I don't get the love for the old Christopher Reeves Superman movies. Well, the first two. I don't think anybody liked the third and fourth one.
Those movies loved giving Superman bullshit powers. The world going backwards thing, the Lois Lane mind wipe, masonry vision, and probably a few others I am forgetting about.
Edit: That one scene where he takes the S off his chest and throws it at someone.
I was always bugged at how Lex Luthor deduced the existance of Kryptonite and its affects on Superman. It makes some of Adam West!Batman's deductions look well reasoned with reasonable evidence.
I love the first two Christopher Reeve Superman movies. Sure they're campy and silly sometimes, but they're also funny and brilliantly cast and have a heart that beats with love for the character.
Superman's weird powers that come from nowhere are far, far less weird than the extra powers he pulled out of the air in his comic book heyday. It's probably true that something like flying backwards round the world to turn back time would seem daft and nonsensical to audiences now if a film did it, but it didn't feel dumb at all back then. Audiences didn't expect his powers to have rigidly set limits. He was Superman. Why not erase Lois's memory with a kiss? Why not have a costume with a throwable S?
I'll take campy and sincere and concerned about cats up trees over Broody McFrownyface and the big crater where Metropolis used to be. I saw Man of Steel and I came out thinking the makers didn't understand the character at all.
I guess my overall problem with the franchise is that there is this nebulous idea of Superman, so NO-ONE is ever got to ever present "the character" to everyone's satisfaction. I mean, pretty much 100% of things that people say "Superman Doesn't Do This" Superman has actually done (most times explicitly In Canon, although there's a healthy dose of Elseworlds and stuff as well).
Even the depictions that most people feel adhere most closely to this gestalt Superman have done some pretty terrible things. We've discussed the breaking of "the bully"s hand, but as part of "turning back time" he implicitly let a bunch of people die as collateral damage, and he mindrapes Lois (memory wiping kiss - Batman got pretty pissed when someone tried that on him). DCAU is pretty celebrated as well, but he tosses a badguy through a (presumably occupied) Metropolis office building, dodges thrown objects (many of which are explosive), and deliberately destroys public infrastructure (even without brainwashing) because he doesn't like someone - things which have been discussed in this thread as being terrible when Man of Steel does it.
My main problem with Man of Steel is that Snyder screws up the tone - he can't decide whether Superman should be inspiring others to succeed by his methods, or inspiring them through his results. Whether Superman should be competent, or still coming to terms with his new role. Whether Superman should listen to his dad, or tell them (both) to stfu. The actual individual actions I don't have too much of a problem with - because Superman has done that kind of stuff before, and I am bemused when people in this thread essentially say "Man of Steel is different because reasons". Instead, I have a problem because apparently Snyder (or Goyer if you wish) has problems telling a coherent story.
I don't think it's a terrible movie - I think it's better than the snoozefest of Superman Returns (and I like Cavill's Supe better than Routh's Supe). But it's certainly a flawed movie.
I'm sure that most people who complain about Man of Steel's Superman actually would have been okay if Snyder decided to make Superman a jerk for most of or even all of the movie if Snyder had actually treated it like Superman was being a jerk.
Instead he showed Superman being a jerk and then proclaimed him the greatest guy ever.
I'm sure that most people who complain about Man of Steel's Superman actually would have been okay if Snyder decided to make Superman a jerk for most of or even all of the movie if Snyder had actually treated it like Superman was being a jerk.
Instead he showed Superman being a jerk and then proclaimed him the greatest guy ever.
The difference between MoS and the Donner films or the DCAU is that they have very different tones. The Donner films and the DCAU are more exaggerated and removed from reality, whereas MoS tries to be grounded and "realistic."
Despite the destruction caused in the DCAU, you don't assume that people are dying and suffering because it's a cartoon. Only when they explicitly show someone getting hurt or killed does it count. The rules are much more flexible. Just look at how often the abilities and power levels of various characters fluctuate. In one episode, the Flash can outrun a jet, in another episode, he has trouble keeping up with cars. Sometimes, Batman can take out aliens that give Superman trouble, other times, he has trouble facing regular humans. The Donner films aren't quite as exaggerated but they're still not trying to be realistic.
