Man Of Steel (2013 Superman reboot directed by Zack Snyder)

[Brónach 1,330]

I have to say that, for me, the Donner film is nowhere near a definitive view on the character or something like that.

I'll be disappointed if I don't.

I want a Superman movie I feel like I want to see more than once.

I loved these films when I was 16. Now I've moved on.

what a stupid fking statement. Completely idiotic. The wonder of films is they survive and you can carry them with you all of your lives.

Let me rephrase that.

I was a total fan of Nolan's Batman when I was a teenager! But today I'm tired of that vision of Batman, the last film didn't sit too well with me and now I want some badass Superman instead!

Better? Worse? Of course the films survive, I might even watch them again and everything! Geez.

[Wojo 2,458]

I'm not so sure MOS is even going to simply be "why am I so different?" I get the sense from the Clark/Jonathan "maybe" dialogue that there might be more of a theme of paternal caution and fear vs. youthful optimism and trust. Not that Jonathan Kent is going to be a cantankerous worry-wart or anything, but that his traditional sound upbringing might be made slightly more complex by his fear for Clark, and Clark is going to have to wrestle with that side of things.

I'm quite sure that Jonathan wants his son to do the "right thing" by saving people, but he wants him to be secretive about it. He knows his "son" is an alien with super-human capabilities. It's not so much that he fears for his son's personal safety, but rather the government would apprehend his son for experimentation, and use intimidation or violence to destroy his family in order to get Clark.

This father goes his whole life not being able to have a child, and so when his prayers are answered and a son is delivered from the heavens, he does not want that son to jeopardize the tenuous Kent family.

Even Joey has to admit that Donner's Clark did a decent job at concealing his powers while still living in Smallville, and not using them in broad daylight in the open until he had "created" his alter-ego to operate freely. That sounds like "you can save people, but don't let them see who you are," which is rather difficult to pull off unless you wear a mask, and Superman is definitely above wearing a mask.

[Koray Savas 2,260]

I have to say that, for me, the Donner film is nowhere near a definitive view on the character or something like that.

I'll be disappointed if I don't.

I want a Superman movie I feel like I want to see more than once.

I loved these films when I was 16. Now I've moved on.

what a stupid fking statement. Completely idiotic. The wonder of films is they survive and you can carry them with you all of your lives.

Let me rephrase that.

I was a total fan of Nolan's Batman when I was a teenager! But today I'm tired of that vision of Batman, the last film didn't sit too well with me and now I want some badass Superman instead!

Better? Worse? Of course the films survive, I might even watch them again and everything! Geez.

I thought, "Why the hell is BloodBoal replying for Chaac?" Then I saw Wojo, and now ya'll are fucking me up.

[crocodile 9,724]

Can't say I undestand your problem...

Karol

[Wycket 36]

you're completely wrong.

Negative. Go read some of the comics. The Superman of the Donner film is a very simplistic view of Superman. This film is actually touching aspects of the character that are hardly explored on movies or tv, but have been a part of the comics for decades.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

we're not talking the comics we're talking about a film, and to call it simplistic is simplistic on your part.

the wojo chaac bloodboal avatar is just awful. it needs to disappear forever.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,388]

I hate it when people imitate my avatar

[JoeinAR 1,957]

you sir are Iconic, the blood boal avatar thing is just bad drawing

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

I've always thought that the Donner Superman is a bit of an idiot, because when he repairs the dam to save all those people, Lois dies. When he rewinds the earth to save Lois, he can't be at the dam so all those people drown. Oops, we're not supposed to notice.

um... if he turns back in time, then there are two superman's at the same time....

just like there are two Marty mcflies when he turns back just before Doc is shot down.

the thing is that it will end in a loop..since the 1st superman will still turn back the world...though if lois is saved... then he wont... and there would be two supermans...

[Wojo 2,458]

[Brónach 1,330]

First timeline, Superman saves dam, fails to save Lois. Goes back in time to second timeline.

Second timeline, original Superman saves dam, future Superman saves Lois, eh, um... I can see your point.

[BloodBoal 8,711]

[Jay 46,244]

I wish they had stuck to whatever ending they originally had in mine for the first and saved the "turning back the world" ending for the second, and then when it came time to finish making the second, they came up with something better and never used the "turning back the world" idea at all

[Wojo 2,458]

Quint, don't read this.

I kinda see where you're coming from, with your Back to the Future perspective. However, a time machine presents logic that is quite different from simply turning back the earth.

