Bio not provided
@fan101 There wasnt a big gripe about Avengers because each character had strengths and weaknesses shown throughout. Captain America and Black Widow showed fatigue as they tried to clear Wall Street, Tony Stark almost died when he guided the missile into the portal. Then there was the villain Loki who was obviously rattled by Hulk as he was thrashed about like a rag doll. Plus New York wasnt atomized by a needless world engine. There was an attempt by the heroes to contain the fight in one square area to minimalize casulties. MOS didnt operate that way it was biggest explosions and super powered beings that showed no fatique or injury as they foguht each other. There was no real investment or worry for Superman as he was pummeled because he showed no such physical vulnerability that and everything was shown out of focus it was hard to make out exactly what was going on.
12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman
@Thatguy12345 Who fraking cares if my picks came after 1986? I never said I was against the character after that period. I simply said there are some good stories out there with Superman as he should be a man of the people doing good for goodness sake. The decade of the 90's almost ruined him, that was the decade I detested and most of the picks of yours were just gimmick stories that while entertaining had lil to no substance or portrayed the character like he should be. The early 2000's also had some wild and crazy ideas that were just wrong or misguided Jim Lee's For Tomorrow is one of them another one comes to mind is Terry austin's Action run. Superman didnt really become great again until Johns took over Action and Grant wrote the great All Star. As for definitive version of the character there is one and it's usually the silver or bronze age version because no matter how ma reboots or dropped plotlines everything eventually circles bac to those ideals and morals
@Thatguy12345 @trans8010 @rosslunney Ummmm I was born in 1987, my first Superman comic was Doomsday! aka Death of Superman. So your attempts to throw me for a fool were futile. Also by throwing books currently being plugged by DC and their New52 stance along with Red Son, Secret Origins, and Birthright. Birthright is usually to be the definitive origin story with most fans and is a crowd pleaser, Waid clearly knows the character and tries his hardest to do justice to Superman. Mark Waid was also among the very celeb talents that disliked MOS. Secret Origins tries to be birthright but comes across as a tedious redo by Geoff Johns who at the time was remaking Superman and restored many of the silver age elements, it was entertaining but a bit unneccesary. The Death and Return of Superman are good reads as well but are not definitive versions of the character either. For Tomorrow is a terrible read it goes nowhere real fast and has a anticlimatic conclusion. The covers were nice though. Earth One is can obvious push to gain younger readers by creating abn origin story that is relatable to those emo youngsters, it's decent but not a favorite. Red Son is an elseworlds tale and not one that should have been included here. If you want great Superman stories besides Birthright I would reccommend Superman Sandman Saga, Superman in the Sixties, Superman Vs. The Flash, Superman: For the Man who has Everything, Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow, Man of Steel, All Star Superman, Last Son, Brainiac, and Action 775.
1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman
@Thatguy12345 @trans8010 @jmaldo85 @Juano Guzman
Any General would brave the atmospheric pressures if it meant more power to best his opponent, even then as his body adapted to the changes forced on him in the climatic final battle. Kal was shown to have been in pain as he struggled to breathe as an infant, and how each power caused him pain and confusion as they manifested yet with Zod there was only pain in that brief moment when his armor as shattered in Smallville, during the fight in Metropolis the pain was suddenly gone. That comment now contridicts itself in hindsight since obviously the atmospheric changes only affect infants and young children in such a brutal fashion.
@Thatguy12345 @trans8010 @jmaldo85 @Juano Guzman It wasnt the world, he was making his way due north through Canada and the arctic. That's following what came before it, the original comic character trekked the world learning about humanity in all cultures because he knew once he was ready he would be a man of the people all people from all walks of life. I was expecting at long last THAT film to be made, so there's one of my disappointments with this film he just goes back to Kansas. Which from a literary point of view doesnt add to the plot or anything yes he goes back home that's nice and natural which is something I didnt mind, however what does he do there? Washes dishes and watches football and talks about some girl he saved from sentry robots. Where's the reflection of time lost between a mother and her son? There were apart ten years and that's the way Goyer and Snyder decided to handle their reunion? Where's the cool stories he could tell to her about his journey, the opportunity to save a dying family from a flaming car wreck, or twarting a simple hold up from a trade mart or something. Add some bits of characterization about how he wants something more than just to be a Superman, these scenes would have helped the development of this character in the present and maybe we could have had a nice lil action scene told via flashback. Instead we had a potential bonding scene wasted.
@rosslunney @trans8010 @Contrabardus My comment had nothing to do whether a successful film made a lot of money but was critically panned or if a critically acclaimed film makes no money and their merits on whether or not that's what makes a hit or flop. I simply said had the public been so in love with Man of Steel like everyone claims on RT and metacritic then it should have at least kept the top spot the next week or at least made more than a buddy cop film that appeals to a very niche audience and a Pixar sequel from a film that could very well be the black sheep of the catalog, It didnt.
