No, the Kirk Alyn and George Reeves serials were better than this film. Snyder had some cool fight scenes but it was still moronic. Miles ahead of the MCU atleast.
Honestly its the only thing in this movie I can't defend. Its especially cringe because Jonathan risks his life for the dog. The very next scene THE VERY NEXT SCENE. Martha has a totally different breed of dog. Its so dumb. >Jonathan believed so much that he had to protect Clark that he gave his life
Thats not right. Superman would never let that happen. Meanwhile the kino story is Jonathan having a heart attack and Clark being unable to save him because it was inevitable.(nevermind that in the comics Superman goes to hell to save Jonathan's soul from the devil who stole it)
He isn't Superman, he's just a normal kid who's about to go to college. A guy who grew up believing his father was right and that he should figure out why he was sent to Earth before he reveals himself to the world. And Jonathan being a guy who risks his own life even for a dog is leading by example and showing Clark first hand what heroism is. It's taking charge and not willing others to risk it when you can do it yourself, because your job is to protect them.
>He isn't Superman, he's just a normal kid who's about to go to college.
He's a teen who can see through walls, bend steel and has 100% discovered his invincibility by this point in his life, letting his father get torn to shreds (you say) because of "consequences".
Look I don’t care if Supes killed half of metropolis the ending fight was kino and the closest thing I’ll get to a decent live action DBZ fight with a gender bent Vegeta to boot.
But dear Lord is everything else an absolute snore.
>Look I don’t care if Supes killed half of metropolis
He mother fricking did not.
See pic related? That was before Clark threw a single punch in Metropolis. Was done by the World Engine (while clark was on the other side of the planet) and the scout ship crashing. And once they started fighting in the city only 1 Skyscraper fully fell and Superman did ZERO damage to it.
Here is the full fight, I defy you to show me where he punched Zod into a building.
Part 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVco65KekFo
Part 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06Qm8cKJ-jo
I will list the damage Clark intentionally does by his own hand here...
In Part 1 at 3:14 he collides with Zod near the side of 1 building leaving a crater.
In Part 1 at 3:23 he burst through a already damaged concrete floor causing very little damage.
In Part 2 at 0:21 he pushes Zod through some construction beams.
In Part 2 at 0:50 Zod punches him into a building and he drags Zod's face across the windows of the building opposite in response.
In Part 2 at 1:50 Superman gains "control" of their decent at the last minute and pushes Zod into the train station.
THAT IS IT! That is all the destruction Superman causes during their hand to hand fight. Not once did he actually punch or throw Zod into a building in Metropolis.
>Part 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVco65KekFo >Part 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06Qm8cKJ-jo >le destruction porn
Yo, Znyder must jerk off to the weirdest shit....wonder if he's switched it up since his daughter became the first member of the Suicide Squad.
This is the best Superman we've ever gotten. Take a look at this scene. It's the defining moment that tests Superman's conviction. His strength drained, he is weakened. Perry White holds hands with Jenny Jurwich and Steve Lombard, symbolizing humanity collectively holding onto each other before the inevitable end. Superman looks so small and powerless, pummeled by this celestial force, the literal weight of the world on his shoulders. And from deep within emerges a vast power, from whence previously there was none, which lifts Superman off of the ground, and rockets him upwards with great speed, into the light.
This movie was a love letter so Superman fans. Frick you OP. It doesn't matter what you say.
It’s good. The only Superman movie I ever liked. I don’t think he’s that interesting but the movie has cool fights. Feels like actual gods during it out over the city.
Cons! > Not addressing the destruction. > Execution of the tornado scene. > Smashing the trucker's truck. > Pa Kent not having enough positive/optimistic scenes. > Pa Kent's "maybe" line. > Clark accidentally taking Zod into Smallville.
Pro or Con depending on your subjective preferences! > Killing Zod. > Clark being genuinely conflicted about revealing himself to the public and the potential dire consequences of such. > Fight scenes/battles are not short. IMO they are just the right length but some consider the final fight to have been overly long. > No jokes breaking tension during the fight or life & death sequences.
