre adolescence? nope. I could tolerate it in a better developed scene but not this.
I feel like if you only see the sacrifice occurring by saving the dog, then you saw something I didn't. I saw it as what started the moment, not what caused the sacrifice.
I can be the only one who finds a flawed Superman interesting can I? He can't be in the same fight or flight mindset as we are? I know he has superpowers, but he was raised human. Its not like he knew any different. M
Comments
M
My verdict: L-O-V-E-D it!!
I got choked up in parts, got tense during some scenes, cheered (like when he punched Zod and said "you dare threaten my mother!?"), was tickled by the comic book nods, and was in awe of the spectacle of it all. I was so impressed by all the actors. And there were some great lessons for fathers about loving and believing in your kids. I also appreciated the respect the movie had for people of faith and the theme of man's need for redemption.
Happy Father's Day to me!
Got to discuss the movie after two days' reflection and nigh-endless debate.
I think adams would be a perfect Lois for a superman done in a 1940s take.
http://www.nerdist.com/
That was it. Not every quoted response is a disagreement or an argument. Sometimes it is simply a "yes and..."
- The portrayal of the press and Perry White: so Perry White- who we can presume in this film version is a lifelong newsman if he has risen to the position he is at the Planet- becomes aware of a story about the existence of alien life, BELIEVES the reporter. . . and then supports the reporter's decision to bury the story because he thinks the people of the world will panic? Rubbish. That is character assassination for a character that is supposed to be a journalist. His job is to inform. His place is not to paternalistically decide what the public is or isn't ready to know. He is a journalist. If he thinks a story is factual, then his priority should be to inform the public.
It reminds me of a storyline I really hated in, this is a long time ago now, but I think it was Civil War Frontline. Basically Ben Urich uncovers information that implicates Tony Stark as profiting from the events of the Civil War, and basically he agrees to bury the story because there has already been enough conflict, or something dumb like that. Something that basically violates the soul of a character that is supposed to be an honest and ideologically sound journalist. And the way Perry White is written in this movie is the same. And, at the point where Lois decides that she would rather help hide Superman's existence rather than report what she has witnessed, she, too, is made to be a terrible journalist.
I also think it was lame that- having found themselves right on the front line of the events in Metropolis- none of the Daily Planet characters we watch in the movie even try to take a picture, or stand and try to report. They just run. Lame. Lame in a movie that is ostensibly about people trying to be brave and at their best. The best kind of reporter would be like a first responder-- they would run towards the danger.
- The military: A lot of the way that the military is played is similarly silly and convenient. Really, the US military is going to find an unknown, potentially alien or pre-human history object in the ice, and they are going to let a reporter anywhere near it? I know there is some throwaway line Lois has about a court injunction or something, but I don't buy it. Also, there seems to be a tiny, skeleton crew of staff on hand to study and guard the object. I mean, movies like E.T. and Close Encounters gave us a convincing portrayal of what it would be like when the authorities converge on something and surround it. More recently, Thor gave a strong image of the government absolutely surrounding an object they don't understand. Here, the scenes (like so many in the movie) just seem conveniently understaffed. Clark, and then Lois, can just wander right up to the ship. The military are dozing by their monitors and in having hot cocoa or something.
- Not enough characters: Speaking of understaffed, this movie sometimes felt like there just weren't enough characters in it. I mean, every time there was a scene with the military, it was Colonel Meloni in the middle of it. I actually laughed when he was the one flying the plane. Of course he does that, too! He does everything. Sometimes he is at NORAD, and sometimes he is five minutes away by helicopter when something crashes in Kansas.
And some characters (e.g. some of the Daily Planet staff, or most of Zod's people) were just a face without a character. It would have been nice if there were more room for more characters to pop, and fill out the world of the story more.
Again, small points in the scheme of things, but ones that stuck with me. Not to be filed under complaints about whether or not the movie was "dark". Rather, these were just things that made it not as smart as I wanted it to be. I think it could have worked harder to justify some of the ways the the real world forces in the movie (the military, the press) would have responded to things.
Those things all bothered me as well, but got lost compared to the Big Break.
M
M
M
M
Just because the scout ship was made from Kryptonian material, doesn't mean a containment unit could've been constructed out of it. Didn't Superman crash through & then burn it with his heat vision? Even if its made into a cube container, Zod would've ALSO been able to tear through it.
Lets say, Kal-El did cobble together a containment cell for Zod. It'd be the same scenario Superman faced in Byrne's issue; if he ever escaped (regained powers in the comic), he'd be able to cause mass destruction again. This time even more personal. He could target both Ma & Lois right away.
M
Just saying...
M
M
Only zod lost his helmet and had to endure sensory overload and he was shown overcoming that quickly.
If Clark had used his slightly superior strength and his other abilities the kryptonians hadnt discovered yet (flight X-ray heat Vision) to his advantage and early it could've balanced the scales. but every fight was just muscle against muscle. When all things are equal, put your money on size and or experience/skill.
Besides, Clark may have had his abilities his whole life but he also spent his whole life essentially avoiding them and learning to ignore then, not honing them. Hell, he only learned to fly himself in the same couple days the kryptonians arrived didn't he?
To be clear, this issue didnt genuinely bother me nor do i think it needs such dissection. Just a funny nitpick.
I never saw him ignore and/or not hone his powers. We saw him get advice to not display his abilities in public yet, but I never saw/heard either Kent scold Clark for using his abilities on the farm or in secret.
Yes, flight was just learned, but only after Jor-El told him his abilities would increase the more he pushed them. We had already seen him leap distances (like in his original comic version), which developed into flight. Plus, much like the holes in the argument people had for Bruce not being able to get back into Gotham from that prison quickly, there was nothing stating Kal-El spent 10 minutes learning to fly.
M
M
It's the film being flawed that bothers me.