I’m just gonna chalk up all the collateral damage and what he did to Zod as simply Clark simply being inexperienced.
But I can imagine alot of stuff in this film rubbing hardcore Supes fans the wrong way, and rightfully so (although I wasn’t too bothered with it because the movie was fun to watch). I can get where they are coming from
Overall I liked it. For some reason I thought it would be just ok and it turned out to be a good movie (not very good but better than I expected). As a Superman comic book reader I wasn’t ok with some changes they did but those things are minor and do not ruin the movie. I agree with the pace though and I also think it felt a little too long. Could have been edited better. I loved the paternal figures (Costner and Crowe) and the overall take on how Clark becomes Superman. Maybe too action packed? I could have deleted some “alien robot destroying the city” shots with more dialogue perhaps.
Onto less serious stuff:
[details=Spoiler]- Amy Adams is really hot. Everyone is talking about the kryptonian girl but I swear that scene when Superman and Lois are landing on the corn field in Smallville, that Lois booty was too good.
It reminded me of the Erradicator (created solely to preserve kryptonian legacy) and how it also tried to change Earth into Krypton.
I remember reading somewhere he wasn’t actually making the earth spin backwards, that was just how Donner was showing time going backwards.
Yeah that’s what got me too. From Lois getting dropped off at the Kents several times, from the leaked report she gave to that wikileaks guy, to the fact that the aliens pretty much only assaulted Smallville, and specifically the Kent farm to start with, and finally Supes stating “I’m from Kansas, been here for 33 years”, I’d be surprised if anybody was still in the dark over who he was.
And Mark Strong going to be playing every fucking DC villain? I liked the Bryan Cranston rumour better.
“I’m from Kansas” isn’t the greatest clue to figuring out a guy’s identity. Great, now we only have to rule out about three million people before we have it narrowed down.
Now that I think about it, The Dark Knight probably had the best way of handling the logic behind an incredibly flimsy disguise.
Well supes disguise in the end was horribly covered…how could you not tell he’s supes given the amount of eye witness accounts.
Also why did shapes confined to punch zod towards the city and not litter space…supes REALLY needs to learn self restraint.
He stated what state he was from, how long he lived there, and a certain town in Kansas got attacked repeatedly by Zod. And a certain farm. That list ain’t that long.
And he told it to a military general, who will surely be very forthcoming with that information if anyone asks, as government officials tend to be.
Yep, Synder gunning for Mark Strong http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/exclusive-zack-snyder-wants-mark-strong-lex-luthor-man-steel-2
lol this guy tears into Mark Waids review - http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/dear-mark-waid
He keeps talking about Superman not being at full power, but doesn’t mention despite being on earth for 33 years, he isn’t stronger than Zod and the others.
I agree that the movie is stronger the second time around–not because I expected the Donner movie with more punching, but because I didn’t know what to expect and was simply turned off by some of the choices that were made. I had a hard time seeing past the many ways that the movie could and should have been done better. Now that we’re past all the portent and now that I can manage my misgivings, I have an easier time enjoying it for what it does right.
This also happened with Inception, albeit years after the fact.
Where I kind of sort of disagree:
One thing that I’d like to highlight is that even if a lot of the criticisms can be rationalized, the fact that they have to be rationalized is an indication that the filmmakers dropped the ball. If Superman is trying to protect civilians and being prevented from doing that, they needed to play that clearly to ensure that the audience can see it happening. (The 1981 movie that people were just shitting on for being cheesy had absolutely no problem with doing this. So why does this one have such a hard time?)
If Superman is getting kicked around because he’s never been in a fight, they need to do a better job of showing that. (We saw his inexperience with flying handled effectively earlier on, so why not here?)
And if they meant for the line “He saved us” to mean “He saved the world”, they should have been VERY careful to make sure it wouldn’t be misconstrued. (Definition of poor editing strategy: having this line occur in the context of lingering shots of ruined cityscapes. They’re just begging for a cynical reaction, even from people who intellectually figure out what it’s supposed to mean.)
And so on and so forth. Assuming the various rationalizations are an accurate interpretation of the filmmakers’ intent, there are many situations in this movie where the message didn’t get through to a lot of people. Therefore the messengers didn’t do a good enough job of sending it.