My point stands Man of Steel simply did not have the great word of mouth to influence a stronger second weekend. All that money made in week 1 only tells me that those who saw it simply paid for a ticket not if they enjoyed the picture. It doesnt matter if there's strong competition from other films if a film itself is good and the audience itself thinks it's good they will go out of their way to support it. Well the support asnt there.
The theater in my area the views were polarizing. There were some that thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread and the other portion mainly families and older senior citizens (they were there) who considered it a betrayal to the source material. In fact after the lights went back up there was a kid one row down from me, the lights go up he stands and claps trying to start an applause. Every person in the surrounding area just turns and looks at him with puzzlement. That was Man of Steel in my area.
1 year, 1 month ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman
@jmaldo85 @trans8010 @Contrabardus @rosslunney No the christ alligory came from the films. His origins were heavily based from the book of exodus and the stories of Moses feeing the israelites. Siegel and Shuster were jewish they wouldnt have used New Testament scripture in their tales.
I'm sorry but not immediately going out to fight evil because Clark still had to figure out humanity is a ploy to excuse Goyer's bad writing. At ths point he's lived amongest us for 33 years. You are telling me in all that time he not once read a history book, or saw a movie or even talked to people and seen something other than darkness?
All throughout the film you see or hear about Clark saving people throught out his trek across Canada, the oil platform, the guardian angel bit Lois immediately latches on to, even saving a bus load of children in his youth, yet that all stops after he puts on the suit. Why?
Clark obviously has had the capacity to do good or else he wouldnt have even attempted such acts of kindness and heroism. At this point he's figured out humanity. Their capabilities and their passion for good. The world may be a dark place right now but the overall populace isnt. He should have known that.
@jmaldo85 @trans8010 @Juano Guzman No you are missing the point, it's not what happened it's why it had to happen to begin with.
There you go throwing up banter on the original Superman film that while I enjoyed, did not ever in recent weeks resort to comparison. Yet that seems to be all that you are focusing on. You say that Superman flying up from nowhere catching Lois Lane and flying off with a cheering crowd made no sense? How? His exposure wasnt about acceptance it was about doing good for goodness sake, he saw he needed to help someone in peril and literally jumped at the chance. The public responed well to him because he came out of nowhere to save one person. That spoke volumes about this guy. He's not just for important geological disasters, or vips this guy will show up to foil a bank robbery, save kittens from trees and save a person from falling. The public was openly trusting of this guy because they WANTED to trust him. If that hokey and unrealistic well guess what it's not supposed to be realistic. You seem to forget that Superman is a FANTASY! I cannot stress this enough.
MOS went a different route he was hiding for 33 years (augggh) only exposing himself to the world when Zod threatened to destroy it. He didnt go out of his way to help people or foil bank robberies after putting on that suit for the first time. It should have been after that scene pushing his limits flying for the fist time that he should have set out to help those in need. So when Superman was indeed exposed as that of kryptonian decent via Zod and his maniacal nature was known itself and he had to fight Zod to prove to us he's not like him I would accept the public trusting him a lot more because of his intial deeds.
Zod's endgame was illogical. Why terraform a planet, to mold it as a exact replica of Krypton if you had the knowledge of what such an atmosphere would do to your strength and prowess. They would all become like gods. All they needed to do was kill all humans and live on earth as it's sole inhabitants. The world engine was just unnecessary baggage written in to make big buildings tumble. Again why go this route to begin with when 3 or more kryptonian beings with the same strength and invulnerability factors should have been more than enough to engage viewers during the climax.
Why was Zod so pissed at Jor-El to begin with? His hatred of him spawned from the fact he and Lara concieved a child naturally. The very thought of copulation sickened him. That's interesting and could very well be a compelling way for Zod to extract vengence on the house of El yet it wasnt the reason. His overall insurrection was about reinstating order to Krypton and removing all the laws and ideals that crippled the planet over the past few millenia, yet he had a problem with copulation and called it sacrilege? Why? A nice little explanation as to why that one rule would become reinstated in your new dystopia would really have explained that lil error.
@Juano Guzman For gods sake, if any of you bothered to read these reviews you would know it wasnt the action itself that critics complained about, it was how long and tedious the action scenes became and how Superman himself seemed to be more interested in causing more destruction than stopping the bad guys. Everyone expected mass destruction and chaos, that was never in question. The plot and characterizations were what critics mainly focused on.
@jmaldo85 @trans8010 @Contrabardus @rosslunney To hell there isnt. I'm sorry but there is christian symbolism in Superman the Movie. You are a fool if you cant see it. The writer Tom Mankiweicz has gone on repeatedly about this. He deliberately wrote Jor-El and Superman as parallels to God and Christ. Hell, even Zod was depicted as Satan. Look at the film again, christian symbolism and christ allogories are everywhere.
Jor-El banishes Zod from Krypton imprisoning him in the phantom zone for eternity. In biblical text God punished Satan by casting him from heaven and into Hell for eternity.
