OT: Man Of Steel. Wow

Submitted by JimBobTressel on June 16th, 2013 at 8:10 PM
That movie was so grimy. I be like dang. What terrific action sequences. Is this the greatest combat action movie of all time? What did you think?

Comments

SFBayAreaBlue

June 16th, 2013 at 8:37 PM ^

It's not quite as good as the Batrilogy, but I'd say if you enjoyed them, you'll enjoy this.   I feel like it would have been better if they had made it two movies instead of one.  Some of the character development gets shortchanged.  The ending is a bit grittier than I expected, I wouldn't take kids younger than 12 to it.  Some of the fight scenes drag on because of the comic-bookish quality of superbeings not being able to get hurt.  So that deflates some of the tension. 

But my god, the visuals are awesome.  Everything about Krypton has been updated, I think for the better.  The cast is outstanding.  

Some people comlain about the flashbacks, but if you're familiar with Nolan's work, you should be fine.  It's entertaining.  If you like Snyder's and Nolan's flicks, you'll like this movie. 

Giff4484

June 16th, 2013 at 8:43 PM ^

I loved Batman Begins but Man Of Steel blew it away. MOS is right there with The Dark Knight and only because of Ledger as the Joker. The action was amazing but the down side is the killed the Lane story and a few details that Batman didn't.

Smash Lampjaw

June 16th, 2013 at 8:26 PM ^

Transformers 3, in that I couldn't focus during the destruction of Chicago or New York. Maybe I'll try without the 3d. What is the cape for? It's time to lose that. Superman must of learned some earthling MMA or they would still be smashing each other around.

WMUgoblue

June 16th, 2013 at 8:38 PM ^

This is probably where I sit as well, the flashback sequences were great in fact I wish there were more of them and Snyder does "action" really well but the acting and the ending were just so so lacking with good actors/actresses nonetheless. 

An Angelo's Addict

June 16th, 2013 at 8:40 PM ^

I wanted to be excited to see this movie but every preview truthfully looked boring. I talked to a lot of people that said it was just a lot of CGI with poor acting/boring with a shitty ending. Next

MGoBender

June 16th, 2013 at 10:44 PM ^

You keep saying this but provide no examples.

TDK was powerful not just because Ledger's Joker was so haunting, but because the idea of a terrorist just wanting to see the world burn was executed to perfection.  It was interwoven with the Harvey Dent storyline so well - the politics, the turn of an idealist into a cynical murderer.  The internal conflict of Bruce Wayne. 

TDK was much more than The Joker.

Now, I'm not asking you to spoil Superman.  Though I'm not a Superman guy and I'll never see this movie, but you keep talking like TDK was simply Heath Ledger when that is simply not the case and you aren't providing any reasons from MoS that suggest that it was a such a tour de force of storytelling.

1464

June 17th, 2013 at 9:01 AM ^

I think TDK would have been serviceable without Ledger, but nothing more than a 7 out of 10.  That character took a decent movie and injected it with whatever the hell it was that he injected it with.  That is still one of the best acting jobs I've seen, and it's surprising to see that in a rubber suit movie.  I still think the biggest flaw in TDK was Bale's comically gruff voice.  It took away from a lot of scenes.

Wolfman

June 16th, 2013 at 8:41 PM ^

Of course, I'm about four decades older than the majority of the other members here so our taste is bound to be different. Just give me some movies with a Biel ass, Kidman legs and a McAdam's face and I'm as happy as hell.

guthrie

June 16th, 2013 at 8:48 PM ^

Acting was fine.  No better or worse than any superhero/comic book movie.  Frankly, it was much better than most comic book movies over the last several years for one simple reason (to my taste, obviously):  action.

I've grown kinda sick and tired of comic book movies that are two hours of people talking and fifteen minutes of the actual hero doing stuff.  Take Iron Man 3, for example.  Yes, Mr. Writer and Director, I understand that Robert Downey Jr. is funny and acerbic and witty and charming.  But I'm really not interested in paying you $12 to watch him play word games with Gwyneth Paltrow and some annoying 10 year old kid.  I paid you so I could watch a guy in a metal suit fly around and blow stuff up.  And in that vein, Man of Steel delivers big time.

As for the complaints about the CGI, I guess I don't get it.  Again, this is a movie about a guy with superpowers.  He shoots frickin laser beams out of his eyes.  I've read several reviews complaining that the fights were nothing but people throwing each other into buildings and cars.  Uhh . . . yeah.  Did you expect karate?  Thumb wrestling?  Maybe a little parkour?  It's Superman vs. Zod.  They fly and destroy stuff.  The end.  That's how it's supposed to be, in my mind.

OmarDontScare

June 16th, 2013 at 8:51 PM ^

Figured I'd give it a chance - horrible, horrible, horrible. How many intergalactic fights can one movie have? Just overkill and seems like it was made to appeal to the unsophisticated masses. Wish I had those couple hours back on my Fathers Day. Good news is that it will make money. SMH

umhero

June 16th, 2013 at 8:59 PM ^

I give it a 6 out of 10

It lacked any of the fun of Iron Man and the story was very disjointed.  If you're just looking for action you'll be happy but it didn't have a lot of substance.

The Dark Knight trilogy was far better.

Jaqen H'ghar

June 16th, 2013 at 9:01 PM ^

I think that it was used as a movie to set up a sequel. There was a lot of back story and character buildup and the action was crazy but the story was very generic allow for this. I didn't really want to see Zod as a villain either because while it solidifies that Superman views himself as a human it shows that Kryptonians can be killed pretty easily (basically a headlock to neck snap) and doesn't allow for a contrast of powers. It's just strength vs strength.

gustave ferbert

June 16th, 2013 at 9:06 PM ^

but I loved the trailers.   I was afraid that I would run into a situation where I would be totally disappointed with great marketing and a marginal movie.  Was that the case?

guthrie

June 16th, 2013 at 9:11 PM ^

As you can see above, looks like a few people despised it.  Me, I liked it a lot.  But I didn't go in expecting it to be an amazing movie.  Figured it would be your typical summer blockbuster/comic book type of movie and when I walked out I thought it was quite a bit better than most of those types of movies.