Hmmm, if I knew your real age and approximate political leanings I could say for certain whether it would be worth your time or not.
"Tattoos are the mullets of the aughts." - Mike Naimark
"Don't stop after beating the swords into ploughshares, don't stop! Go on beating and make musical instruments out of them. Whoever wants to make war again will have to turn them into ploughshares first" - Yehuda Amichai
Beaks: The brutality and shocking finality of Superman snapping Zod's neck. How did that come about?
Goyer: That was something that we had a lot of discussions about, and I know that originally Chris felt... that was not in the first draft. It's something that Zack and I wanted to do, and initially there was a lot of resistance, which I completely understand. One of the things that we've always tried to do with the Batman films and the Superman film is never accept something just because that's the way it's done in the comic books. That was never a good enough reason. It always had to make sense within our own universe or within the rules of our universe. So I understand why the editors at DC would say "Batman doesn't kill" or "Batman doesn't use guns".
One of the the things that I like to do as a writer and director is put my heroes in the most difficult situation as humanly possible. I always say, "What's the worst thing that could possibly happen to our character?" Or the biggest obstacle that you could possibly put in that character's path. If you can come up with it, and then figure out a way for them to subvert that and get around it, then that's an exciting place to be in terms of the writing. We tried to come up with a couple of scenarios like that for Superman as a kind of mental exercise. I think if you can do that, and come up with something that the audience is surprised by but accepts, then I think they're more emotionally engaged. So what happens with Zod... I feel like virtually everyone who's seen the film accepts it, but Superman is not happy about it. He cries. That's also the last link to his people. If you can get the audience to tear up in a Superman film not just out of nostalgia, but because they're actually emotionally invested, then I feel l like you've got them in a way that maybe some other iterations of Superman haven't had them before.
Lots of rumors going around that WB wants the sequel to come out in 2014. I think that would be a mistake unless you filmed the movies back to back like they did with Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit and the Matrix sequels.
Also, if you liked the Man of Steel soundtrack, you can listen to the whole album for free on Spotify.
I saw it Sunday and again last night. I LOVED it, mostly. As a non-comic guy but as a "I saw the Reeve movies but not the newer Superman movie"-guy, I liked the way they twisted the classic telling of the Superman story a bit.
Are we still being "spoiler sensitive"? I guess I'll use the tags just to be safe.
Spoiler Below: Highlight text to read
I felt like the fight scene at the end was about 5 minutes too long. I mean, there wasn't going to be a chance Zod wins, but there was just some self-pleasuring CGI-style there. When Zod said his sole purpose was to protect Krypton and there was no Krypton, I half-expected him to self-terminate. I wonder if they tested it that way and people preferred the "super fight at the end" version.
Also, what's with the Kryptonians using the Gregorian calendar? I think Russell Crowe's second line in the movie mentions "weeks", and there is talk of "centuries" and "years." Even Star Wars had their own made-up units of time (""You've never heard of the Millennium Falcon?…It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs.") and that was in 1977. That goes under Movie Stuff That Bugs Me™.
Holy fuck shit motherfucker shit. Read comics. Fuck shit shit fuck shit I sold out when I did my job. Fuck fuck fuck shit fuck. Sorry had to do it....
Revenge of the Sith = one thumb up from me. Fuck shit. I want to tittie fuck your ass. -- The Guinness. to Cerebus
Originally posted by JayJayDeanAlso, what's with the Kryptonians using the Gregorian calendar? I think Russell Crowe's second line in the movie mentions "weeks", and there is talk of "centuries" and "years." Even Star Wars had their own made-up units of time (""You've never heard of the Millennium Falcon?…It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs.") and that was in 1977. That goes under Movie Stuff That Bugs Me™.
Probably wouldn't be as significant if the audience didn't realize how long it's been since the last time something happened because they used a made up unit of time. What's up with them speaking English in Krypton? Why does Jor El have an Australian accent and Zod speaks American English? Why does Faora speak as if English isn't her first language? Do they speak German in Krypton, too? LOL
So far this is my favorite movie of the summer, although I definitely did not think it was without its faults. I also thought that Pa Kent came off as kind of a dick. I see what they were trying to do with his character, but I think there was a much cleaner way to execute it. There were a number of small plot holes in the film (okay, so he gets his suit, but where does he get a haircut and shave?), and the Daily Planet was most definitely an afterthought. But other stuff, I really liked. I loved that they dispensed with the Clark/Lois/Superman love triangle right out of the gate, because I've always hated that dynamic and find it really creepy. It also showcases how good of a reporter Lois is, because she figures out his secret identity before he even has a public identity. I'm also a sucker for Superman reaffirming his humanity, and I even loved the way the film treated ghost dad Jor-El. He leaves this AI behind to tell his son about all the great things he's supposed to do, and it becomes increasingly apparent that Jor-El's plan for Krypton was no less insane than Zod's. The people of Krypton are engineered for a purpose, and Zod's monologue at the end about his purpose really made it clear that Earth and Krypton could not share a planet. I loved the line "Krypton had its chance," because it showed that Superman eventually came to the conclusion that his dad was wrong, and that he needed to be his own man and make his own choices.
Product placement is nothing new, though. For instance, I will always find it completely ridiculous in Iron Man 1 that after months imprisoned in the Middle East, Tony Stark comes home to Malibu demanding "an American hamburger" and with the plethora of choices at his disposal in Southern California, he goes to Burger King.
Anyway, complaining about product placement in a Superman movie? Go back and rewatch Superman II and the fight with Zod, Non and Ursa. Count the product placement there. Marlboro truck. Coca Cola sign. Kentucky Fried Chicken. Etc. etc.
Just finished watching MoS. Loved it! I loved the idea of Lois kind of already knowing who Clark/Supes, especially at the end because as someone said earlier, makes her look like a really good reporter.
That was my issue with the originals and it made Margot Kidder's Lois seem like a complete idiot for not being able to figure it out. The fight scenes were epic and Jonathan Kent's exit from the movie was rather moving to me.
I do not see a problem with the end of the movie. I will say this. If you want Superman to have the simple choices to make, you will enjoy the Reeve movies more.
About product placement...movies have been doing this for years now, I am not sure why this still upsets people. I have just accepted that it will happen and enjoy the movie. :)
Chuck Norris drives an ice cream truck covered in human skulls.
Not sure I ever shared the story, but as a kid right after Greatest American Hero debuted, I was looking through TV Guide (I had a weird habit of memorizing when all the shows were coming on, which was much easier when there were only 5 channels)