With MoS, they're intentionally making it very serious, ground, gritty, and realistic. The rules are much more rigid. Whereas in a cartoon, you can have someone getting hurt in a realistic way in one scene but then have that same person doing something incredible in the next scene, that doesn't work in a more grounded film. You can't have as much inconsistency in a film like MoS than in cartoons or less serious films.
+1
Options
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
Man of Steel would've been a much better movie if it wasn't a Superman movie
Kryptonian superpowers has always been due to yellow sunlight. On the flip side, it's also been shown that one of the ways to turn Superman into a normal person with no powers is to stick him in an environment with red sunlight, similar to Krypton.
Things are different in MoS. Apparently, exposure earth's atmosphere gives Kryptonians powers. It's not really clear if yellow sunlight does anything. That's why Superman becomes weak after getting on Zod's ship but then instantly gets his powers back when the Jor-El AI changes the ship's atmosphere.
I'm going to hazard a guess it's still just the yellow sunlight.
Kryptonian environments weaken him, that's pretty canon to Superman. So being on a spaceship with an artificial atmosphere and gravity would likely change lots of stuff about how he uses his powers. Spaceships are generally shielded from solar radiation too.
Thus, no flying/jumping and no superpowers in general.
Also he was sent to Earth because it was his best chance for survival, not the perfect chance for his survival. So it may still be risky for young Kryptonians on Earth.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
I don't get the love for the old Christopher Reeves Superman movies. Well, the first two. I don't think anybody liked the third and fourth one.
Those movies loved giving Superman bullshit powers. The world going backwards thing, the Lois Lane mind wipe, masonry vision, and probably a few others I am forgetting about.
Edit: That one scene where he takes the S off his chest and throws it at someone.
None of those things are as bullshit as superman lifting an island made of kyrptonite
I'm sure that most people who complain about Man of Steel's Superman actually would have been okay if Snyder decided to make Superman a jerk for most of or even all of the movie if Snyder had actually treated it like Superman was being a jerk.
Instead he showed Superman being a jerk and then proclaimed him the greatest guy ever.
The difference between MoS and the Donner films or the DCAU is that they have very different tones. The Donner films and the DCAU are more exaggerated and removed from reality, whereas MoS tries to be grounded and "realistic."
Despite the destruction caused in the DCAU, you don't assume that people are dying and suffering because it's a cartoon. Only when they explicitly show someone getting hurt or killed does it count. The rules are much more flexible. Just look at how often the abilities and power levels of various characters fluctuate. In one episode, the Flash can outrun a jet, in another episode, he has trouble keeping up with cars. Sometimes, Batman can take out aliens that give Superman trouble, other times, he has trouble facing regular humans. The Donner films aren't quite as exaggerated but they're still not trying to be realistic.
With MoS, they're intentionally making it very serious, ground, gritty, and realistic. The rules are much more rigid. Whereas in a cartoon, you can have someone getting hurt in a realistic way in one scene but then have that same person doing something incredible in the next scene, that doesn't work in a more grounded film. You can't have as much inconsistency in a film like MoS than in cartoons or less serious films.
In the DCAU Superman is called out for his shit. He isn't perfect and makes mistakes, but he learns and tries to be careful with his power. He's a jerk sometimes, not 100% dick. They did that with Young Justice Superman too.
Even the DCAU acknowledged collateral damage every once in a while. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etPYl1OQoqk
I think they mentioned the buildings being deserted earlier.
Yeah, even a throwaway line like 'thank God we got everyone out of that skyscraper' takes the edge off, even if it does start to push credulity sometimes.
How long do you think it takes to evacuate a building that size?
I liked how they addressed it in Injustice:
When they bring Good Superman in to help fight, Rebel Batman is against it, until he hears him talking about how the first priority is to move the fight with people like Doomsday away from Metropolis to minimise casualties. He might not manage to save everyone, but it's usually what he's trying to do.
Course, he then started lasering cars out of the air, when they were being thrown from moving traffic, and presumably occupied...