Pros! > Clark learning to fly + him stopping the world engine are universally praised scenes even among haters. > Extremely well choreographed epic fight scenes. > Simultaneously grounded in a realistic feeling earth but with a truly epic feel, scope & scale. > Incredibly well crafted sets and outfits. > Beautiful score. > Flawless cast. > Best, most competent, least overly emotional Lois Lane in the history of live action except MAYBE Durance. > Zod is a great villain. > Faora is iconic & sexy as frick. > No homaging/copying/retreading the Donner films (aside from using zod) > Fantastic Krypton opening. > Some nice military porn without overdoing it or being "America frick yeah" like MBay. > Inspiring despite the honest & slightly dour presentation of humanity being flawed. Scenes of the Daily Planet staff, the main solider & Toby from the West Wing being willing to sacrifice themselves are all well done.
>Best, most competent, least overly emotional Lois Lane in the history of live action except MAYBE Durance.
tf is ppl's problem w/ margot kidder? she was great. i guess not a hottie, but she pretty much delivered on the emotional axis of who lois was at the time and exceeded that.
It's a good line. It paints Jonathan as a father struggling to deal with a difficult situation and trying to explain something to a kid who doesn't have to capability to understand it properly and when he's asked a difficult moral question he can't deliver a perfect answer when the choice is between revealing his son to the world which endangers his son's entire future vs people dying and there's no guarantee a small kid with powers could do anything except make things worse atop of revealing himself to the world. So Jonathan fumbles and says maybe because that's what every parent would do, first and foremost think of their child before anyone else. And then he immediately realizes he has to come forward and explain to Clark everything now so he can understand why he has to ve careful and hide
"We have to hide him or the goverment will do speriments on him and stuff. Im a good person overall because I care about my family and now ill die to prove that"
Oh yeah definately not moronic writing in a shitty movie by writers who have fricking clue how humans act or how morality works
>> Clark learning to fly + him stopping the world engine are universally praised scenes even among haters.
It was purty! >> Extremely well choreographed epic fight scenes.
The climactic fight with Zod was stupid, and did not live up to the Smallville fight, the only good fight. >> Simultaneously grounded in a realistic feeling earth but with a truly epic feel, scope & scale.
So purty. >> Incredibly well crafted sets and outfits.
Did I mention how purty it was? >> Beautiful score.
Purty music too! >> Flawless cast.
Lois is too old, Perry is an imbecile, but the main problem is that all the characters are written like shit, not that they don't look appropriate. >> Best, most competent, least overly emotional Lois Lane in the history of live action except MAYBE Durance.
Yes, she can climb ice cliffs in lethally cold arctic nights in her mall-coat, wowzers. >> Zod is a great villain.
He's a 40 IQ military strategist who gets his ass kicked by farmers and labcoats. He'd be low-tier in the MCU with Malekith and the like. >> Faora is iconic & sexy as frick.
So, so purty. >> No homaging/copying/retreading the Donner films (aside from using zod)
(aside from using all 3 of the villains from Donner effectively) >> Fantastic Krypton opening.
Purty space dragons! >> Some nice military porn without overdoing it or being "America frick yeah" like MBay.
Jets go whoosh! >> Inspiring despite the honest & slightly dour presentation of humanity being flawed. Scenes of the Daily Planet staff, the main solider & Toby from the West Wing being willing to sacrifice themselves are all well done.
Despite the hackneyed "humans gonna freak" plotline, the humans all act completely reasonable at all points in the movie, aside from strafing the piss out of Smallville to "save it". Anything resembling a profound story is lost as soon as Snyder starts bashing his action figures together, and are never taken up again.
Being Purty is the ONLY merit the film has, and is the ultimate fall-back for Snyderpajeets.
And really it's purtiness relies heavily on your tolerance for oversaturation.
It's plot is garbage, it's characterization is garbage. But sooo sooo purty.
Yeah, being "purty" is not a bad thing in a visual medium. I don't like the movie at all but you type like a homosexual.
Being Purty is the ONLY merit the film has, and is the ultimate fall-back for Snyderpajeets.
And really it's purtiness relies heavily on your tolerance for oversaturation.
It's plot is garbage, it's characterization is garbage. But sooo sooo purty.
>> Clark learning to fly + him stopping the world engine are universally praised scenes even among haters.
I probably qualify as what you would consider a hater and I don't think the world engine scene works. I think it would've been better if it were actually around people so that it would have delivered on the whole "Clark will inspire people" thing.
As for your other pros, nah.
