Zack Snyder's 'Man of Steel'

[Darkstream]

Originally Posted by thelwig14

Loved it.

I would have just cut 10 minutes from the battle scene and added in 10 more minutes of character development from Clark's childhood/teenager years.

The way Snyder made this though he can have flashbacks in later movies.

That reminds me... one thing I haven't heard anyone mention is how great the casting was for both of the younger Clarks. Both child and Teen Clark looked exactly like younger versions of Henry Cavill. I'm always impressed when a film has kids that actually look like they are the same person as the adult actor. As much as I love Batman Begins, that kid that played young Bruce Wayne looked nothing like Christian Bale. I was impressed with Young Thor and Loki, though, in Marvel's Thor.

[unsung122212]

Originally Posted by Bolty

I truly wonder if the deleted scenes would clear up any of these faults. What if they did have several scenes taking place after the battle that showed the consequences, but they were simply cut to keep the movie from becoming super long.

More scenes with the Jenny girl so her fate would matter more to us.

I see many of the movies' faults as faults of omission not comission---that could be cleared up scene extensions and lines here and there. What if Jor-el had claimed his wife was ill to cover up her pregnancy from the council, etc.

If they were going to make cuts they sure weren't gonna cut the action stuff that they knew most moviegoers wanted.

I am hoping for a director's cut or an extensive deleted scenes section at the least.

As another person pointed out, Synder had 3 hour of footage with only one deleted scene. That is 30-40 minutes of something to add to the movie.

[Darkstream]

Originally Posted by unsung122212

As another person pointed out, Synder had 3 hour of footage with only one deleted scene. That is 30-40 minutes of something to add to the movie.

More action!

[Bolty]

Originally Posted by Darkstream

That reminds me... one thing I haven't heard anyone mention is how great the casting was for both of the younger Clarks. Both child and Teen Clark looked exactly like younger versions of Henry Cavill. I'm always impressed when a film has kids that actually look like they are the same person as the adult actor. As much as I love Batman Begins, that kid that played young Bruce Wayne looked nothing like Christian Bale. I was impressed with Young Thor and Loki, though, in Marvel's Thor.

Agree, the older 'young Clark' was a dead ringer---he can only hope he grows up to look like cavill!

Not too hard to find a date when you look like that.

[unsung122212]

Originally Posted by Darkstream

More action!

Oh god, I hope not. I thought it had just enough action that went a little long with the final fight with Zod.

[ONE_DAY_AS_A_LION]

I've read a lot of negative reviews. Here are the common comments: too much action, less character development, Superman kills

On 'too much action', what the hell do you expect when two kryptonians go at it???

On 'less character development', the full on action didn't start until the 90 minute mark, prior to that was establishing Clark/Superman's character.

On 'Superman kills' last ditch effort to stop Zod & probably last time he does that but if it should happen again, has to be a good reason, like what he did to Zod (please you saw how upset he was when he did it - ya know, the Last of the Kryptonians coming to a theater near you - couldn't resist)

[Dispatch Ninja]

I personally liked how the first half was nearly all story build up and the 2nd half went out all action. The fight scenes weren't hard for me to follow either. I still don't like that no one from the planet recognized that clark was superman at the end, not sure how they're going to make that work in a sequel.

[Darkstream]

Originally Posted by ONE_DAY_AS_A_LION

I've read a lot of negative reviews. Here are the common comments: too much action, less character development, Superman kills

On 'too much action', what the hell do you expect when two kryptonians go at it???

On 'less character development', the full on action didn't start until the 90 minute mark, prior to that was establishing Clark/Superman's character.

On 'Superman kills' last ditch effort to stop Zod & probably last time he does that but if it should happen again, has to be a good reason, like what he did to Zod (please you saw how upset he was when he did it - ya know, the Last of the Kryptonians coming to a theater near you - couldn't resist)

I think a big part of it is because there are a lot of flashbacks telling the story of Clark, and so many people are so used to the way it was done in Superman: The Movie, where they gave us an extended chunk of Smallville in between the Krypton and Metropolis settings. I guess when you break up the scenes, people feel they are missing out or something.

[Rinzler]

I think I need to revisit this film to gather my thoughts on it... I will say that some things worked... and some didn't. In the writing, casting, direction, composing, and performances, there were successes and failures.

[Blu-vie]

LEAVE SUPERMAN ALONE : MAN OF STEEL REVIEW - YouTube

This guy's review pretty much sums up what I think of the MoS.

[unsung122212]

Originally Posted by Dispatch Ninja

I personally liked how the first half was nearly all story build up and the 2nd half went out all action. The fight scenes weren't hard for me to follow either. I still don't like that no one from the planet recognized that clark was superman at the end, not sure how they're going to make that work in a sequel.

Well not just that,

[Show spoiler]how could the military not question Martha Kent as to why Zod came to her house specifically. Or Lois asking the police to take her to the Kent's residents. Also, I don't think that Perry and others at the Daily Planet actually saw the person named Clark Kent, only Superman/Kal-El. They could have just shrugged it to being someone that had a similar look to Superman.

[Bolty]

Originally Posted by Darkstream

I think a big part of it is because there are a lot of flashbacks telling the story of Clark, and so many people are so used to the way it was done in Superman: The Movie, where they gave us an extended chunk of Smallville in between the Krypton and Metropolis settings. I guess when you break up the scenes, people feel they are missing out or something.