Yeah, even a throwaway line like 'thank God we got everyone out of that skyscraper' takes the edge off, even if it does start to push credulity sometimes.
How long do you think it takes to evacuate a building that size?
Didn't the city know there was an alien invasion incoming?
Yeah, even a throwaway line like 'thank God we got everyone out of that skyscraper' takes the edge off, even if it does start to push credulity sometimes.
How long do you think it takes to evacuate a building that size?
Didn't the city know there was an alien invasion incoming?
No. There's no way they were able to evacuate the majority of the population before the terraforming started.
0
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAmod
The difference between MoS and the Donner films or the DCAU is that they have very different tones. The Donner films and the DCAU are more exaggerated and removed from reality, whereas MoS tries to be grounded and "realistic."
Despite the destruction caused in the DCAU, you don't assume that people are dying and suffering because it's a cartoon. Only when they explicitly show someone getting hurt or killed does it count. The rules are much more flexible. Just look at how often the abilities and power levels of various characters fluctuate. In one episode, the Flash can outrun a jet, in another episode, he has trouble keeping up with cars. Sometimes, Batman can take out aliens that give Superman trouble, other times, he has trouble facing regular humans. The Donner films aren't quite as exaggerated but they're still not trying to be realistic.
With MoS, they're intentionally making it very serious, ground, gritty, and realistic. The rules are much more rigid. Whereas in a cartoon, you can have someone getting hurt in a realistic way in one scene but then have that same person doing something incredible in the next scene, that doesn't work in a more grounded film. You can't have as much inconsistency in a film like MoS than in cartoons or less serious films.
Donner films have got personality. Personality goes a long way.
Seriously, though, the flaws in the Donner films (and there are plenty) are outweighed by the fact that everybody is having a fun time and totally sells their roles. When Superman is doing something stupid with his powers, that movie just owns it. Yeah, I just threw the S off my shirt, you got a problem with that? And when Superman is being a dick, it's still kind of charming about it.
And yeah, I'll admit that 95% of what makes the Donner films work is that Reeves is the best thing ever. It wouldn't have worked with another actor.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Yeah, even a throwaway line like 'thank God we got everyone out of that skyscraper' takes the edge off, even if it does start to push credulity sometimes.
How long do you think it takes to evacuate a building that size?
Didn't the city know there was an alien invasion incoming?
No. There's no way they were able to evacuate the majority of the population before the terraforming started.
The thing to remember is that EVERY major comic character is, at some point, depicted in a way that goes against the general feel of a character. Sometimes writers just do their own thing. Byrne's run on Superman is a great example. Just because one depiction insists that "Superman would do this!" doesn't mean that it's a generally accepted part of their character. Or current character -- everyone brings up the fact that Batman once had a gun and shot dudes, but he hasn't killed people in 70-odd years. Even though it came from the original creators, it's not something that's generally held up when people think of Batman today.
What I'm noticing here is that when superheroes are depicted doing things against their generally accepted character in movies, they're given much more weight than a shitty fill-in issue from a hack writer.
Man of Steel would've been a much better movie if it wasn't a Superman movie
It would have been better but probably not by that much. The film still has a lot of glaring problems in its structure, character development, and plot.
The ideas aren't developed enough for it to be a good sci-fi movie. The characters are bland, although Michael Shannon's over the top acting is pretty amusing at times. The flashbacks don't really connect to anything or tie into any major themes. There are some pretty glaring plot problems that could have been fixed rather easily with a few lines of dialogue or extra scenes.
I'm sure that most people who complain about Man of Steel's Superman actually would have been okay if Snyder decided to make Superman a jerk for most of or even all of the movie if Snyder had actually treated it like Superman was being a jerk.
Instead he showed Superman being a jerk and then proclaimed him the greatest guy ever.
I'm sure that most people who complain about Man of Steel's Superman actually would have been okay if Snyder decided to make Superman a jerk for most of or even all of the movie if Snyder had actually treated it like Superman was being a jerk.
Instead he showed Superman being a jerk and then proclaimed him the greatest guy ever.
