If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Group of men having a conversation in a restroom about how the new Superman movie wasn't as good as the original are interrupted by Terence Stamp. No word on whether they knelt before him   (tv.yahoo.com) divider line 119
    More: Amusing, Terence Stamp, superman movies, Superman, Man of Steel, movie theaters, General Zod, Ojai, Superman reboot  
•       •       •

5896 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 24 Jun 2013 at 12:55 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



119 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-24 11:28:00 AM
I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.
 
2013-06-24 11:28:31 AM
General Zod is watching you pee.
 
2013-06-24 11:45:24 AM

DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.


It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.
 
2013-06-24 11:46:59 AM

Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.


The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.
 
2013-06-24 11:53:02 AM

DamnYankees: The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.


No one can get hurt?! You do know that one of them (no spoilers!) gets hurt really effing bad.
 
2013-06-24 11:53:34 AM

DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.


This has been my complaint with dozens of "boom Boom" action movies for a long time: the more booms you have in the movie, the worse of a job the "good guys" are doing.  A perfect example of this was the old Nick Cage movie Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene.   In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right.  That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians
 
2013-06-24 11:54:00 AM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: No one can get hurt?! You do know that one of them (no spoilers!) gets hurt really effing bad.


Yes, he did, but in a particular way which requires no spectacle. Being thrown around a city did absolutely nothing to hurt any of them.
 
2013-06-24 11:54:23 AM

DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.


See, there are two easy ways to address the "no stakes" issue: 1. Supes and enemies show genuine injuries; 2. create tension by Supes having to spend time/energy saving people and getting hurt while doing it. Bruising and bleeding, Supes having to hold up a wall long enough for bystanders to get away while Zod hammers on his kidneys - how hard would've it have been for them to do that?
 
2013-06-24 11:55:26 AM

Magorn: That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians


But that would've robbed us of that awesome ending with Steve Buscemi.
 
2013-06-24 12:01:30 PM

DamnYankees: Yes, he did, but in a particular way which requires no spectacle. Being thrown around a city did absolutely nothing to hurt any of them.


It slowed them down. You just can't lead in with the haymaker! It was obvious that the battle was taking its toll on them now they never spelled out if it was for the strikes that they were delivering or from the impacts for the buildings.
 
2013-06-24 12:12:40 PM
Sorry, but who the hell hangs out in the men's room discussing superman movies.
 
2013-06-24 12:24:01 PM
This has nothing to do with bathroom etiquette, but do you think Terence Stamp is a fistbump kind of guy? I like to think he shies away from shaking people's hands, I bet too many people have tried to crush his hand when offered. I have to admit I'd be tempted.
 
2013-06-24 12:33:41 PM

Magorn: DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.

This has been my complaint with dozens of "boom Boom" action movies for a long time: the more booms you have in the movie, the worse of a job the "good guys" are doing.  A perfect example of this was the old Nick Cage movie Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene.   In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right.  That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians


Or as I call it, the Dark Knight Conundrum. Joker just killed a bunch of people, is a complete psychopath, and has a history of murdering tons of people, including cops. You have the joker in your sights with a motorcycle with a mounted machine gun on it (even though you're batman and you don't kill people, you have a bunch of guns). Also nevermind you shot through a bunch of stuff on your machine gun mounted motorcycle and could have murdered a bunch of civilians in the process.

Do you A) shoot him, thus completely ending his killing spree, or B) continually try to capture him alive and put him in prison so you can have a moment in which you can say you're better than him? Oh and knowing he'll probably escape prison at some point and potentially murder hundreds more people.

Even better if Joker is in the DC universe with Superman.

Batman: "Superman, find joker and kill him. You know what, while you're at it go back in time and kill him before he killed anyone, and while you're at it take out Ra's al Ghul and all his henchmen too and the person who murdered my parents."
<Superman disappears and reappears.>
Superman: "Done."
Batman: "Huh? Who are you? I have a business meeting with my father."
 