>No, no. (raises a finger) Now, you listen to me. When you first came to us, we thought that people would come and take you away because, when they found out, you know, the things you could do...and that worried us a lot. But then a man gets older, and he thinks very differently and things get very clear. And there's one thing I do know, son, and that is you are here for a *reason*. I don't know whose reason, or whatever the reason is...maybe it's because...um...I don't know, it's uh... >(exhales) >But I do know one thing. >(soft smile) >It's *not* to score touchdowns. Huh?
If your dad is still alive Cinemaphile, did you call him today?
I know right. As if the content its self wasnt shit (His father commiting suicide, Superman barely talks) lets stand back and look at it from an artists point of view to see what this film conveys:
1) A bleak colorless atmosphere, worse than a regular movie. (comic book heros, THE comic book hero wears absurd bright colors)
2) One dimensional thinking thats unoriginal and indicative of borderline IQ: "Durr, uh, he real strong so he uhh must be like god/Jesus and is god/" Effectively giving Superman zero personality.
3) Superman kills, theres a thousand unlimited ways you could write him winning without having to kill since its fiction, just something to tell you Superman not killing is dumb and unrealistic
4) Jonathan Kent self murder - a hopeless attempt at something deep that ultimately comes across as stupid, when his son runs so fast no would see - but really only written in to give you a bleak atmosphere.
5) Murder City, not so much intentional, but just to make everything "cool" with disaster porn. Ultimately makes Superman incompetent and betrays what he stands for
6) Superman is mute and not uncharismatic, a loser even.
7) A one dimensional movie overall with none of the morality associate with Superman.
8) They didnt even want to title the Superman movie "Superman", because thats obviously stupid, amd Superman is stupid.
This is the quintessential non-Superman fan movie. And Cavill is sort if a victim here because he always wanted to play a proper Supermam but had to settle for this hoping it wouldnt suck ass as it went.
Now, I'm not a Reeve wanker, frankly I think people should get over him since Im tired of people aping him. But look at how his color pops and how he looks like Superman in his world. And frankly its quite sad Reeve is still Superman essentially because there have been so many flops or just mediocrity.
All Snyder had to do was address the ONE big criticism of MoS and it would've worked fine as a Superman origin story and the point Clark grows from.
But Snyder can't stop himself from sacrificing character for destructive spectacle.
He wants a Clark that won't act to save his father's life, but will turn a truck into a pretzel. He wants a Batman that is opposed to Superman's wanton destruction, but also has a massive bodycount. He wants a Batman who kills, but for there to still somehow be a Joker.
I think the best scene of the DCEU is still the opening scene of BvS because it actually seems to know this and to orient itself towards fixing Man of Steel's problems. It addresses the wanton destruction, actual people die and survivors experience consequence, it's not like in MoS when the Daily Planet staff escape their crumbling office and are back at work in the final scene.
It sets up the central confict between a Batman who values life and a Superman who can't stop destruction and wants to do better, and with every subsequent scene Snyder shits on that promise. Batman kills, Superman kills, both are high and mighty about the other killing, the confict doesn't develop in any substantial way until the final scene, yadda yadda, we've all heard these gripes before...
But no shared universe has delivered a scene where they have their cake and eat it. Where they can turn the camera on themselves and change the context in which an earlier film operates. Marvel's work is too cookie-cutter to ever have the level of self-awareness this scene has, and I don't understand why Snyder couldn't take the lessons of it, but then he missed the point of Watchmen too so I guess the guy just has no clue about the messages of his own works.
>He wants a Batman that is opposed to Superman's wanton destruction, but also has a massive bodycount.
The hypocrisy is intentional, you fricking idiot.
>He wants a Batman who kills, but for there to still somehow be a Joker.
And? Joker even in the comics survives from all kinds of shit, and Batman is still incapable of finding Joker if he's hiding. Batman turning unhinged is a new development. You're proving that Snyder it too smart for you with such stupid complaints. You're a whiny fanboy buttmad you didn't get the version you wanted in your own developed hype
Explain why. Explain why it's not a bad thing that these characters stand for nothing and have no redeeming qualities.
>Joker even in the comics survives from all kinds of shit
And it's dumb as frick there too. And there Batman isn't living, eating, breathing and shitting murder. Batman goes out of his way in the comics to save Joker a stupid amount of times. If Batman put that same effort into killing him, as DCEU Batman presumably has, why is he alive?
>Batman is still incapable of finding Joker if he's hiding
In Suicide Squad he goes to Arkham after killing Robin, escapes with Harley Quinn, goes to a nightclub, and Batman finds him there on his personalized lamborghini.