Kal-El's spaceship is in the form of a twinkling star, not unlike the Star of Bethlehem that signaled the arrivial of Christ.
Jor-El sends to earth his only son in hopes not just to save him from Krypton's fate but to save us from damnnation. He also instructs him that while he can live amongst the humans he mustn't be one of them that his destiny and message is more important than physical wants. How is that not different from Jesus?
"Live as one of them, Kal-El, to discover where your strength and power are needed. But always hold in your heart the pride of your special heritage. They can be a great people, Kal-El, and they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you, my only son."
Perhaps why you cannot see them yourself is because it comes across as subtle. So while you claim I have no understanding of Man of Steel you had NO understanding yourself on Superman the Movie.
As for what my grandfather said about the film. He understood completely that this wasnt a Superman film and that's why he didnt enjoy it. They never cared to properly develop the character into the hero that will become Superman in the first film. It had nothing to do with misunderstanding. That was Man of Steel's greatest flaw. You're telling me you have all these powers and you're not gonna fly out to save your father because he told you not to. That's BS, it really is, it's not compelling or heartwrenching, nor does Clark learn a lesson about trust, he was an idiot who watched his father die from a preventable situation.
The acting may have been fine but the writing was terrible. Using it's only part 1 as an excuse to ignore development is lazy and ignorant to the fans, and tells me the writers in charge have no idea who Superman is and chose to write a character that ISNT him in any way shape or form. This character lacks every trait even in his upbringing we didnt see Clark. The love story was also very tacked on, there was nothing about Lois that seemed necessary. Every scene she was in could have been done using a different character and there would have been little to nothing altered.
@Contrabardus @trans8010 @rosslunney So I missed two minor points about ticket prices but everything else is right on. The film couldnt hold it's umph after the first weekend and profits dipped. Also only the buddy cop film was crushed by MOS Monsters University steamrolled over MOS, so I'm not the only one trying to use false data. lol
Ok in all seriousness, the film didnt perform to Warner Bros. expectations, the word of mouth was sour, if the film was truly a great opus as many seem to think it should have kept climbing or held the no. 1 spot for at least another weekend. It didnt. Even Batman Begins a film also polarizing for fans kept the top spot longer and only dropped one spot per week and it had Star Wars and a (at the time) greatly anticipated Will Ferrell film as it's competition.
MOS may have scored high on RT or Metacritic but those ratings are misleading as well since they only rate those who use the site, which not everyone uses. So roughly HALF if that of the movie going public were represented. Superman is a timeless character the people in the theater when I saw it ranged from 8-70. I doubt those 70 year olds were immediately on RT to submit their scores. My father disliked the film as did my grandparents. They apreciated the balls on approach in the action but were greatly disappointed at how little the film tried to showcase the characters and plot.
I liked it, but I wasnt in love with it, I felt the human drama was there just not fleshed out properly, Cavill did a decent job as the title role, but Lois Lane, Perry White and many of the supporting cast had literally nothing to do but react to this or to exist solely to further the plot like Lois on the alien craft, no reason for her to really be there. They could have easily written the scene for Clark. The christ allogories were forced in with a spoon with no subtlety. The orignal film carried this notion with grace, you didnt need to see Christopher Reeve with his arms outstretched to get that he's a savior to humanity, he just saved people.
@rosslunney Those first weekend totals were misleading. It was revealed that almost half of those first weekend totals were IMAX screenings. Have you been to an IMAX showing tickets are in the 20-25 dollar price range depending on your area. That's more than half of a standard ticket. That less patrons than you think that actually saw this film. It couldnt even hold the top spot for more than one weekend losing to a buddy film staring Sandra Bullock and Monsters University. Why? Word of mouth poisoned the potential profits this film could have made. The film suffered in subsequent weeks. The film was not nearly as successful as box office totals would want you to believe.
@rosslunney No they dont. Superman has had everything unique stripped from him beginning in 1986. This current generation has no idea who Superman is. The current version is just another strongman the only thing unique is his massive set of powers and blue suit. Also not everyone has seen Smallville either so using that as a point of defense is just an excuse. I'm not saying let's remove that part entirely but use those scenes for something other than the same message over and over until Pa Kent dies. The codex also is a plot device and not a very good one. How will he be able to extract those cells from his DNA to create or give sentience to kryptonian beings? If there's no use for them rather than keeping Krypton alive is ato excuse his behavior. They are just cells within his body nothing more nothing less.
@jwatkis @jJaay @sefy76 This wasnt like Batman Begins at all. Batman Begins was done as a stand alone film as an experiment by Warner Bros to see if the public was ready for another Batman film.
Even narratively speaking it cannot compare with MOS. At the end of that film we knew Bruce had become Batman when the titles were revealed after the cut to black done deliberately to inform the audience that Bruce has been accepted by the public and Gordon and has evolved as Batman. By the end of MOS Clark still isnt Superman.