Ah, Wonder Woman syndrome.
Although I don't think MoS went that far.
How does that relate to Wonder Woman?
I refer specifically to the 2011 TV Pilot
They kind of do that in the comics too, especially with the Amazons.
0
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAmod
Man of Steel would've been a much better movie if it wasn't a Superman movie
It would have been better but probably not by that much. The film still has a lot of glaring problems in its structure, character development, and plot.
The ideas aren't developed enough for it to be a good sci-fi movie. The characters are bland, although Michael Shannon's over the top acting is pretty amusing at times. The flashbacks don't really connect to anything or tie into any major themes. There are some pretty glaring plot problems that could have been fixed rather easily with a few lines of dialogue or extra scenes.
I think it probably would've been even more incomprehensible as anything other than a Superman movie. As it is, the film only works to the extent that you decide Superman is altruistic at heart, because he's Superman. If you take away the fact that he's Superman, that kind of problem infects every other aspect of the movie, because Snyder is bad at world-building. Supe's parents' motivation for sending him to Earth becomes even more obtuse, the entire opening sequence becomes more arbitrary and out of place, the existence of the Fortress of Solitude becomes increasingly implausible, the fact that Lois Lane is even a character in this movie becomes weird...
As it is, half this stuff works just because you've seen it before and you expect it to be that way. Oh hey, Lois Lane? Yeah, okay, she's Superman's girlfriend. Oh, random ice fortress? Right, that's Superman's summer home.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
+1
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Man of Steel would've been a much better movie if it wasn't a Superman movie
It would have been better but probably not by that much. The film still has a lot of glaring problems in its structure, character development, and plot.
The ideas aren't developed enough for it to be a good sci-fi movie. The characters are bland, although Michael Shannon's over the top acting is pretty amusing at times. The flashbacks don't really connect to anything or tie into any major themes. There are some pretty glaring plot problems that could have been fixed rather easily with a few lines of dialogue or extra scenes.
I think it probably would've been even more incomprehensible as anything other than a Superman movie. As it is, the film only works to the extent that you decide Superman is altruistic at heart, because he's Superman. If you take away the fact that he's Superman, that kind of problem infects every other aspect of the movie, because Snyder is bad at world-building. Supe's parents' motivation for sending him to Earth becomes even more obtuse, the entire opening sequence becomes more arbitrary and out of place, the existence of the Fortress of Solitude becomes increasingly implausible, the fact that Lois Lane is even a character in this movie becomes weird...
As it is, half this stuff works just because you've seen it before and you expect it to be that way. Oh hey, Lois Lane? Yeah, okay, she's Superman's girlfriend. Oh, random ice fortress? Right, that's Superman's summer home.
I don't think it'll be that confusing since it follows the "chosen one" tropes. Krypton sets up the idea of the child being special and his parents having to send him away because they're threatened. The scout ship/Fortress of Solitude is the memento left to the hero to set him on the quest to fulfill his destiny. Lois is the audience surrogate.
0
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
His first appearance he loses his hand to Superman's heat blast instead of Piranahas, because that's how you dawn justice!
I don't know, it could play out like a Brave and the Bold thing, where they interact with a bunch of different random heroes over the course of two and a half hours.
First fifteen minutes is Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman, next fifteen is Superman, Batman and Elongated Man, then Aquaman, then the Teen Titans, then Flash, then Green Lantern, then Jonah Hex, then the Legion of Super-Heroes, then at the end they all fight Mordru together.
Man of Steel would've been a much better movie if it wasn't a Superman movie
It would have been better but probably not by that much. The film still has a lot of glaring problems in its structure, character development, and plot.
The ideas aren't developed enough for it to be a good sci-fi movie. The characters are bland, although Michael Shannon's over the top acting is pretty amusing at times. The flashbacks don't really connect to anything or tie into any major themes. There are some pretty glaring plot problems that could have been fixed rather easily with a few lines of dialogue or extra scenes.