I know that's not a Snyder movie, but still.
>Batman turning unhinged is a new development
If you think "Batman, but with muder" is an original Zack Snyder idea (TM), you are in no position to lecture people about Batman.
>Explain why it's not a bad thing that these characters stand for nothing and have no redeeming qualities.
Because they're human and err. Batman deranged and drunk on his fear and anger because he's lost faith in humanity as a bitter, broken man is important factor when Superman proves you can be better and literally inspires Bruce to get his shit together.
>And there Batman isn't living, eating, breathing and shitting murder.
Batman is focused on destroying Superman, not running around murdering everyone, you stupid c**t. He's slowly growing more erratic and sadistic instead of being murder man from day one.
>and Batman finds him there on his personalized lamborghini
And then he loses him when he saves Harley. Just because you can find someone occasionally doesn't mean you can always find them.
>Superman proves you can be better and literally inspires Bruce to get his shit together
Superman is also a sad man struggling with his faith, and he doesn't do much better than Batman, considering he's still murdering people with impunity and not working to establish a relationship with the world he intends to save and represent.
Lois' entire arc in the UE is struggling to explain to people that Superman didn't execute someone with a gun, something people struggle to believe. That's your inspirational Superman?
>Batman isn't murder man from day one
He brands the human trafficker in his introductory scene, and then Clark explains that the brand is a death sentence in prison. In the UE it's explained that Lex is orchestrating the murders, but Batman still knows its a death sentence and continues to do it. So he is a murderer from day one. There is no progression in Batman or Superman's character from the first scene until they fight.
>Superman is also a sad man struggling with his faith
No, he's struggling with the pressures of being a public hero, like the impossibility of being sure that every action he takes doesn't have unwanted consequences, either indirectly or by ther people.
>and he doesn't do much better than Batman, considering he's still murdering people with impunity
Nope, wrong again.
>and not working to establish a relationship with the world he intends to save and represent.
He just wants to help, and not be the story. Him appearing at the senate hearing is him accepting that he cannot just go around saving people like a good Samaritan anymore, and has to get personally involved to control the narrative told about him. It's another lesson and development for the character.
>That's your inspirational Superman?
My inspirational Superman is someone who takes a man who's lost in his own fear and rage and lifts him up and makes him become a better man again. Superman singlehandedly restores Batman's hope and faith in humanity by proving Batman's cynical fears wrong.
>He brands the human trafficker in his introductory scene, and then Clark explains that the brand is a death sentence in prison
I.e. he isn't murdering people directly. It's an indication of him turning more sadistic, brutal and cruel and that's why his actions develop more violent and erratic until he's about to murder Superman with his own hands.
Again, you're too stupid to understand the movie, ya silly c**t.
2 years ago
Anonymous
He does still murder people with impunity. He flies those terrorists through concrete walls. His propensity for killing with impunity is so well known in-universe that Lois struggles to convince people he didn't execute someone with a gun.
Nobody in the DCEU looks up to Superman. The people he saves are grateful to him, the people he is against are usually murdered or fear murder, and most people don't trust him.
DCEU Superman is not an inspirational figure, least of all to Batman, whose opinion of Superman doesn't evolve for 3 hours of the movie up until the Martha scene.
There is functionally no difference between many indirect murders via torture, imprisonment and shanking vs killing one guy yourself. The moral difference there is something you've invented to sell yourself a character arc that doesn't exist. Again, most of what you like in this movie isn't actually in the movie. You silly c**t.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Nobody in the DCEU looks up to Superman
Hey now, that's not true, he had plenty of cultists who worshiped him like the second coming of Jesus.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Killing in defense of others isn't fricking murder.
2 years ago
Anonymous
He could've easily disarmed them, stood in front of the bullets, etc., but he flies him through a concrete wall.
Again, he acts so brutal that Lois struggles to convince people he didn't commit a war crime.
If Clark had grown from the ending of Man of Steel, he'd be more careful about applying lethal force. But Snyder wants him to kill people because that's realism bro, realism is when things are badass.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's also not something Superman does.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>He flies those terrorists through concrete walls.
No. Knyazev was the one who killed Amajagh. Not Superman.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I'm gonna have to ask you to cite specific lines from the movie as I haven't seen it since the UE came out and you've been making shit up this whole thread.