@jwatkis Ahem, we like Superman the Movie because the character has heart. We know he lacks the power punch action but that's not at all as necessary as his need to do good, to save people, to foil any crime big or small. MOS decided that in order to make Superman work for the 21st century you had to strip what made him popular and unique amongst all heroes to begin with. Sure he has the powers accurately portrayed but without that heart he's only opporating at 50% capacity.
@rosslunney @trans8010 Why should it matter? It's a iconic power of his. It's like saying why do beams of light radiate from his eyes. It could be said that he freezes the air he breathes on the intake and blows it out at subzero temps. Either power makes no lick of sense, but that's one of the joys of Superman it's fantasy. It's not spposed to be taken seriously or realisticly.
@jwatkis @Jet Set Willy Lois wasnt requested like when someone is handed a invite card with a check box under RSVP, her invite was more or less come with us willingly or be brought on board kicking and screaming. She chose to join Kal to prevent an incident.
Using the lack of development as an excuse because it's part one in a trilogy is weak. One part that makes a movie in itself great is the evolution and conflict of the characters.
Superman had conflict in MOS but all of it was handled wrong. Clark couldnt save his father from a tornado why? As a sign of trust? That's illogical you have powers, so save him let Pa Kent see just how much he's been holding his son back have him struck by debris afterward or die from a heart attack something Clark couldnt save him from. Use that message on how even with those powers you cant save someone from everything. His battle in Metropolis wouldnt have been so cold then.
Clark finally finds his destiny as earth's protector and what does he do, he hides! Why? He has powers, a suit and the knowledge he can help people so why doesnt he? Hiding is not how a hero is born. It's not that someone was holding him back at this point his biological father told him to save people.
Why does he immediately kiss Lois Lane after touching down in Metropolis instead of greiving over what his culture has done? Had he realized just how much life was lost in that moment and vowed to Zod that he will stop him at any cost to prevent more unecessary death and destruction I could see his torment as Zod pinned a family with his heat vision.
Also had Zod and Superman been shown with actual bruises and bits of fatique as two EQUALLY powerful people were fighting each other to give the fight that needed dramatic tension instead of just throwing themselves through glass and brick and mortar buildings without any once of pain or emotion that end fight may have been exciting.
That's the complete opposite of the direction he should be going. He needs to be the hero at the end of part 1 so we care about what happens at part 2.
@rosslunney First off no one was arguing over his Power levels. Why people incessantly believe this was the problem with naysayers is beyond me. What we had a problem with was how one dimensional the characters were written, how lazy the plot moves along and how overlong the action sequences were. Superman can punch things. That's great, but where's his heart? The power levels are only 50% of the character, his heart and constant need to do good and help others are what stands the character out from other superheroes in this film he's been resorted to just another superhero strongman. One scene I was especially dissapointed in was after he left the fortress I expected Kal to fly out of that arctic wasteland with a purpose to do good and help others, but he didnt. No, he resorted to more hiding only showing himself when Kryptonians were exposed via the dark maniacal Zod. Only then he takes action because he's forced to. The other most dissapointing scene was how easily and happily his disregards his kryptonian heritage by destroying Krypton's future. In no comic or any adaptation would that EVER be considered right in Superman's code.
@Contrabardus @trans8010 @sefy76 @Batmandrew Superman killing Doomsday is irrelevant to the conversation. As Doomsday had no soul no conscious he existed as a living breathing weapon one that could not be stopped by normal means. It wouldnt have been till years later that the creature's origin be revealed and given sentience. It's not the same as Hank Henshaw at all. Hank was a man driven into insanity for refusing to believe his life was ended by nothing more than an accidental occurance. Also I believe in Adv. 468 when Hank went to retrieve his wife was confronted by Superman who then told him he was of living energy, and decided after the torment of his wife to leave and transferred his form to Superman's birthing matrix, and shot himself into space to hich Superman failed to prevent. In that case there is some familiarity of Hank's abilities to Superman. Which also gives little more evidence into my claim that Superman could have believed him when Cyborg told him he would be back.
1 year, 2 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman
@Contrabardus @trans8010 @sefy76 @Batmandrew I see no reason why you cannot see my theory without stepping on it and throwing it away as rubbish. If you think Superman II is better with the original ending or not it doesnt change how it would have been considered canon at one point before it's home video release wihich I believe was only in rental form and pretty rare to come by before 1986, tv was how most people rewatched films, that's why ABC, CBS, and NBC's movies of the week became so freaking popular. Just because you never saw this film in it's varying states besides that of the original theatrical doesnt mean it didnt exist in some form. Even if that version was eliminated wouldnt it then be called a retcon.
Much in the same way Superman 466 a comic you've clearly not read tells me, and with that knowledge into Superman 82 proves to me that the intention was always to have Cyborg escape even if Superman did try to kill him, it wasnt gonna happen because I knew Cyborg would find a way out. All those subtle hints throughout the arc how he could transfer his essence to any computer he wanted at will or interface with any piece of machinery and control it.