2013-06-24 12:43:38 PM

Magorn: Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene.   In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right.  That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians


Yeah, shooting down a plane with a bunch of convicts (admittedlyone good guy convict and one cop)is a worse crime than letting it crash into the Vegas strip, killing hundreds and causing millions in property damage. Chief O'Brien was a dick but he was hardly the bad guy. And John Cusack destroyed his ride. Oh, and the whole affair let Steve Buscemi, the Hannibal Lector of the group, go free. Great story.

/liked Con Air
 
2013-06-24 01:00:49 PM
I just imagined Steve Carrell as one of the guys, at the urinal, turning around to address him in mid-wizz.

/pissed it by THAT much
 
2013-06-24 01:01:17 PM

basemetal: Sorry, but who the hell hangs out in the men's room discussing superman movies.


Some of us take a very wide stance when we discuss the merits of a film
 
2013-06-24 01:02:27 PM
I hope he told them Wilson is coming
 
2013-06-24 01:04:17 PM

DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.


Right.

Even in the comic books Superman's powers and strength have significantly increased overtime -- which I think is a mistake. If I were writing a reboot the first thing I'd do is get rid of his invulnerability. He'd still be super strong, but I'd limit things by saying bullets cannot break his skin, but they can bruise it, so if Superman gets hit by a missile or throws himself in front of a train, for example, he's going to get seriously injured.
 
2013-06-24 01:04:42 PM

Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.


I was talking about this very thing the other day. The body count was huge compared to the original movies (ostensibly thousands vs....what? Four in the previous flicks?). As for the movie itself, they probably could have shaved 20 minutes off it and tidied-up the third act. It was an exhausting assault on the viewer as well as General Zod.

Side observation: it's interesting how far we've come in a decade. With all the building collapses in (let's face it, Metropolis = NY) there's no way you could have made/screened this film in late 2001, 2002.
 
2013-06-24 01:06:18 PM

basemetal: Sorry, but who the hell hangs out in the men's room discussing superman movies.


i610.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-24 01:10:15 PM
I always get Terence Stamp and Charles Dance confused.


/my brother Numsey has forgiven me!
 
2013-06-24 01:10:35 PM

Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.

See, there are two easy ways to address the "no stakes" issue: 1. Supes and enemies show genuine injuries; 2. create tension by Supes having to spend time/energy saving people and getting hurt while doing it. Bruising and bleeding, Supes having to hold up a wall long enough for bystanders to get away while Zod hammers on his kidneys - how hard would've it have been for them to do that?


This would have been a much more entertaining fight than what we got for the last 10 minutes.
 
2013-06-24 01:14:09 PM

bdub77: Magorn: DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.

This has been my complaint with dozens of "boom Boom" action movies for a long time: the more booms you have in the movie, the worse of a job the "good guys" are doing.  A perfect example of this was the old Nick Cage movie Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene.   In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right.  That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians

Or as I call it, the Dark Knight Conundrum. Joker just killed a bunch of people, is a complete psychopath, and has a history of murdering tons of people, including cops. You have the joker in your sights with a motorcycle with a mounted machine gun on it (even though you're batman and you don't kill people, you have a bunch of guns). Also nevermind you shot through a bunch of stuff on your machine gun mounted motorcycle and could have murdered a bunch of civilians in the process.

Do you A) shoot him, thus completely ending his killing spree, or B) continually try to capture him alive and put him in prison so you can have a moment in which you can say you're better than ...


That's why I don't read crossovers* with Supes and Batman. I like to pretend they're in separate universes. In a world with Superman, Batman is basically superfluous, and I don't want to live in such a world.

* unless they're totally awesome, like Superman: Red Son
 
2013-06-24 01:14:32 PM

basemetal: Sorry, but who the hell hangs out in the men's room discussing superman movies.


s.mcstatic.com

Superman. It's what's called a male pornographic fantasy.
 
