Man of Steel (2013)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
User avatar
Posts: 16716
Joined: March 2012
m4st4 wrote:
You literally live to for attention
I honestly don't care one bit who you think you are.
:lol: English is not my primary language and yet this is just ridiculous.
Actually, that second one is actually grammatically correct.

Posts: 14
Joined: June 2013
darthnazgul wrote:
DKnight007 wrote: Yeah, smells like an agenda to me.

MOS Cinemascore A- amongst the general movie going public.

Critics think they're OPINION is better than everyone.

Elitist arrogant douche bags.....but wait....MOS was bad because it was a bit too dark, and it didn't have enough comedy and wasn't exactly like Donners old azz dated version. Lol

What a joke.
I haven't seen any critics saying their opinion is better. Well, I've known of critics that have done that before but I just ignore them now. Also, I haven't seen anybody complaining that the movie was too dark.
The only critic I had a problem with was Rex Reed. The guy writes biased reviews in my opinion.
But still everyone has there own view of how they thought the movie was. Some people loved and some people didn't. I liked it, but my friend didn't. Thats just how it goes.

Posts: 140
Joined: July 2012

Just back from an Imax 3D premier in France (original version though)

first, disappointed with my cinema. No AC. We were all sweating inside and my glasses were broken :judge:

now! what about the movie?
what can i say?

i haven't follow the promotion. I've stopped watching teaser and trailer after the third one. So I was not exposed to spoiler.
the movie is damn good. i'll give him that. Snyder/Nolan/Goyer: they succeed in bringing superman back in the business. Cavill is a nice superman.
but they are flaws, big flaws that i can't stand personnally.
flatness: some crucial characters such as Lois Lane aren't developped enough. some bond/ties/relationship aren't developped enough (the reason why the kent so much love clark, why he is special for them). Jo Kent is a great character but Martha Kent is not developped enough. Zod deserves more attention. As I read it earlier in this forum. You don't have time to understand what's happening on the screen between the characters. you don't have time to settle down, have a breath. It has cons and pros but if you can't understand the characters etc etc etc... then it's a con.
Many things aren't said and when you open a new story you tell those missing stuff. If i haven't read or watch something about superman in my entire life and I watch this movie i won't understand the ties between the characters. this is a complex universe and if this is an introduction you need to tell everything to the audience. eventhough it's boring, even if there's a lack of action you can always put some more action in ep.2 or ep.3.
i'm really surprised by that because when you have a fan-like writer like Goyer and someone who loves deep, developped characters such as Nolan you expect that in the scenario. maybe it is in the scenario but it isn't in the movie. I won't debate or argue that there are missing scenes. but it's almost too action-packed for an ep.1 movie.
Superman is really well-grounded in the story. Who is CK and how does he become S is the best part of the movie. But it needs time to develop. i had the impression that it happens in 5-10 minutes. you see a fisherman and then 10 minutes later this guy is now superman. And I think this is because there's too much action sequences.
what is surprising is also the scenario itself. i had the strange sensation that everything was logic (pro) but given (con). i saw where the movie was going before it happened and that is really not a good thing. Sometimes you don't understand "how" for example: why and how he end up working on that military complex that comes from, literally, nowhere? it's awkward.
all in all, they just put CK in different situation to show us how he reacts and how he becomes S. what can he do with his strenght etc etc etc. It's description over description over description. we needed to focus more on who is he psychologically.

so basically there are many things to adjust (but can't be adjusted unfortunately): less action or more talking scenes. why the hell do they need to kiss each other in the middle of that ground zero city. they don't need to fall in love at the end of it. don't rush it. take your time. this romance isn't developped.

basically, everything but it needs much MORE time.

cons (yeah prepare for a lot insults here)
cinematography. Of course cinematography!!! BLOODY HEEEEEEEELL!!! Amir Mokri fucking ruined the movie with his transformers-like way of shooting. you're not shooting "atrocious-animated-cgi-ed" robots. yes i'm as pissed as Christian Bale was on T4's set. but this guy is a jerk. get a job or a life but stop shooting movies this way. how is it possible to do that kind of shit work. Where's the guy who shoot Lord of War at point of his career? VFX=awful zoom E-VE-RY-SIN-GLE-TI-ME. all the tracking and handled shots are just pain in the a** to understand. ok during the fight scenes i can understanding shaky shooting but even when you have to shoot still, you're still handeld and moving. you're shooting for imax screen can you understand that you'll with fuck our eyes for 2 hours and 20 minutes. Fuck this blairwitch-like way of shooting. I don't understand people who are using that way to shoot on purpose but... without a good, logic reason. it's the movie about a man with his own flesh and blood who can do wonders. We have to see those wonders like if we were seing those amazing things for real. We have to appreciate and see the details. The outstanding and the amazing we need to see how it looks like and we can't because he was having parkinson the entire movie. :sick: :sick: :sick:
oh i just imagined the moment when Nolan saw the rushs and said "ahum it's "a bit" shaky, isn't it?"