It may have been fan speculation or the readers perspective but that's what makes reading and collecting comics a fun passtime.
@Contrabardus @trans8010 @sefy76 @Batmandrew No the point is even if Superman wanted to kill Hank which isnt possible considering HE'S ALREADY DEAD by Superman 82, the writers made sure to write him a way out, something the film failed to do.
Even if Superman tried to kill Hank, again with his super intellect and eidetic memory (powers he clearly has) he must have known deep down that Hank could have the capability to come back. He had to destroy the physical body in order to stop him, I wasnt disputing that but there was no way to kill him, and Superman knew of Hank's resourcefulness to survive the impossible he should have known that Hank would have found a way out.
I've also said Superman has killed in the source material, however I also said when he does it's an act of desperation of the writer to give him an edge that ultimately backfires with fans for coming across as out of character. Superman 22 got away with it kind of simply because of the ramafications of the act mirror Zod pulled on his pocket dimensions citizens.
Also stop throwing that scene back at me from Superman II. I have a valid reason why people would think of it as canon, and you are too ignorant to see through my point of view. Superman II was broadcast on TV many times and the film had that scene to expand the run time to 3 or 4 hours. It's the ending I remember from my childhood as it probably is for a lot of fans. The ending may not exist anymore but that doesnt erase it from those who can. In a world where VHS was expensive and hime recordings from TV broadcasts were the cheaper alternative this was the canon to a lot of people.
@rosslunney Besides building walls with his mind which didnt make an appearance til 1987's bomb of a sequel most if not all of those traits and powers came from comic books of the era. In that respect those films were a faithful adaptation of the characters of Superman. Yes Superman even had the power kiss in his arsenal in the comics. Also where does this inqury about him having freeze breath and heat vision bother you? He's always had both!
@Contrabardus @trans8010 @sefy76 @Batmandrew Adventures 466 which I have right in front of me has Hank dying of radiation sickness suffered from a space mission gone horribly wrong. As he's dying he constructs a robotic body and implants his essence into it very similar to how Doc Ock implanted his into Peter's brain in Amazing Spider-Man 698-700. Back on topic, his body now dust all that lives on is memories inside a memory chip. After the death of his wife he uploads himself into Superman's own bithing matrix and shoots himself into space.
Going back to The Return of Superman trade specifically Superman 82 again another comic I have right in front of me. Hank controls Steel's armor choking Irons with it, he goes on to say that anything metal he can control and maipulate, he does so multiple times throughout the run before the climatic battle at Engine City, forging video survilence showing doctored images of the Eradicator wiping out Coast City and duplicating Superboy as a witness backing up Cyborg's claims. He even explains how he becomes a cyborg. You see the kryptonian DNA inside the matrix allowed Hank to shapeshift his metal parts into a hmanoid robot and fill in the gaps using Superman's own DNA. His biology is not that of Hank Henshaw but that of Superman's. With that said he's more a computer than that of a lifeform.
Going back to Superman 82 Hank says as Superman punches through him that he couldnt destroy him that he'll live on, Superman replies and if that happens I'll stop you. With all the subtle hints throughout the run of Hank's abilities there's no reason to think that the writers were willing to kill the character off for good. When he vibrates his arm at super speeds to destroy the body, he was still concerned if Hank was still around, Hal Jordan scanning with his ring found no trace of him. Superman with a sigh of relief says it's over. Not he's gone forever or dead just that it's over, deep down he knew Hank would be back. In fact not even a year passes when Superman met up with the Cyborg in Superman/Doomsday: Hunter Prey. Proving Hank was indeed correct and Superman didnt kill him he simply uploaded his essence again on a tracking meter he placed on Doomsday's body when he hurled it into space in Superman 78.
Also to further my point it's been revealed that Cyborg is immortal and therefore anything that happens to his physical body he continues to live on thanks to his Kryptonian DNA that he absorbed from Superman's birthing matrix, and the ability to download himself onto any computer or memory unit .
@Contrabardus @sefy76 @Batmandrew As I have said repeatedly Superman knew the Cyborg was not dead and even if he did, Hank Henshaw was already dead, he died from radiation poisoning back in Adventures of... 466. Superman merely destroyed a carbon copy. Hank even told him that he would return, and Superman replied if that was the case he then would stop him again. It's all in Superman Vol. 2 82. He never once believed he was killed.
@sefy76 @jparlee321 For a short time Superman did deny his Kryptonian heritage when John Byrne rebooted the character in 1986. However when he left the books in 1988 whatever changes that stined the character were resolved within ten years. Fans were outraged by Superman's suddenly betrayal of his heritage and DC realized the mistake and corrected it.
The only comics that ever showed Clark being raised in angst was Earth One vol. 1 a out of continuity graphic novel published as a what if Superman was an angsty realistic teen. It's not that popular with fans either.