2013-06-24 01:18:08 PM
Man of Steel was fine. I don't know what people wanted from it, but I liked it better than the 1978 Superman - blasphemous, I know. The reason is that it took itself more seriously, was a bit (though obviously not much) more "believable" and had a villain that had a reasonable motivation. In the 1978 film, you had Superman flying with Lois Lane without having to hold her, and Superman being able to travel back in time to save Lois - but not, you know, prevent the Holocaust or whatever.

I know, I know. Comics are serious business, right?
 
2013-06-24 01:22:19 PM

Lord Dimwit: Man of Steel was fine. I don't know what people wanted from it


For it to be better than fine.
 
2013-06-24 01:22:39 PM

Magorn: A perfect example of this was the old Nick Cage movie Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene. In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right. That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians


wow man, nice spoiler alert dickhole.
 
2013-06-24 01:24:57 PM
I was horrified by what I saw on that screen. Horrified. While I appreciate that Zod had a freak'n motivation this time around it was established almost immediately that there were little to no stakes. Had Clark experienced some genuine anguish over a handful of casualties in the Smallville battle scene and he had to haul ass even faster to save Metropolis (and maybe keep that fight, I don't know, contained somewhat?) then it might have been somewhat more interesting.

But it wasn't. And I think they kind of missed the point of who Superman is supposed to be.
 
2013-06-24 01:28:08 PM

DamnYankees: Lord Dimwit: Man of Steel was fine. I don't know what people wanted from it

For it to be better than fine.


This.

rickythepenguin: Magorn: A perfect example of this was the old Nick Cage movie Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene. In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right. That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians

wow man, nice spoiler alert dickhole.


Really?  That movie's, what, 20 years old?  If you haven't seen it yet well...tough luck, man.
 
2013-06-24 01:29:32 PM

rickythepenguin: Magorn: A perfect example of this was the old Nick Cage movie Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene. In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right. That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians

wow man, nice spoiler alert dickhole.


It was his sled
 
2013-06-24 01:29:52 PM

rickythepenguin: Magorn: A perfect example of this was the old Nick Cage movie Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene. In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right. That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians

wow man, nice spoiler alert dickhole.


And Bruce Willis was actually dead the whole time.
 
2013-06-24 01:29:57 PM
SURPRISE ZOD! XD
 
2013-06-24 01:31:25 PM

DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.


That was an issue with me as well.  Compare Man of Steel to The Avengers.  You had:  two assassins, a selfish alcoholic billionaire, and a brutish green rage monster who seemed more concerned with collateral damage and civilian casualties than the Big Blue Boy Scout.  You saw Captain America devising a containment plan to limit the battle just to mid-town, and coordinating with the NYPD and New York National Guard.  Even Hawkeye and Black Widow were pulling civilians out of a wrecked bus.

Afterwards, you had the news footage montage where various regular people mentioned how a specific Avenger saved them, and you saw people cleaning up and rebuilding.
 
2013-06-24 01:34:22 PM

KatjaMouse: And Bruce Willis was actually dead the whole time.


You need to use the new meme on this:

"The guy in the hair piece was Bruce Willis the whole time!"
 
2013-06-24 01:34:55 PM

DamnYankees: Lord Dimwit: Man of Steel was fine. I don't know what people wanted from it

For it to be better than fine.


Well, sure, but that's true of most things.

I'll put it this way: it was better than I'd feared, not as good as I'd hoped.
 
2013-06-24 01:35:47 PM

KatjaMouse: rickythepenguin: Magorn: A perfect example of this was the old Nick Cage movie Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene. In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right. That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians

wow man, nice spoiler alert dickhole.

And Bruce Willis was actually dead the whole time.


Kong dies at the end.
 
2013-06-24 01:36:01 PM
He should have exited the bathroom, turning just before the door was closing and said "Nobody will ever believe you."
 
2013-06-24 01:39:11 PM

DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.