Superman flies the head terrorist through a wall and kills him. The other terrorists are left for authorities, but found later to have been killed execution style. Thus the Lois plot of the UE.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The tub scene with Lois. Clark says, "I didn't kill those men". Later we find out it was Luther who ordered the hit on Amajagh to make Superman look bad.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I assumed that meant the remaining men. He clearly takes out Amajagh with excessive force.
Either way, even the negligibility of the kill, and the fact that most people Lois encounters readily believe Superman kills, shows that he's not putting enough emphasis on disavowing lethal force to take the high road when it comes to Batman, thus the entire central conflict and character arcs are sacrificed for wanton violence, as is my original argument.
>Nobody in the DCEU looks up to Superman
Plenty of people do. He even has a statue.
>>east of all to Batman, whose opinion of Superman doesn't evolve for 3 hours of the movie up until the Martha scene.
Almost as if that's a pivotal scene climaxing in Batman realising he's been in the wrong that whole time, ya dumb fricking troglodyte.
He gets a statue after he dies because Snyder wants to treat Superman as a god figure in the back end of the movie without doing any of the work in the front end showing him or his perception by the world changing. The same thing happens with Batman.
Pivotal scene my ass, it's called a character arc, not a character straight-line-until-it-veers-wildly-at-the-end. Batman's opinion doesn't evolve. Contrary to what that other anon says, he doesn't get more unhinged through the movie, he's killing people from day one. The character is stagnant up until his opinion takes a 180. Snyder had three hours of a movie to build something leading up to that, his best attempt was to show us the Waynes being shot... again.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>He gets a statue after he dies
No, the statue is built after the events of MoS. You also see him saving people and articles detailing his heroism and media debating his role and how to view him. It's all part of the larger narrative about Superman's existence dividing people until there's unity when he publicly sacrifices himself to save the world.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Superman didn't kill Amajagh. That was a plot point. It's shown later in the Ultimate Edition.
2 years ago
Anonymous
He pushed the guy at high speed through two brick walls. Is it like the later DCEU scenes of carnage where we are assured "that entire section of the city has been evacuated."?
They're never shown to have been evacuated, there's no sirens or anything, but conveniently it's mentioned after they blow up the district.
I guess Batfleck didn't kill any of Luthor's guards, including the one he dropped his tank on from the second story.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Superman headbutted the walls I'm pretty sure. And in the original theatrical cut Clark says he didn't kill anyone. In the Ultimate Edition it's made even more clear by showing us that the killer was Anatoli.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>He pushed the guy at high speed through two brick walls
Yeah, and? Where is it shown he's dead instead of just injured?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>I guess Batfleck didn't kill any of Luthor's guards, including the one he dropped his tank on from the second story.
Batman killing people with a vehicle has always been fair game.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Nobody in the DCEU looks up to Superman
Plenty of people do. He even has a statue.
>>east of all to Batman, whose opinion of Superman doesn't evolve for 3 hours of the movie up until the Martha scene.
Almost as if that's a pivotal scene climaxing in Batman realising he's been in the wrong that whole time, ya dumb fricking troglodyte.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Superman singlehandedly restores Batman's hope and faith in humanity by proving Batman's cynical fears wrong.
That happened in the most contrived and stupid way possible which is why the no one takes this movie seriously outside die hard cultist.
>Superman is also a sad man struggling with his faith
Sort of? They really fricked up by not giving Clark the character of "Clark Kent: mild mannered reporter for the Daily Planet."
>DCucks still whining about a movie a decade later
It's over. Move on. What happened to that CW shit you morons couldn't stop sucking the wiener of for like a month?
>Son, the world must never know of your powers, you must never risk exposing yourself even if it means kids might die >but if you want to turn some trucker frick's cab into an Optimus Prime skewer, go for it
Nice movie, Snydergays.
I think being so concerned with "branding" (is it appropriate for Sonic to have mature themes or these things in it? Or Mario? Or what about Pokemon?) is sign of corporatist brain-rot where storytelling has been monopolized by IP-holders and the extent of media criticism by their target audiences isn't with respect to art's meaning but instead whether or not it's "on-brand". You'd have children's stories all throughout history where animals maim each other or little kids were devoured by demons, cute aesthetics that go dark by the end, but what apparently counts as legitimate criticism now is to point out that something that looks childish goes to dark places and how awful that is for a children's IP.