I think it probably would've been even more incomprehensible as anything other than a Superman movie. As it is, the film only works to the extent that you decide Superman is altruistic at heart, because he's Superman. If you take away the fact that he's Superman, that kind of problem infects every other aspect of the movie, because Snyder is bad at world-building. Supe's parents' motivation for sending him to Earth becomes even more obtuse, the entire opening sequence becomes more arbitrary and out of place, the existence of the Fortress of Solitude becomes increasingly implausible, the fact that Lois Lane is even a character in this movie becomes weird...
As it is, half this stuff works just because you've seen it before and you expect it to be that way. Oh hey, Lois Lane? Yeah, okay, she's Superman's girlfriend. Oh, random ice fortress? Right, that's Superman's summer home.
Agreed.
Without the Superman branding, the story becomes even more broken as the shifts in character and how the movie treats him wouldn't make any sense.
At least with the branding, we understand what Snyder was trying to do, even as it fails completely.
shryke on
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Without the Superman branding, I think most people would have called the film plagiarism.
Posts
Yeah, its fucking batty how bad these films are when you go back and look at them.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
priceless
The bully part of Superman II doesn't make sense from a "I should probably keep my secret identity a secret" point of view.
Movies are kind of awful.
Christopher Reeve is a fantastic superman though.
Nothing in modern superhero movies even comes close.
Superman's weird powers that come from nowhere are far, far less weird than the extra powers he pulled out of the air in his comic book heyday. It's probably true that something like flying backwards round the world to turn back time would seem daft and nonsensical to audiences now if a film did it, but it didn't feel dumb at all back then. Audiences didn't expect his powers to have rigidly set limits. He was Superman. Why not erase Lois's memory with a kiss? Why not have a costume with a throwable S?
I'll take campy and sincere and concerned about cats up trees over Broody McFrownyface and the big crater where Metropolis used to be. I saw Man of Steel and I came out thinking the makers didn't understand the character at all.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Even the depictions that most people feel adhere most closely to this gestalt Superman have done some pretty terrible things. We've discussed the breaking of "the bully"s hand, but as part of "turning back time" he implicitly let a bunch of people die as collateral damage, and he mindrapes Lois (memory wiping kiss - Batman got pretty pissed when someone tried that on him). DCAU is pretty celebrated as well, but he tosses a badguy through a (presumably occupied) Metropolis office building, dodges thrown objects (many of which are explosive), and deliberately destroys public infrastructure (even without brainwashing) because he doesn't like someone - things which have been discussed in this thread as being terrible when Man of Steel does it.
My main problem with Man of Steel is that Snyder screws up the tone - he can't decide whether Superman should be inspiring others to succeed by his methods, or inspiring them through his results. Whether Superman should be competent, or still coming to terms with his new role. Whether Superman should listen to his dad, or tell them (both) to stfu. The actual individual actions I don't have too much of a problem with - because Superman has done that kind of stuff before, and I am bemused when people in this thread essentially say "Man of Steel is different because reasons". Instead, I have a problem because apparently Snyder (or Goyer if you wish) has problems telling a coherent story.
I don't think it's a terrible movie - I think it's better than the snoozefest of Superman Returns (and I like Cavill's Supe better than Routh's Supe). But it's certainly a flawed movie.
Instead he showed Superman being a jerk and then proclaimed him the greatest guy ever.
Ah, Wonder Woman syndrome.
Although I don't think MoS went that far.
Despite the destruction caused in the DCAU, you don't assume that people are dying and suffering because it's a cartoon. Only when they explicitly show someone getting hurt or killed does it count. The rules are much more flexible. Just look at how often the abilities and power levels of various characters fluctuate. In one episode, the Flash can outrun a jet, in another episode, he has trouble keeping up with cars. Sometimes, Batman can take out aliens that give Superman trouble, other times, he has trouble facing regular humans. The Donner films aren't quite as exaggerated but they're still not trying to be realistic.
With MoS, they're intentionally making it very serious, ground, gritty, and realistic. The rules are much more rigid. Whereas in a cartoon, you can have someone getting hurt in a realistic way in one scene but then have that same person doing something incredible in the next scene, that doesn't work in a more grounded film. You can't have as much inconsistency in a film like MoS than in cartoons or less serious films.