Amir Mokri for MoS 2: "Death or Exile?" :judge:

Now :D :lol: i'll rewatch this movie one or two times to have a full opinion on it.
Last edited by Zimmeredge on June 18th, 2013, 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 91
Joined: July 2012
Obvious Spoilers.

Well, now that the film has premiered it's time to get into the dirty little details. While many people love Man of Steel (especially on this board), there are many others whose expectations were not met, who have things they would change, or outright hate the film. This is not a place for a "You're wrong, I'm right!" argument to break out, rather, it's for those who feel unfulfilled by what they saw and and would ultimately change things given the chance.

Personally, I would give Man of Steel a 7/10 upon my first viewing. It's not a horrible film, but it definitely did not live up the advertising which had been created for it, nor did it live up to my hope of having a legitimately inventive and exciting beginning of a DC Shared Universe, unlike Iron Man. Here are some nits, picks, and complaints to get us started off.
-Mixed feelings about the opening Krypton scene. I liked how they showed Zod taking power, which was better than what we had seen in the Donner films, but as for the look of Krypton itself-sure it looked different than the Donner films and alien enough I suppose-but I didn't care much for it. Why would an advanced civilization have winged mounts to fly around on or have their genesis chamber-big womb-undersea? I think some of that stuff was just put in their for a visual spectacle, and it didn't work for me.

-I also thought the opening sequence went on too long. Battle Jor-El was a little bit much and the way he kicked Zod's behind was pushing it too far. I'm sure they probably had to accommodate Crowe but still Zod should've handled himself much better if he is a genetically engineered warrior.

-Why is the genetic destiny of Krypton embodied in an ancient skull? And why isn't there better security around that skull?

-the Krypton scenes that follow border on nonsensical and way too rushed. If we had just had maybe one or two scenes prior to the council scene, establishing Jor El and General Zod as genuine allies with one tragic difference in world views, it would have given so much more weight to the Jor El's death, Zod's incarceration, and the destruction of Krypton. Ultimately it just feels like one rushed action setpiece to the next, setting up the very plotty MacGuffin in the Codex. Say what you want about the original Superman's version of Krypton, the silly outfits and fake looking sets, Donner gives it mournful pace and a wonderful, wise Jor El in Marlon Brando who really sells the importance of the moment. TELLING rather than SHOWING is generally a big complaint I have about David Goyer's script.

-When Superman takes Zod out for bullying Martha, he seems to forget the other Kryptonian soldiers there. What was to stop any of them from killing Martha while he's tussling with Zod?

-Superman did seem a bit oblivious to the destruction he was causing, or part of causing. There was at least one scene where he's warning some locals to get inside, but that doesn't mean much when they are throwing people through buildings and leveling skyscrapers, particularly in the Krypton scene.

-Why doesn't anyone think opening a black hole above Metropolis might not be a bad idea?

-Also, if it was such a big deal about Lara and Jor-El conceiving naturally, how did they cover up the pregnancy? Did anyone not notice that Lara was pregnant? With Jor-El being a prominent scientist I would assume he might be somewhat in the public eye.

User avatar
Posts: 10554
Joined: March 2012
Location: The Rose City
Zimmeredge wrote:Zod deserves more attention.
I agree, upon second viewing some performances weren't a impressive as I previously thought, but Shannon's Zod was even better.

User avatar
Posts: 15999
Joined: June 2011
Location: New York City
"You believe your son is safe? I WILL FIND HIM."

User avatar
Posts: 10554
Joined: March 2012
Location: The Rose City
TehBatGetsBraked wrote:"You believe your son is safe? I WILL FIND HIM."
Zid was fantastic. ;)

User avatar
Posts: 700
Joined: August 2012
Location: Mar del Plata, BA, Argentina.
Oh, I'm still shocked. Just got from the cinema.
That was bad, it disappointed me so much :(

I'll try to write something when I recover.

Posts: 140
Joined: July 2012
Durden wrote:
Zimmeredge wrote:Zod deserves more attention.
I agree, upon second viewing some performances weren't a impressive as I previously thought, but Shannon's Zod was even better.

i so much love this actor since take shelter. incredible in MOS. his acting is great. but he lacks screentime.

User avatar
Posts: 8282
Joined: May 2012
Location: The Island, NY
"If you love these people so much, you can MOURN for them!"
"You can save them all."
"Goodbye my son."

Post Reply