It has some good parts to it, like Zimmer's music and the Smallville battle. Or the final aerial battle with Zod (if you can somehow ignore the scores of dead people). I think Snyder captured the visuals of Superman's flight and the impact of his punches better than anyone else did.
But yeah overall it sucks, and BvS was somehow even worse. The third trailer for it is absolute kino though.
i think this movie was supposed to be a doomsday movie, the metropolis fight scene and Superman killing zod makes more sense if you think that way
also Superman returns is better
I also want to say that WB's weird decision to make all their superheroes 30-somethings who have to have arguments with their Mommy/Daddy/parent-figure/gf so they can go out and superhero (like they are 16 yr olds who want to go to a house party past 9pm) is baffling.
This shit really started with Bale-bats and his israeli Mom-Butler, and has not let up since.
They aren't teenagers, but apparently all the Superfriends need to seek parental permission.
Yes, but he harps on Bruce like his israeli mother. It's okay for him to have adventures shooting up the third world for the Crown (probably at an earlier age than 30), but Bruce is absolutely a fool for trying to undo the havoc he created by pissing off a cult of assassins.
Better to leave the city to their revenge!
It's creepy how middle-aged DC superheroes need permission. Man of Autism seeks it out in all 3 movies. What an inspiring guy.
I mean, if you're a 35 yr old billionaire and you are still shouting "YOU AREN'T MY DAD" at your manservant unironically, you have problems.
It's like the DC movies are made for autists who will never leave the nest.
It's a lot of money to throw away on a tedious, off-tone Superman movie, when the PREVIOUS Superman movie was the same expensive tedious off-tone shit.
Is it really necessary to reinvent Superman as a sad, reluctant man of constant sorrow?
$328,276,427 domestic box office adjusted for inflation
$151,359,070 domestic home market adjusted for inflation
~$485,820,000 international box office adjusted for inflation [this one is a bit funky] [it's a conservative estimate]
The movie made WB a lot of money.
You know desperation has set in when Blu Rays and T-shirts start getting added into Box office.
Only DCKeks do this. I have never seen anyone try to justify Eternals by Blu Ray/4k sales, and the Eternals 4k was phenomenally expensive.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I mean 328 million adjusted for inflation is pretty decent- it's higher than Thor Ragnarok.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Even without the Blu-ray, DVD, and streaming sales (which is all perfectly legitimate taking into account ZSJL and movies such as Turning Red are made to turn a profit and have successfully done so) that's still like $850 million. I don't understand that criticism.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Stop trying and failing to do math. I'm second hand embarrassed for you.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I'm not failing anything though. Those numbers all cut off at like May.
I don't really care if you do or don't hate it. The fact is that MoS made around $1 billion. Removing the $150-$175 million it made from DVD sales and such, it's sitting around $800-$850 million.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>The fact is that MoS made around $1 billion.
It made $750 million adjusted, and absolutely no one but Snyderpajeets figure in vidya sales into box office. You absolute kek.
You can't just make up figures, you aren't Orange Leader.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>no one but Snyderpajeets figure in vidya sales into box office
$485,820,000 international box office adjusted for inflation
$328,276,427 domestic box office adjusted for inflation
This is already over $800 million. And it doesn't account for DVD sales.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>$485,820,000 international box office adjusted for inflation
This is a number you have completely made up, unless you want to cite it.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's an estimate for the international box office adjusted for inflation. And you can calculate for inflation in other countries.
https://fxtop.com/en/inflation-calculator.php
Try it out for yourself.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I know you want to believe that the international sales experienced no inflation whatsoever, but they did. And now who is really fudging numbers?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>I know you want to believe that the international sales experienced no inflation whatsoever
THE YEAR that Man of Steel made money, all that International money was converted to Dollars, Hollywood does not vault Rupees.
TODAY, those DOLLARS convert up to 113%, you do NOT figure all International Box office by the inflation rate of the Rupee, you beyond ignorant Poo.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Hollywood does actually hold foreign currency. And if you want the numbers adjusted for the inflation rate of the dollar then...
Clean your own house before criticizing others.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You are using the inflation rate of the US economy, rather than the inflation rate of ticket costs. Ticket prices have not inflated at the same rate as the cost of gas or broad economy.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's 291mil domestic, adjusted to 328 million
and 377mil worldwide adjusted to 426 million
Added together that's 754 million, not a billion, not "close to a billion, not 800 million.