It's funny that in the comics when he is fighting someone with a similar power level, he does get bloodied up.  But in the movies, nope.  Were they trying to not show blood so that the rating would be low enough so parents would take their kids to see it?
 
2013-06-24 01:39:56 PM

Sgt Otter: DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.

That was an issue with me as well.  Compare Man of Steel to The Avengers.  You had:  two assassins, a selfish alcoholic billionaire, and a brutish green rage monster who seemed more concerned with collateral damage and civilian casualties than the Big Blue Boy Scout.  You saw Captain America devising a containment plan to limit the battle just to mid-town, and coordinating with the NYPD and New York National Guard.  Even Hawkeye and Black Widow were pulling civilians out of a wrecked bus.

Afterwards, you had the news footage montage where various regular people mentioned how a specific Avenger saved them, and you saw people cleaning up and rebuilding.


That's another thing:  It seems like MoS completely forgot about collateral damage AND the ramifications of the battle, while "The Avengers" actually made it part of the story.  Leaving that part of the story to dangle for the next movie; which, of course, was partly mentioned by Tony in "IM3".
 
2013-06-24 01:40:15 PM

PsyLord: Were they trying to not show blood so that the rating would be low enough so parents would take their kids to see it?


Yes. This movie suffers badly from PG-13ness. How many farking movies do we need where there's mass carnage, but you're not allowed to see or feel any of it because otherwise it'd be an R.

Only one director can pull off PG-13 violence, and that's Nolan.
 
2013-06-24 01:41:35 PM

DamnYankees: PsyLord: Were they trying to not show blood so that the rating would be low enough so parents would take their kids to see it?

Yes. This movie suffers badly from PG-13ness. How many farking movies do we need where there's mass carnage, but you're not allowed to see or feel any of it because otherwise it'd be an R.

Only one director can pull off PG-13 violence, and that's Nolan.


Which is quite funny considering "Superman/Batman: Apocalypse" actually had scenes involving blood.
 
2013-06-24 01:46:20 PM
SPOILERSSPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

Honestly, I think that all the destruction and Zod's killing are setting up the character arc for the next movie.

In this one, Superman has come to terms of his powers and who he is, but not yet with his responsibility as beacon of hope for mankind.

After all, this is a Superman that has just been tossed into a major crisis without much time to prepare or reflect about it and is facing an enemy willing to commit genocide on a global scale.

I think that there is a point that the movie is called Man of Steel, and he is barely called Superman. Because he is not Superman yet. He will be, and I think that the elements are there, but he still has to become Superman.

Besides, at the end of the day, the movie opened with him saving people from an oil platform and stopped a doomsday device that would have ended all Earth's live, I guess that it is very Superman to me.

But I guess that a bit of someone talking about how the city has been evacuated could have been good.

/I liked the movie.
//Comparing it with the Reeves version is stupid.
 
2013-06-24 01:46:51 PM
PEE BEFORE ZOD!
 
2013-06-24 01:46:57 PM
Would have been a much better story had they said the new one was better, only to be approached by Stamp.  "Why do you say this to me...when you know I will KILL you for it?"

In fact, had Stamp just used that as his staple response to everything, we'd all have a whole lot more interest in him.
 
2013-06-24 01:48:40 PM
I would call for a vote of no confidence.
 
2013-06-24 01:51:26 PM

Crewmannumber6: basemetal: Sorry, but who the hell hangs out in the men's room discussing superman movies.

[i610.photobucket.com image 600x258]


came for this pic - thanks for posting!
 
2013-06-24 01:52:31 PM

DamnYankees: Yes. This movie suffers badly from PG-13ness. How many farking movies do we need where there's mass carnage, but you're not allowed to see or feel any of it because otherwise it'd be an R.

Only one director can pull off PG-13 violence, and that's Nolan.


I don't know what movie you saw. When the world engine was going on you had bodies in the air coming up screaming then, BOOM, then coming up again silent. There was also the red mist as a pilot was torn from his cockpit and throw into the turbines of his jet, and a large number of other moments.