I'm going to hazard a guess it's still just the yellow sunlight.
Kryptonian environments weaken him, that's pretty canon to Superman. So being on a spaceship with an artificial atmosphere and gravity would likely change lots of stuff about how he uses his powers. Spaceships are generally shielded from solar radiation too.
Thus, no flying/jumping and no superpowers in general.
Also he was sent to Earth because it was his best chance for survival, not the perfect chance for his survival. So it may still be risky for young Kryptonians on Earth.
None of those things are as bullshit as superman lifting an island made of kyrptonite
So, basically, really really really weak kryptonite.
How does that relate to Wonder Woman?
In the DCAU Superman is called out for his shit. He isn't perfect and makes mistakes, but he learns and tries to be careful with his power. He's a jerk sometimes, not 100% dick. They did that with Young Justice Superman too.
I think they mentioned the buildings being deserted earlier.
How long do you think it takes to evacuate a building that size?
I liked how they addressed it in Injustice:
Course, he then started lasering cars out of the air, when they were being thrown from moving traffic, and presumably occupied...
Didn't the city know there was an alien invasion incoming?
No. There's no way they were able to evacuate the majority of the population before the terraforming started.
Donner films have got personality. Personality goes a long way.
Seriously, though, the flaws in the Donner films (and there are plenty) are outweighed by the fact that everybody is having a fun time and totally sells their roles. When Superman is doing something stupid with his powers, that movie just owns it. Yeah, I just threw the S off my shirt, you got a problem with that? And when Superman is being a dick, it's still kind of charming about it.
And yeah, I'll admit that 95% of what makes the Donner films work is that Reeves is the best thing ever. It wouldn't have worked with another actor.
What I'm noticing here is that when superheroes are depicted doing things against their generally accepted character in movies, they're given much more weight than a shitty fill-in issue from a hack writer.
It would have been better but probably not by that much. The film still has a lot of glaring problems in its structure, character development, and plot.
The ideas aren't developed enough for it to be a good sci-fi movie. The characters are bland, although Michael Shannon's over the top acting is pretty amusing at times. The flashbacks don't really connect to anything or tie into any major themes. There are some pretty glaring plot problems that could have been fixed rather easily with a few lines of dialogue or extra scenes.
I refer specifically to the 2011 TV Pilot
They kind of do that in the comics too, especially with the Amazons.
I think it probably would've been even more incomprehensible as anything other than a Superman movie. As it is, the film only works to the extent that you decide Superman is altruistic at heart, because he's Superman. If you take away the fact that he's Superman, that kind of problem infects every other aspect of the movie, because Snyder is bad at world-building. Supe's parents' motivation for sending him to Earth becomes even more obtuse, the entire opening sequence becomes more arbitrary and out of place, the existence of the Fortress of Solitude becomes increasingly implausible, the fact that Lois Lane is even a character in this movie becomes weird...
As it is, half this stuff works just because you've seen it before and you expect it to be that way. Oh hey, Lois Lane? Yeah, okay, she's Superman's girlfriend. Oh, random ice fortress? Right, that's Superman's summer home.
Must mean they're going for JLU badass aquaman.
I don't think it'll be that confusing since it follows the "chosen one" tropes. Krypton sets up the idea of the child being special and his parents having to send him away because they're threatened. The scout ship/Fortress of Solitude is the memento left to the hero to set him on the quest to fulfill his destiny. Lois is the audience surrogate.
I know it should be don justice but movie title!
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
A glorious mess I must see in theaters.
I don't know, it could play out like a Brave and the Bold thing, where they interact with a bunch of different random heroes over the course of two and a half hours.
First fifteen minutes is Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman, next fifteen is Superman, Batman and Elongated Man, then Aquaman, then the Teen Titans, then Flash, then Green Lantern, then Jonah Hex, then the Legion of Super-Heroes, then at the end they all fight Mordru together.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Agreed.
Without the Superman branding, the story becomes even more broken as the shifts in character and how the movie treats him wouldn't make any sense.
At least with the branding, we understand what Snyder was trying to do, even as it fails completely.