Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So.... what do you think about Superman? (may contain spoilers)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DysfunctionalReality
    replied
    I agree, the plot had serious problems. The worst of which was the writing - it was horrible, atrocious and it ultimately sucked a great deal. A big part of the reason why was the pacing - there were simply way too many long pauses where with no plot development whatsover - booooooring. The music - god the music - god it sucked. Traditional, conservative heard it hundreds of times before crap. The best thing you can say about the music is that it suited the writing a great deal. They were both written by people with no skill or talent or imagination whatsoever (sorry im on a rant). I've never cared less about SuperMan's personal life.

    It just makes me want to cry when movies misrepresent and are vastly outpreformed by the original works. Ugghhh - I saw part V for vendetta the other day and I had to hit the stop button; couldn't bare to watch it anymore - it looked like it was written by a couple of 4 year olds.

    Makes me want to cry. Or hit things. Or projectile vomit all over my keyboard and shirt.

    (rant, im just on a rant)

    Btw
    I didn't like the guy who played Clark, but that's just me. I hate the quiet reserved passive types who play this type of role. I think SuperMan should still be sensative - but he needs to have some balls.

    The Lois, Cyclops, Clark angle? - again never been more bored in life. Cyclops was still kind of cool, only one of the actors I liked.

    Lois was smart - but a hardass. Is Lois a hardass in the comics? - I think not!

    Lex Luther - Not bad. Actually I don't read the comics (just sort of glance at them once or twice a year) so I have no idea if his personality - ala Spacey - was a good idea/bad idea. Still..... not bad, he had his moments.

    You can maybe give the movie a few points for the few, really cool action scenes. Begining to think Bryan Singer is the only one who did his job right. If he had to do a movie about SuperMan - couldn't he have at least picked a better script?
    Last edited by DysfunctionalReality; 08-09-2006, 04:23 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jan
    replied
    Don't go there, people. Take it to one of the political threads.

    Jan

    Leave a comment:


  • David Panzer
    replied
    So what was the "anti-american" film this year?

    Leave a comment:


  • Dr Maturin
    replied
    Originally posted by waspfan
    I actually hated it. $220 million???? Where??? Maybe they should have given 10 million to JMS to write an actual compelling story.
    One anti-American film per year is enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ranger1
    replied
    Superman loves young chicks

    Leave a comment:


  • phazedout
    replied
    I've said this in other forums so I'll continue the theme here.
    katie bosworth is a child, not a hard bitten reporter
    She's too young. I mean he was gone for 5 years, she has the kid not long after he leaves which means she was like 17 in the first two movies?
    Purlease.
    I mean otherwise I enjoyed it but the kiddie reporter as Lois Lane just drove me up the wall.
    Phaze
    on the "get someone over 30 to play lois next time" ID

    Leave a comment:


  • waspfan
    replied
    Super Hype

    I actually hated it. $220 million???? Where??? Maybe they should have given 10 million to JMS to write an actual compelling story.

    Continuity problems and damn those crystals that build land... and Louis is an olympic swimmer -- I could go on but I would be typing till noon tomorrow...

    I thought the acting was fine I guess but Routh tried too hard to be Chris Reeve... Louis' boyfriend is much more a man than sups -- strange story..

    Here is a good comparison -- You don't have to SPEND to entertain..

    Serenity $35 million -- I felt was a solid written film with decent special effects
    Superman $220 million -- story is burden by common sense flaws, special effects are good but twice the money of revenge of the sith?

    Sorry just my opinion -- I was actually really looking forward to it (because it was to continue after #2)...

    Leave a comment:


  • Donald
    replied
    I didn't think much of the film. The plot was lackluster and too many characters made too many stupid choices.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shr'eshhhhhh
    replied
    I liked it a great deal.

    Mr Routh (though not an obvious choice for Mr Red Knickers and Tights) was superb at portraying the alieness of Superman and his alienation after his return from his fruitless search for others like him (who don't want to conquer Planet Houston). He was also very believable as Clark Kent.

    Wasn't too keen on the new look Ms Lane though but she did well enough.

    Spacey was very good (I prefer Hackman though).

    The one thing that was lacking was the fun...the 'gee wizz' sort of glee that the first two had was kinda missing.

    Hopefully if another film turns up...what with Supes having something to smile about again... that will come back.

    All in all a much better Superman III than some other Superman III's that may have been made.

    Leave a comment:


  • David Panzer
    replied
    It was better than I expected, and I wasn't expecting much. If I was younger and not a cynic (which I have been since I was 11), then I would have enjoyed it even more.

    Leave a comment:


  • Karachi Vyce
    replied
    Originally posted by Garibaldi's Hair
    Haven't seen the new Supes yet, but from what I have read I was under the impression that, as far as continuity is concerned, Superman and Superman II both happened, but Superman III and Superman IV have been swept under the carpet.
    As it should be.

    Writing Superman to have a kid is interesting for the movies, so long as they don't go over the top with it. I mean, by the time Superman III rolls around I don't want to be seeing Superboy show up.

    Leave a comment:


  • Garibaldi's Hair
    replied
    Haven't seen the new Supes yet, but from what I have read I was under the impression that, as far as continuity is concerned, Superman and Superman II both happened, but Superman III and Superman IV have been swept under the carpet.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ranger1
    replied
    Still haven't seen Pirates 2.... people tell me its a good flick but tooooooo long.

    And im totally agree with the action part about Superman, wasn't much there, and the story sure moved slow.

    Superman's son..... now thats puzzles me, i thought that this Superman was set right after the original one (Superman 1), if so, Superman (well, Kent) had sex with Lois in Superman 2 (you remember, when he decide to let his powers go).

    The whole son part was too much for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Karachi Vyce
    replied
    I liked it....I mean, I thought it was a good movie, and did feel like the old 80s Superman flicks. But that movie needed a LOT more action than it had. I'm really hoping that next movie has a supervillain, because as......just about all of Marvel's movies have shown, a big fight with a supervillain in your climax really puts the movie over the top.

    As it was, this was a good film, but not nearly as fun or exciting as Pirates of the Caribbean 2. Not even close.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spoo Junky
    replied
    I'm with you.

    My husband seemed to like it and there was a lot of action, but I found it boring too. The story itself moved too slow for me and there wasn't really all that much to it. Some movies I'd consider seeing again, but this one isn't one of 'em.

    It was also very predictable. There's a kid in the movie. Hmmmm, could it be Superman's son that he doesn't know about? Well, I'll be! - It is!
    Last edited by Spoo Junky; 08-03-2006, 08:20 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X