You do not get to make up your own math.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You don't get to bargain like a Persian Bazaar; it's a simple process of MATH.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Btw, using a computer, Man of Steel's box office inflation is 113%. 113% of it's (rounded up) box office is 754 million. Not even close to a billion.
>box office inflation
Dude, do you understand how money works? Each country has its own inflation rate. Worldwide box office inflation is an impossible calculation to perform.
That being said MoS did respectable in the domestic box office all in all. The problem is that the movie opened so well it should have done more.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Worldwide box office inflation is an impossible calculation to perform.
All that world box office is converted to American dollars; those dollars are convertible through ticket inflation. I'm aware you are using moron-mathestimacation to try and make Man of Steel a bigger success than it was, and I am asking you to cut it out.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>All that world box office is converted to American dollars
I can't believe this is something I have to explain to an adult human capable of typing words on the internet, but here we go:
The amount of USD a ticket in Japan cost in 2013 is almost identical to the amount of USD a ticket in Japan costs today. WB, from Japan, has made "no more" money from inflation with MoS in Japan, because if they sold the same amount of tickets they would get the same amount of USD out today.
On the other hand domestically the inflation rate has made US/Canada tickets worth more. So if they sold the same amount of tickets in US/Canada today as they did in 2013, they would make more money than they did back then. That's why you can't just say "lmao just do 1.13 x worldwide gross" for an accurate adjusted picture.
This is why box office sites only report "domestic inflation adjusted" instead of "worldwide inflation adjusted," because they aren't total morons like you. Tell me, where's the "international adjusted" tab? If it's 750M like you're saying then why isn't it an official stat?
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Man-of-Steel#tab=box-office
And you should note that I am not a Snyder shill. I overall dislike Man of Steel and I think it would have easily made 800M+ in 2013 if it was a better movie, given how well it opened.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Yes but that money doesn't stay in Japan (outside of the theater's cut). So it's irrelevant what Japan's inflation is, Hollywood isn't in Japan. Their banks aren't either.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Dude, do you understand how money works? Each country has its own inflation rate.
I am aware.
According to Thenumbers.com, Man of Steel made close to $750 million adjusted for modern ticket prices. it's budget would also be closer to $300 million by those same adjustments.
It had a phenomenal opening weekend, but collapsed when audiences got a good taste of it and word spread.
MoS made WB so much money, giving the company the buying power of around $1 billion, and you're going to have to swallow that fact. It was an incredibly successful movie all-around.
Criticizing the film's revenue is laughable. Find something else to criticize because you won't succeed making fun of its box office.
I maintain this movie is the victim of bad timing more than bad execution. People just weren’t interested in dour dramatic superheroes at this time thanks to Ironman and Avengers. Lots of other movies got an unfair shake for the same reason like Amazing Spider-Man. I have a feeling in years to come people will look back more kindly on it for its attempt at deeper themes and forget about all the cheap meme reviews that blasted it for superficial reasons.
Because that would destroy the ceiling of the building they were in.
Because Zod would fly down with equal force and they'd go nowhere. Because he was visibly struggling already to hold Zod's head where it was.
>And then what? They'll just keep fighting forever because they're evenly matched and by evenly matched I mean Zod is stronger because he has to be a threat but also Clark is still strong enough to break his neck.
i don't call myself a superman fan. i call this the first good superman movie
I'm a redditor zoomer btw. Forgot to mention this.
No, the Kirk Alyn and George Reeves serials were better than this film. Snyder had some cool fight scenes but it was still moronic. Miles ahead of the MCU atleast.
I was lurking in that other Supes thread with the YouTube thumbnail as the OP image as well.
I'd sooner call this a Dragon Ball Z movie than a Superman movie
Why?
stop my invincible son will live on forever
Honestly its the only thing in this movie I can't defend. Its especially cringe because Jonathan risks his life for the dog. The very next scene THE VERY NEXT SCENE. Martha has a totally different breed of dog. Its so dumb.
>Jonathan believed so much that he had to protect Clark that he gave his life
Thats not right. Superman would never let that happen. Meanwhile the kino story is Jonathan having a heart attack and Clark being unable to save him because it was inevitable.(nevermind that in the comics Superman goes to hell to save Jonathan's soul from the devil who stole it)
>Superman would never let that happen.
He isn't Superman, he's just a normal kid who's about to go to college. A guy who grew up believing his father was right and that he should figure out why he was sent to Earth before he reveals himself to the world. And Jonathan being a guy who risks his own life even for a dog is leading by example and showing Clark first hand what heroism is. It's taking charge and not willing others to risk it when you can do it yourself, because your job is to protect them.
