Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I liked a lot of the movie. I thought that the fight scenes dragged on way too long, but on the other hand, I wanted a whole movie based on life on Krypton. I thought it was the most beautifully imagined I'd ever seen that universe.
Russell Crowe was great, as were Kevin Costner and Diane Lane. Henry Cavill is sexy as all get out and I will watch Amy Adams in anything. Love that woman.
While I will always love the first and second Christopher Reeve "Superman" movies, that was then and this is now.
I don't feel the need to compare the two. The character has undergone a myriad of changes in the comic books and I see no reason why the film versions should be any different.
Looking forward to the next one. I just sort of wish Mr. Cavill could use his real accent.
I recently watched this on DVD for the second time(the first time in theaters) and the reason why I think that it made 290 million domestically because people knew that Christopher Nolan was producing it. Plus, it had enough charm and style to it that people embraced it. However, even though it had style, it lacked a lot of substance.
And for many parts of the movie, this lack of substance translated into scenes and explanations that were too simplistic. For example, when Halo-Jor-el gave Kal-el his suit, I thought that it would have been better if he would have explained that the suit was warrior's suit for the House of El for those who led their army into battle, or something like that. But instead, he just presented him with the suit and it was kind of like, 'well, here's the Superman suit that you should wear on this planet'.
Also, there's the whole thing with Clark's identity and how all of the kids and even the parents of his hometown knew that he was different and had somehow miraculously rescued a lot of the kids in the town. And how most of the people from Smallville should already know that this 'Superman' is actually Clark from their hometown. Or in other words, the movie should have had Clark keep his powers a secret a lot better than he did.
And then there's the thing where this movie was basically a rehash of Superman II from 1980, but it was a totally retooled rehash of Superman II where it was different enough that people didn't feel as if they were watching an extension or a remake of the Superman movies from the late 70s and the 80s. But still, it was a somewhat similar movie to Superman II and probably would have been a better movie if they had taken a totally fresh approach with a story.
Although, this brings up the question: Are all of the new versions of old franchise movies always going to have the origin stories? Just like with the new 'Amazing Spider-Man' franchise. Did we really need to see Peter Parker getting bit by a spider again and Uncle Ben die again? And will that continue to be covered in the future installments of the 'Spider-Man' movies?
Same thing with the Superman franchise. All we always going to have the first movie in the future installments of this franchise cover the destruction of Krypton and Kal-el traveling to Earth and being taken in my Jonathan and Martha Kent? And will we always have General Zod right on his tail to eventually have a 'super' fight with Kal-el where they practically destroy the city of Metropolis during combat?
And one more thing that I wanted to mention is that I don't know what it is, but there's something about the chemistry between Superman and the new Lois Lane that doesn't quite mesh together. But perhaps if she dyed her hair dark, maybe that would help their chemistry because I guess I'm just used to a dark haired Superman being with a dark haired Lois Lane.
Russell Crowe was great, as were Kevin Costner and Diane Lane. Henry Cavill is sexy as all get out and I will watch Amy Adams in anything. Love that woman.
There were other people in the movie besides Cavill? I hadn't noticed.
My problem with Man of Steel was I felt it was a remake of the Matrix. The flying scenes, Kryptonians being created in fields/chambers, the fight scenes. All to similar to the Matrix in my opinion.
It was a lot better than the superman that came out in 2006. However it still sucked overall, especially when compared to the dark knight movies. The part where Clark let his dad die was just ridiculous to me. Also, I thought he would defeat in a more climactic way beside breaking his neck (something Steven seagall does on every movie. I give MOS a 6/10.. Also, Amy Adams does not fit as Lois Lane.. they need someone who is at least attractive.
It was a lot better than the superman that came out in 2006. However it still sucked overall, especially when compared to the dark knight movies. The part where Clark let his dad die was just ridiculous to me. Also, I thought he would defeat in a more climactic way beside breaking his neck (something Steven seagall does on every movie. I give MOS a 6/10.. Also, Amy Adams does not fit as Lois Lane.. they need someone who is at least attractive.
Well, why did it have to be like Nolan's Batman trilogy? Batman is naturally a darker character, so the darker tone fit pretty well.
I do think Superman has always been kind of cheesy. The only dark thing about his back story is the fact that he is pretty much all alone in the universe so he feels isolated. I did like that Man of Steel tried to get that across. But then suddenly he became heroic after not wanting anyone to know who he was. Seemed contrived.
Well, why did it have tofir Nolan's Batman trilogy? Batman is naturally a darker character, so the darker tone fit pretty well.
I do think Superman has always been kind of cheesy. The only dark thing about his back story is the fact that he is pretty much all alone in the universe so he feels isolated. I did like that Man of Steel tried to get that across. But then suddenly he became heroic after not wanting anyone to know who he was. Seemed contrived.
I wasn't expecting it to have a similar story line to the Dark Knight series, but I was expecting it to breathe New life into the story like Dark knight did. I do think they have a decent foundation to build on for the next movie
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Too Simplistic, Needed More Substance