I am so glad they broke up the Smallville scenes into segments---I was dreading an exact copy of the 1978 version-- 20 minutes of Krypton, 20 minutes in Smallville/Fortress, 40 minutes buildup to action and then an extended action sequence.

We got nearly exactly 20 minutes on Krypton (but with a lot of action) and then right into adult Clark as the loner with the flashbacks throw in. God that was so much better than if they had gone the same exact route. Also it made the retelling of the origin way more tolerable since it is so familar. Really really wonder though if they filmed the Kents finding the baby---I'd love to see that, but i get how they couldn't use it since his origin was told from his memories and not from his parents perspective.

[Chris435]

Originally Posted by Dispatch Ninja

I personally liked how the first half was nearly all story build up and the 2nd half went out all action. The fight scenes weren't hard for me to follow either. I still don't like that no one from the planet recognized that clark was superman at the end, not sure how they're going to make that work in a sequel.

I didn't like it either, but it's the classic take on the character. He's Clark Kent with the glasses, Superman without.

I was hoping they'd change that aspect, but it didn't make or break the movie for me.

[ONE_DAY_AS_A_LION]

Originally Posted by Darkstream

so many people are so used to the way it was done in Superman: The Movie, where they gave us an extended chunk of Smallville

That's the problem - so many people want it to to be like Superman the movie - that was already done - time to move on.

[roguescribner]

Some people here have dismissed Mark Waid's views (writer of Superman: Birthright and Kingdom Come) on the movie, but I have to say I agree 100% with this quoted passage from his review and that if things played out like he said, I'd probably be voting 4 or 5 stars. Unfortunately, it didn't.

[Show spoiler]

As the credits rolled, I told myself I was upset because Superman doesn’t kill. Full-stop, Superman doesn’t kill. But sitting there, I broke it down some more in my head because I sensed there was more to it since Superman clearly regretted killing Zod. I had to grant that the filmmakers at least went way out of their way to put Superman in a position suggesting (but hardly conclusively proving) he had no choice (and I did love Superman’s immediate-aftermath reaction to what he’d done). I granted that they’d at least tried to present Superman with an impossible choice and, on a purely rational level, and if this had been a movie about a guy named Ultraguy, I might even have bought what he did. But after I processed all that, I realized that it wasn’t so much my uncompromising vision of Superman that made this a total-fail moment for me; it was the failed lead-up TO the moment. As Superman’s having his final one-on-one battle with Zod, show me that he’s going out of his way to save people from getting caught in the middle. SHOW ME that trying to simultaneously protect humans and beat Zod is achingly, achingly costing Superman the fight. Build to that moment of the hard choice…show me, without doubt, that Superman has no other out and do a better job of convincing me that it’s a hard decision to make, and maybe I’ll give it to you. But even if I do? It’s not a victory. Not this sad, soul-darkening, utterly sans-catharsis “triumph” that doesn’t even feel like a win so much as a stop-loss. Two and a half hours, and I never once got the sense that Superman really achieved or earned anything.

[Cleric Empire]

Fassbender for Lex Luthor!

[ONE_DAY_AS_A_LION]

Originally Posted by bolty

i am so glad they broke up the smallville scenes into segments---i was dreading an exact copy of the 1978 version-- 20 minutes of krypton, 20 minutes in smallville/fortress, 40 minutes buildup to action and then an extended action sequence.

We got nearly exactly 20 minutes on krypton (but with a lot of action) and then right into adult clark as the loner with the flashbacks throw in. God that was so much better than if they had gone the same exact route. Also it made the retelling of the origin way more tolerable since it is so familar. Really really wonder though if they filmed the kents finding the baby---i'd love to see that, but i get how they couldn't use it since his origin was told from his memories and not from his parents perspective.

+1

[Bolty]

Originally Posted by unsung122212

Well not just that,

[Show spoiler]how could the military not question Martha Kent as to why Zod came to her house specifically. Or Lois asking the police to take her to the Kent's residents. Also, I don't think that Perry and others at the Daily Planet actually saw the person named Clark Kent, only Superman/Kal-El. They could have just shrugged it to being someone that had a similar look to Superman.

I've been seriously wondering.......

Are we to assume that the military can't figure out his identity (which is assinine) or simply that they can't/he won't let them--- figure his hideout (Fortress)

It would make perfect sense if they knew that Clark Kent/Superman worked at the Planet, but that he was keeping his 'home' hidden from them.

That i could live with.

If the military can't figure out what Lois did in a short time--without aliens having knocked on his family door at that point----then the military and by extension the audience are to be taken as morons.

[mrpink134]

Originally Posted by roguescribner

Some people here have dismissed Mark Waid's views (writer of Superman: Birthright and Kingdom Come) on the movie, but I have to say I agree 100% with this quoted passage from his review and that if things played out like he said, I'd probably be voting 4 or 5 stars. Unfortunately, it didn't.

You sound like a broken record!

[samlop10]

I went to watch the movie twice at my local theater in 3D, and the 3D was inverted! (It uses Dolby 3D btw) I had to turn my glasses upside down to watch it in proper 3D, with the objects in the movie placed right, and not what was supposed to be in the front being at the back and what was supposed to be at the back being at the front. Most people did not even notice it. I went to tell an employee but they did not fix it. At the end some people said that that was the worst 3D they had seen, at least they noticed something was wrong, but I suspect that they thought it was just the movie's 3D.