Movie was pretty damn violent even for a pg-13, and lets face it. If we want these movies to succeed then they need to have the widest audience possible, so some concessions are going to be made.

KatjaMouse: I was horrified by what I saw on that screen. Horrified. While I appreciate that Zod had a freak'n motivation this time around it was established almost immediately that there were little to no stakes. Had Clark experienced some genuine anguish over a handful of casualties in the Smallville battle scene and he had to haul ass even faster to save Metropolis (and maybe keep that fight, I don't know, contained somewhat?) then it might have been somewhat more interesting.

But it wasn't. And I think they kind of missed the point of who Superman is supposed to be.


Its a reboot, they can make supes be whoever they want and I like what they have so far. Besides, remember we saw a daily planet totally rebuilt as Clark entered so you have no idea how long in timeline between the disaster and present day. Then you have the government trying to track him, etc...

There's a lot of material to get into serious supe mode for the next movie, I'm in the Kevin Smith camp of yes it is not what all of us wanted as hardcore fans but it was what was needed to spring board the franchise from circling the drain to alive and well again.
 
2013-06-24 02:06:33 PM
Never forget:

Superman's greatest weakness is his combat wisdom - he's a TERRIBLE strategist.

Bats ambushes him in Dark Knight Returns. IN. A. TANK.

Thor (JLA vs. Avengers) lures him into a trap where he confronts his greatest enemy: 100,000,000,000 volts of pure power. Superman's brain can't handle it, goes unconscious - drops like a turd.

...and Venom beats the crap out of him in the most one-sided fist-fight in comics history: Eddie Brock disguises himself as a regular guy, Superman walks past him... Eddie has the symbiote possess Superman (he did the same thing to Punisher) and uses Clark's own fists to beat himself to uncnsciousness.

TL;DR - Superman is a TERRIBLE strategist.
 
2013-06-24 02:08:55 PM

OtherLittleGuy: I just imagined Steve Carrell Don Adams as one of the guys, at the urinal, turning around to address him in mid-wizz.

/pissed it by THAT much


FTFY, now parallels the story
 
2013-06-24 02:12:34 PM

bdub77: Magorn: DamnYankees: Solon Isonomia: DamnYankees: I don't think I've seen the original, but the new one isn't very good.

It had one climatic event too many and I'm still disappointed by the lack of concern for collateral damage, IMHO. But it sure did look pretty.

The collateral damage thing is a huge issue, but the fight scenes suffered from the same thing every Superman fight scenes suffer from - there are no stakes at all, since no one can get hurt. It's just stupid, and I really don't find it thrilling at all. Give me Batman v. Bane in a small room any day of the week.

This has been my complaint with dozens of "boom Boom" action movies for a long time: the more booms you have in the movie, the worse of a job the "good guys" are doing.  A perfect example of this was the old Nick Cage movie Con Air, which was a halfway decent film until somebody decided it needed the "runaway plane destroying the Vegas Strip" scene.   In that single scene they destroyed the plot of the movie and mde John Cusak's charachter, the obstensible hero, wrong and Colm Meany, the supposed villain of the piece, to be right.  That Plane SHOULD have been shot down before it was allowed to do that much damage, and kill (presumably) that many people as it roared out of control into a city crowded with thousand of pedestrians

Or as I call it, the Dark Knight Conundrum. Joker just killed a bunch of people, is a complete psychopath, and has a history of murdering tons of people, including cops. You have the joker in your sights with a motorcycle with a mounted machine gun on it (even though you're batman and you don't kill people, you have a bunch of guns). Also nevermind you shot through a bunch of stuff on your machine gun mounted motorcycle and could have murdered a bunch of civilians in the process.

Do you A) shoot him, thus completely ending his killing spree, or B) continually try to capture him alive and put him in prison so you can have a moment in which you can say you're better than ...


That's the injustice storyline, sorta.
 
Displayed 50 of 119 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report