When Marty leaves the original 1985, he vanishes from the timeline to permit his re-emergence in 1955. There is only one Marty. When Marty goes "back to the future," he returns to a different point in space and time -- a few minutes before the shooting, a couple blocks over. He intends to directly interfere with the original timeline to prevent the murder of Doc, but he is ultimately -- and fortunately -- too late to directly interfere. Had he somehow directly stopped the murder, the original Marty would have seen him and not followed the same path through 1955 with the goal of saving Doc. This would have prevented Marty from taking the indirect action of handing Doc a letter explaining the circumstances, which is all that was required. Chances are very high that both unarmed Martys would have been killed by the armed Libyan terrorists. As far as I recall, the camera in the original 1985 never even points in the direction of the "second" Marty, so that we aren't telegraphed the answer to the movie right off the bat and to raise the question whether there was a "second" Marty there the whole time. This keeps Marty's actions linear and permissible by timeline logic.

Superman does not have a time machine, so he does not "vanish" from the Lois-is-dead timeline to cleanly "re-emerge" in a Lois-is-still-alive timeline. He turns back the earth, which basically amounts to rewinding time. The film even shows this by making the Earth rotate backwards as Lois' car pulls itself out of the crevice. This puts Superman back at the original point where he must choose whether to repair the dam or save Lois. With his "second chance," by saving Lois, the dam kills untold millions.

[Brónach 1,330]

Oh right. I think the confusion comes from seeing Superman circling the Earth while he should be being rewinded like everything else... which makes it difficult to rewind anything in the first place. Then again, what's the rewinding mechanism? Maybe he could do it thinking it, but he's flying around the Earth...

[Wojo 2,458]

Well, yes. You could also argue that since Superman is flying around the world backwards, in order to rewind time at the same he is repairing the dam, there are two Supermans along the same timeline. This leads to a paradox of an infinite number of Supermans that should result in nothing bad ever happening and nobody ever dying in an accident.

Accident happens, Superman fixes it. Another accident happens at the same time, Superman rewinds time and directly fixes the second, and the "original" Superman still fixes the first, since the movie doesn't want you to believe the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many. Afterwards, one Superman remains. Another accident happened at the same time, and Superman rewinds time allowing him to fix that one, too, while the other two accidents also get the Super-treatment. At some point, Superman is going to be stretched too thin, long after an infinite number of Supermen (Supermans?) are fixing all of the earth's problems.

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

Oh right. I think the confusion comes from seeing Superman circling the Earth while he should be being rewinded like everything else... which makes it difficult to rewind anything in the first place. Then again, what's the rewinding mechanism? Maybe he could do it thinking it, but he's flying around the Earth...

yeah

[Wojo 2,458]

The idea of rewinding the Earth to reverse time is eerily reminiscent of playing cassette tapes and records backwards to produce sounds and images in reverse. It's a rather obsolete concept.

[A24 5,156]

The results of the What Did You Think Of The Man Of Steel Trailer:

http://www.comicbook...k/news/?a=71361

Alex

[BloodBoal 8,711]

[KK 3,313]

Screw that, I want my Cowabunga option!

[Quintus 6,499]

The results of the What Did You Think Of The Man Of Steel Trailer:

http://www.comicbook...k/news/?a=71361

Alex

I'm waiting for the part where you tell us you linked it because "you thought it's the kind of thing folks here might be interested in."

Because you're completely disinterested in what the mainstream thinks

[A24 5,156]

Prove it!

Alex - who was dead on the money 5 days ago.

[Wycket 36]

we're not talking the comics we're talking about a film, and to call it simplistic is simplistic on your part.

Sorry to bring this back after a few days, but I have to say my piece. Not trying to start a fight, just want to further expand on my views.

I grew up watching Superman for the last twenty-five years. I think its still a great film and definitely set a trend which continues to be followed, most notably very closely structurally in the Spider-Man movies. That being said, having become more exposed to Superman in his original media, comic books, I see it as a way to portray Superman in a very basic way without really getting into much depth. Clark Kent is not a bumbling idiot, he's a competent reporter who is average in just about every way. He doesn't stand out as to not draw attention to himself, and this is completely differently portrayed in the original film than in every other media. Reeves performance is great, but he's hardly the definitive Clark Kent. After all, Clark is just as much of his personality as Superman is, so to get half of that wrong really bugs me nowadays.

As for the film itself, the motivations for Clark becoming Superman are very minimal. For a film pushing two and a half hours, it does very little to actually give motivation to Clark to become Superman. Yes, his father gives him a speech about responsibility and having a purpose, but it really doesn't have much of a draw, especially for a teenager. Jor-El's recordings obviously played a big role in him choosing to do what he did, and I felt those being expanded upon could have really added more gravitas to his decision. Instead we get scenes with characters like Otis and Miss Tesmacher, who were created solely for the film and while well played, lead to less of a focus being given to Superman like it should have. Hell, the second half of the film features very little of Clark and Superman other than action sequences. While Reeves is always strong and his presence was dominating, I would have loved to seen more. At least this is one thing that the sequels helped to address.