@sefy76 @trans8010 @rosslunney @Fingerkane I didnt disagree I simply added that it wasnt just fatigue. Superman also wanted the carnage to stop and leaving Metropoils was the only thing he could do to ensure Zod would stop what he was doing.
@Contrabardus @sefy76 @trans8010 @jparlee321"If you ever got what you wanted, it would no doubt turn out to be the Batman Forever of Superman movies."
Switch around the overall tones and you know what, that's what's happening right now. Batman Returns was too dark for the mass audience and Warner Bros wanted a more lighter tone to appeal to those soccer moms that protested a penguin happy meal toy. So what came of it was Batman Forever starring the Flamboyant Riddler, and overzealous Two-Face. The film opened to massive box office success breaking all records for an opening except it was met with mixed critical reviews and as a result of bad word to mouth from those fanboys who detested this new Batman as a result the film couldnt keep the top spot and fell to 2nd behind Pocahontas, and then fell to third behind Apollo 13. It kept dropping spots until being pulled from theaters. The film made well over 336 million worldwide making a 236 million profit which was good enough for Warner Bros to greenlight a sequel. We all know what happened there right? Warner is on the verge of repeating history.
Superman went over budget with 50 million dollars, that was a HUGE budget. In fact none of the original Star Wars adaptations ever exceeded that in terms of budget. So I have no idea where you get off that Superman had a small budget. 50 Million in 1977 was a ton of money. They shot the film at Pinewood on the famed 007 stage, a stage used exclusively for big budget extravaganzas.
The visual effects in Superman were revolutionary for the time, they depicted for the first time a Superman who could move freely as he glided across the air, arms raised, lowered, loop de loops right turns, left turns. Such a concievable feat couldnt even be attempted years prior. The academy was impressed they gave a special Oscar award for best visual effects a category that wouldnt even exist until the late 90's. So have respect for the film's technical achievements.
Superman was never considered a kids film after it was released it may have been intended as one but from what I read and heard from Donner what they wanted to do was create a Superman film that was respectful to it's comic book roots while creating a more vulnerable side that audiences of all ages could connect to. The film was rated PG which as we all know was given to films that suggested parental guidance for children under a certain age. It was also the more widely accepted and popular rating at the time much like PG-13 is today. There was only three ratings G, PG and R. Superman had dark moments to reflect that rating but there was also a refernece to drugs, sexual innuendos, and dark moments used to create conflict and tension but it was in no way a dark film. There was a sense of awe and wonderment. The spirt of the character was kept in tact.
@Contrabardus @jparlee321 Superman spent 9 weeks at the top spot in 1978-1979 this film only held that coveted spot for one week that is a fact. The film also had only 817 theaters or so playing it compared to the 1400 or so of today. Yes comparing both films seems tedious but every way you look at it in a decade crammed full of sorrow and the world betting against Superman that movie succeeded, exceeding all expectations and then some. It was the highest grossing film Warner Bros ever released at that time, made mega stars out of it's cast and crew, and made Gene Hackman a bigger star. With the height of the Cold War, the political corruption, and soring energy prices people were willing to go see a fun lighthearted Superman picture. So it's my belief that had Superman been respected with a lil darkness thrown in just because of modern times we may have had another phenomenon.
@Contrabardus @jparlee321 Comic books are not kiddie fare anymore but they are being published with teenagers in mind not adults. As adults we realize Comic books are fantasy and we can believe that a person can survive in that world wearing spandex or a very tight armor suit that looks like a bodyglove. It's the teens or the non readers that scoff at the hobby that these publishers are aiming the books at. They want them to watch the movies and then buy the books, problem is they dont want to buy the books because of preconcieved notions about the character sthat are just wrong or foolish so the New 52 era was made to cater to them exclusively.
"Batman cant wear spandex in a make believe world because it's not realistic." They said
Poof the spandex is gone and now Batman wears armor. "
Superman is gay, he's ultra powerful with nothing that can hurt him, and those red underwear he wears are super gay."
Well poof he wears armor that was desgined exclusively to be movie friendly, in fact all the characters wear armor now even the Flash because we all know that nothing would tire out or create more drag than 40 lb armor right?
The adult readers hate this idea and DC Comics sales after a slight surge have suffered because of it. Only Green Lantern and Batman seem to have the strong sales. Marvel followed suit with a black Nick Fury (his son but whatever) a Avengers movie inspired Captain America complete with helmet cowl, and Jean Grey's sort of ressurrection a character that long time fans grew tired of. These changes were made because they're catering to non fans trying to get them to buy these books. What happens they try them out grow bored and dump them and sales plummet as a result.
You say that a Boy Scout Superman wouldnt sell well guess what Superman's comic sales are lower now than they were before the reboot, so what does that tell you? Warner Bros. is actively listening to people that dont give a damn about Superman, and making those changes based off their opinions, not the rest of the world that likes Superman to stay what he is and how he's remembered best. As an icon a symbol that stands for the truths and justices of every one of us. A man willing to put himself on the line to do whats right no matter how unpopular it may seem. A person that puts everyones well being into mind and not a select few. A person that inspires us to achieve those great and powerful things that better ourselves as a person and ultimately a race.