And something that really made me shake my damn head at the author of the piece was this:
For one thing, by second-guessing Waid’s argument, he’s avoiding engagement with it. For another thing–and this might be hard for today’s post-Tarantino moviegoers to understand–what the author calls “corny” is called sincerity, humanity, and, yes, joy. Once upon a time, popular entertainment was allowed to have these things. Nowadays, the idea that those things need to be suppressed for fear of being shouted down as “corny” is what brings us the sort of cold, angry vibe that has overtaken most of today’s action-adventure movies and very nearly overtakes this one.
To the author: if you can’t find genuine, heartfelt joy in the moment when Christopher Reeve’s Superman snatches Lois Lane from the air in one hand and a plummeting helicopter in the other–replete with John Williams’ motherfucking excellent score*–I feel very, very sorry for you.
*And what does the author prefer? The Hans Zimmer score? I hope he knows that at such an advanced stage, taste cancer is terminal.
Sincerity is often confused as corny and cheesy these days…everything has to be sarcastic or self aware. If I’m to be honest the amount of depth to these characters came off as less realistic and mature to the so called campy cheese of the 70’s film.
I laugh at the amount of people hating this movie and wanting it’s demise before it came out. I’m also laughing at the same people still hating this movie even though it’s considered a BOH. With that said,
http://robotmutant.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/20110426-034725.jpg
i was hella confused, it seemed pretty obvious anyone could track down who he was. not like an alien spaceship showed up on his doorstep or the fact they blew up his house. lmfao. i thought for a second they were gonna do some sort of iron man no secret identity thing.
though i guess it may take some searching since hes probably not officially in any databanks for adoptions cause their forge
Also, the Daily Planet must have a very lax background check. It wouldn’t take long for them, an investigative news center, to find holes in Mr. Kent’s origin.
I also thought they were going to do away with the Clark Kent secret identity when most of Smallville has a strong suspicion of Clark’s “godliness” or have actually seen him in action. Lois finds out who superman is (easily), superman openly confesses he’s from Kansas and how long he’s been there, the aliens specific targeting of the Kent house, most of the town of Smallville SEES Clark Kent fighting the aliens on their street. Superman once again telling the military he’s from Kansas, etc.
The only thing he didn’t do is call a press conference, ala Tony Stark.
But no. They opted to tack on the secret identity thing at the last moment and just force the viewing audience to accept that Superman lives in a world of blind morons with alzheimer’s. :bluu:
The way the movie was edited it made it seem like Clark must have left after his father’s death, anyone remember the date on the tombstone?
Wait, so how do they handle Superman’s fake ass secret identity in the comic? No one knows of his past right?
1997
Only Lana and Pete Ross knows about him in Smallville. Clark left Smallville after highschool and it wasn’t until after college in Metropolis that he made a public appearance as Superman. He also didn’t let cameras to take good pictures of him (moving at high speed so they will be blurry) so that his face wouldn’t be very familiar.
Because it happens so late in the movie, it’s still a mystery how the identity will be handled and what its implications will be. It’s basically the first plot point of the second movie.
The most sensible solution would be to do what some of the comics have done already: imply that Clark’s closest friends at the Planet know his secret, but don’t say anything.
Having Lois in on it from the get-go might be an indication that this is their plan.
He’s also engineered several instances when Clark Kent and Superman have been seen in the same location at the same time.
Chronicle? The same movie that was a bootleg of Akira?
Shit…that dude best never walk into comicon lol.
The nerd rage wars are gonna get ugly now…
Also to add to that, he tends to slouch and appear clumsy as Clark Kent as opposed to standing tall and coordinated as Superman. He also uses his super-speed to keep his facial features in flux when trying to capture him on camera and he pitches his voice deeper and more confident-sounding while he’s Superman.
It also helps that the one guy who could do the most damage to his life if he knew who he was-- Lex Luthor, is so consumed by hubris that he has dismissed evidence of the Clark-Superman connection… He believes that someone as powerful as Superman would have no need to disguise himself as a lowly human… lol.