As for the upcoming film, I'm glad that Goyer is apart of the process. I don't think he's a particularly good filmmaker, but he definitely understands the characters in these comic films. And that is an important thing to remember. These characters should be treated no differently than any other adaptation, where they should be given the respect they deserve and not treated as jokes. Superman really took a back seat in the last film, basically being resorted to be a stalker and an absent father. Hopefully this new film will delve into his troubles with fitting into society and trying to reconcile how he will always be different and the burden that brings. That is an important part of the character that wasn't addressed much, and when it was in Superman 2 he chose to give up his powers to bang Margot Kidder. Hopefully this time it will do an equally good job showing why he chooses he much be the hero of the Earth (not just America) and be the symbol of justice for society that he can be.

[Koray Savas 2,260]

The results of the What Did You Think Of The Man Of Steel Trailer:

http://www.comicbook...k/news/?a=71361

Alex

Man those 5,000 people really do represent the world so well.

[A24 5,156]

Other than just being your usual negative self, what's your point, Koray?

[Koray Savas 2,260]

What's yours?

[A24 5,156]

Isn't it evident?

Why do you hate it? Why does this post aggravates you so much? Why this post in particular? Snyder? Positive? It can't be?

[Koray Savas 2,260]

Lol what? To me it just seems like you're passing a 5,000 person poll as representative of the collective whole's anticipation for Man Of Steel. Misuse of information. Doesn't bother me, and if it isn't clear yet, I am looking forward to it.

With Nolan producing and Snyder toning down on the slow-motion and green screen, it should be fine.

[A24 5,156]

Of course, I do. No tougher crowd for a Supes movie than the comics crowd. Everybody knows that.

Christopher Nolan Says "Man Of Steel" Was Far More Difficult Than "The Dark Knight":

http://www.worstprev...ne.php?id=27053

"Zack was the perfect man to take this on. He is unbelievably skilled at creating a coherent, cohesive world -- whether it's a very stylized world, like '300,' or something that's more challenging, more varied, like he did with 'Watchmen.' I try to be as supportive as I can, and I'm just amazed by what he is doing."

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,388]

Hopeful.

Ofcourse if the movie is shit, the producer is the last to say it.

I have faith in Snyder though....

[Delorean90 47]

I'm not really too concerned about this being bad as a movie--I think it will be good. For me the question mark is really how the character and mythos are going to be treated, and what the response will be from both the fanbase and the mainstream public.

[BloodBoal 8,711]

[Quintus 6,499]

Ah, that says more about you than it does about Stefan, BloodBoal. Carefully does it.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,388]

The words of Bloodball are like a broken pencil.

Pointless....

[Wojo 2,458]

What if you break the pencil at the eraser?

[Ollie 1,375]

Nolan is the only saving grace at the moment.

[Matt C 605]

I'm not really too concerned about this being bad as a movie--I think it will be good. For me the question mark is really how the character and mythos are going to be treated, and what the response will be from both the fanbase and the mainstream public.

The second trailer for Man of Steel got the same amount of views online in the first 24 hours as the one for The Dark Knight Rises did almost exactly a year ago (which was attached to Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows). I'm trying to find a link for it, but a lot of people (aka normal moviegoers) are certainly taking notice of this movie now.

[Red 75]

Nolan is the only saving grace at the moment.

Other than Zimmer, who I think is wrong for Superman, the only thing holding this back for me is Snyder. If it wasn't for him I'd be head over heels with this movie.

[crocodile 9,724]

Karol

[BloodBoal 8,711]

[Wojo 2,458]

Isn't it time we make a superheroes sub-forum, so we can keep our Superman and Dark Knight and Iron Man and Avengers and Wonder Woman and Seaman discussions contained?

[Quintus 6,499]

You know that depressing, deflated feeling you get in video games when three quarters of the way through the main story you are captured and stripped of all your weapons, equipment and upgrades (before reacquiring them later)?

That's how this Superman's gonna feel for the entire second half of its runtime.

[KK 3,313]

Karol

Where did the colour go?

[ZackR 187]

Superman needs to get a little sun. Looks pretty pasty.

[chuck 155]

Karol

Where did the colour go?

That's Bizarro!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro

[A24 5,156]

Karol

Where did the colour go?

Color? That's too remindful of the Supes films they are trying to make us forget. New directions, others ways.

[BloodBoal 8,711]

Where did the colour go?

Zod took them away. That's the plot of the film.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,388]

Zod And The Technicolor Dreamcoat?

[Quintus 6,499]

It'll be like the opening of Wizard of Oz until he gets his powers back at which point glorious technicolour (and hope in mankind) shall be restored.