@jparlee321 Corporations paid Warner 160 million to feature their products 100 in all from Sears, to 7-Eleven. So that 600 million in profit is more like 440 million. Warner tacked the profits made from IHOP and added that to the first weeks totals, in that respect MOS didnt even make that much at the total box office that week.
@jparlee321 Superman the Movie is still the most successful when adjusted for inflation that's 1978 dollars converted to todays money for those who havent the slightest clue about that) If Superman had been released in 2013 and played it's final showing the domestic end totals are $468,042,300. That's at least 150 million more.
@Contrabardus @sefy76 @rosslunney @Fingerkane Singer's Superman didnt work because Warner felt Superman was supposed to fit with modern times to be this dark and moody soul because uplifting and chipper was so 70's well guess what Superman was moody, quiet, and turned into a deadbeat stalker who screwed Lois and took away her memories of that encounter therefore one could view it as rape since Lois certainly doesnt remember consumating her relationship with Superman. Shortly after he left earth for 5 FREAKING YEARS for what he thought was Krypton which was a ruse planted by Lex Luthor to get out of jail and with Superman the character witness off planet, Lex went free. When he returns and surprise there's a kid with powers he acknowledges the kid but doesnt plan to help raise him nope its fly across the earth and wink at the camera time. Fans hated what SInger did to Superman and wanted not just action but the return of that beacon of light. That is why Superman Returns failed!
@sefy76 @rosslunney @Fingerkane Superman fled not just because he was tired from having a bus slam into him, he had to divert the three away from the populace. After he gets out from the wreckage he surveys the area and sees just how devoted Zod is to creating mayhem and destruction and comes to the realization if he doesnt leave Metropolis would be smashed, he was counting on Zod to follow him because his thrist for revenge against the house of El was too great.
@Contrabardus @sefy76 @rosslunney @Fingerkane Actually it was mid to late eighties and on syndication networks as late as the mid nineties. Even if it wasnt canon I and others grew up watching those TV cuts. A lot of people remember the film this way as a result. Stop being so ignorant of those like Sefy and myself who remembers watching that version of Superman II. I also remember that pig head scene from Roger Rabbit and STILL have the VHS recording with it.
@rosslunney @sefy76 @Contrabardus Stop being so darn ignorant. Superman II when originally broadcast on ABC in 1984, 17 minutes of footage was reinserted, including the scene in question with Luthor confronted by arctic police as the three outcasts were carted away, this was the cut a lot of people saw, and thanks to my father recording everything off TV with his Super VHS back then, this was the cut of Superman II I grew up watching. It was common practice to add scenes previously deleted to increase the runtime from 2 to 3 or 4 hours by networks. So because of this common practice by the big three networks these scenes were considered canon by those who remember them. Hell when I bought the Ultimate Superman boxset and watched Superman II I was amazed those scenes werent there.
@jparlee321 MOS made 600 million worldwide but Warner Bros will be lucky if they make half of that 300 million that comes from overseas. You see Warner has to share with financial backers, distributors and overseas merchandisers, also they still owe hundreds of thousands of movie profits to the Seigels which was the whole point of that lawsuit. With a large fraction of those international totals tied up in those investments Warner Bros will be lucky if they get half of that. You also fail to read up on Warner Bros. financial troubles with 3 films not meeting studio projections and Hangover III bombing domestically only making 111 million in the US, MOS making slightly more at 280 million against a 220 million budget and rule 43 which the less said the better. Warner is spending more money on products aimed at the 18-25 demographic and they are failing big time, Warner forgot how much families enjoy films and Disney, and Dreamworks are reeling in the money off of their output, they're also ignoring the comic book fan which has become more nostalgic and tired of these over sophisticated over complicated action heroes and would care to see their Superheroes in a much lighter tone, something Marvel is more than willing to offer. If you think I'm lying look up Warner Bros. downsizing and you'll see the truth.
@charlieboy2 Yeah ur mom. She says hi by the way. :)
1 year, 3 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman
@charlieboy2 @trans8010 @MichaelRTrice @marc1913 This is a thread about a comic book movie. Honestly what else did you expect from these comments?
@charlieboy2 @trans8010 No your mummy dresses me after I reared her for several hours. Bazinga!
@CoreyV Stop comparing the fantasy embracing Superman from the TImm animated cartoons to that of a live action film that ignored the fantasy elements in favor of the dark and gritty realism. You simply cannot compare the two in any shape or form.
@ty19c @Dannybohy @trans8010 It's not that we're running out of complaints, transitioning scenes or wipes are neccessary in film. Ignoring these makes the finished product unprofessional. So they are valid complaints.
@ty19c @trans8010 I carefully explained this in my comment. If you and I were to fight just fist and fist punching and kicking each other there will be open wounds and bruising and after awhile we will tire ourselves out as our energy depletes. Well two kryptonians sharing the same biology should be able to hurt each other, they both get their energy from the sun now, and are using up that energy faster than they could gain it. Hell even in the comics when Superman fought Zod or those with equal or greater power they were able to bruise him. Look at the picture above there's clear bruising and blemmishes on Jim Lee's Superman in that fight scene. Doomsday a Kryptonian weapon a bastardization of science was able to KILL him. In a film where realism sacrificed majesty and awe, the one on one battle should have depleted and bruised both combatants because that's how real biology works.
@ty19c @sefy76 No Zod was genetically engineered to be a leader a general one that fights for his people, and protects them, that's what he should have done. Also he rebeled against those of Krypton because of their current society and their bogus laws, yet he had a problem with human procreation? What sense does that make? This whole my new purpose is to kill mankind wasnt at all neccessary consideirng Faora was there. The species could live on that way.
Superman had been on earth for 33 years but due to Jonathan's constant reassurance the world would take him away he cloested his abilities and never once decided it was time to put on the hero pants even after saving a barge of men, his selfish acts of petty vengence against a trucker, and many others he saved as a silent guardian not once did he say to himself I could do more for earth. No he had to wait until his "Space-Dad" told him to do so. Even after he put the suit on and had his father say to him you were put on this earth to help mankind not once did he even attempt to help others in need, before Zod's arrivial forced him in that position. SO in that respect he didnt earn the suit nor the responsibilities of being a hero, nor acknowledged how much of a screw up he was or had been to himself or to others about the sudden weight on his shoulders is forcing him to change his ways. That's is damming to the character before he even begins.
As for Captain America's Avengers suit what exactly didnt you like about it? I and many others felt it was a perfect modernization of the classic red white and blue colors. While it wasnt like the classic costume, which no one was expecting, it had the needed armor look while still keeping the traditional look. It was the perfect example of how non armored characters should look in comic book adaptations.
@jparlee321 You realize how implausible that scenario is? With two kryptonians fighting each other it would be the same if you and I started trading blows. Either one of them would have been depleted in some form by the end of it. Also with their biologies the same Kal should have been able to bruise Zod at least which didnt happen. Kal's energy level would have been much greater so he should have been able to exert more power compared to Zod. The whole end fight defied even Superhero logics.
@DrakeJaeger Superman is a character EVERYONE knows and adores and for that reason he should have been well respected. This film was geared towards one audience and one audience only the tweens and 18-25 year olds, and after that first wave of moviegoers saw it, and moved on the die hards and older generation became exposed to it and tat's where your dwindling numbers come from. My father who is a huge Superman fan and has been collecting comics since the 1960's thought this film was an utter embarrassment to the character, much in the same way my grandfather thought of the Lone Ranger. There comes a point when you have to look at what you're doing and reflect if this is the right direction for a character that's touched so many.
@ty19c @trans8010 Batman Begins had Star Wars and the memory of Batman and Robin as it's biggest obstacle. There was no way that film was ever gonna get any more money that summer because of those two factors. In the month of June there was nothing holding MOS back. Had they been proud of his superhero heritage this film would have made more.
@CoreyV @trans8010 Imagine you pay for a ticket for MOS and you are so bored with the action sequences because all it is was deafening explosions, tedious punching that added no damage or fatique to the other characters. So, there became no point in contiuing on the fight that lasted 90 mins or so and the one thing you craved while watching it was Superman going out of his way to save people never once happened unless it was Lois, or one or two pilots. I'm sorry but I and many others found that equally as boring. I'm not saying that Superman cant punch anything but when that's all he does, it got boring!
@VinceC Al Pacino's lack of exploration into the roles he's given tells me just how lazy he's become as an actor, and also explains his failure to bring about a box office success because of said lazyness, using that to defend your arguement shows just how misguided you are when it comes to film. Superman is more than just space aliens punching each other, there's a heart in him that was missing in this picture, and the film it's message, even the forced Christ parallels suffered because of it.
@VinceC Using Fast and the Furious is irrelevant because everyone knew what to expect from that film franchise. Superman has 75 + years of history and with that a wide fanbase spanning generations, those who went to see it opening weekend may have enjoyd it but there were some who didnt were very vocal about their dislikes and as a result spread the word, people obviously listened, with MOS's returns dwindling and dwindling. We are vocal cause we care. Using ASS and MUSCLE in your arguements may work for Fast and Furious but for Superman it's an entirely different entity one that should have been respected by the filmmakers.
@MichaelRTrice @jparlee321 @trans8010 In my honest opinion Batman is there to clean up a mess WB is not making the profit they projected on MOS so all the problems will be solved by just putting the Dark Knight Detective in there. That's another lazy fix. I expected a World's Finest film but not as a direct result of MOS.