>He isn't Superman, he's just a normal kid who's about to go to college.
He's a teen who can see through walls, bend steel and has 100% discovered his invincibility by this point in his life, letting his father get torn to shreds (you say) because of "consequences".
It'll never not be moronic.
Look I don’t care if Supes killed half of metropolis the ending fight was kino and the closest thing I’ll get to a decent live action DBZ fight with a gender bent Vegeta to boot.
But dear Lord is everything else an absolute snore.
>Look I don’t care if Supes killed half of metropolis
He mother fricking did not.
See pic related? That was before Clark threw a single punch in Metropolis. Was done by the World Engine (while clark was on the other side of the planet) and the scout ship crashing. And once they started fighting in the city only 1 Skyscraper fully fell and Superman did ZERO damage to it.
Here is the full fight, I defy you to show me where he punched Zod into a building.
Part 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVco65KekFo
Part 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06Qm8cKJ-jo
I will list the damage Clark intentionally does by his own hand here...
In Part 1 at 3:14 he collides with Zod near the side of 1 building leaving a crater.
In Part 1 at 3:23 he burst through a already damaged concrete floor causing very little damage.
In Part 2 at 0:21 he pushes Zod through some construction beams.
In Part 2 at 0:50 Zod punches him into a building and he drags Zod's face across the windows of the building opposite in response.
In Part 2 at 1:50 Superman gains "control" of their decent at the last minute and pushes Zod into the train station.
THAT IS IT! That is all the destruction Superman causes during their hand to hand fight. Not once did he actually punch or throw Zod into a building in Metropolis.
>Part 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVco65KekFo
>Part 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06Qm8cKJ-jo
>le destruction porn
Yo, Znyder must jerk off to the weirdest shit....wonder if he's switched it up since his daughter became the first member of the Suicide Squad.
ew this shit is so gay. it was gay when i was a kid and watched it. it remains gay now. god, you snydergays are sad.
Is funny how people forget that superman dragged a fight to smallville and we all saw how that went
And that was a frick up if someone who's never been in a fight before. And when he tried to leave he got stopped.
He literally dragged zod there that shit wasn't an accident
Like I said, dumbass, it was a frick up on Clark's part. He just wanted Zod away from his mom. He wasn't thinking, he was reacting.
The fact that he almost immediately into the fight tried to drag Faora back out of town suggest otherwise.
>Look I don’t care if Supes killed half of metropolis
he didn't, 90% of the destruction was Zods dubstep machine.
This is the best Superman we've ever gotten. Take a look at this scene. It's the defining moment that tests Superman's conviction. His strength drained, he is weakened. Perry White holds hands with Jenny Jurwich and Steve Lombard, symbolizing humanity collectively holding onto each other before the inevitable end. Superman looks so small and powerless, pummeled by this celestial force, the literal weight of the world on his shoulders. And from deep within emerges a vast power, from whence previously there was none, which lifts Superman off of the ground, and rockets him upwards with great speed, into the light.
This movie was a love letter so Superman fans. Frick you OP. It doesn't matter what you say.
They made him a cold blooded killer with no humanity
You're trying too hard
There was no hope, there was no humanity.
He had no personality, and I'm not even sure he smiled once.
Was literally posted in the last thread.
Does it hurt to reach this far?
Unspeakably handsome actor, as Clark and Supes.
Does anyone have that gif of Gal Gadot biting her lip at Henry.
Wasn't that Chris Pine
He's handsome too. But he's best as Kirk.
Superman vs. Good Water Pressure
It would've been cooler if this scene ended with him punching up the beam like in the Fleischer cartoons.
I have always wanted to put this scene to The Planet Krypton theme from 78. I think it even syncs well.
>the music swells as Superman flies into the beam
I'm a Superman fan and this was top tier capeshit. Now what?
I never once felt hope coming from this Superman, just a ticking pyschopath
It’s good. The only Superman movie I ever liked. I don’t think he’s that interesting but the movie has cool fights. Feels like actual gods during it out over the city.
Cons!
> Not addressing the destruction.
> Execution of the tornado scene.
> Smashing the trucker's truck.
> Pa Kent not having enough positive/optimistic scenes.
> Pa Kent's "maybe" line.
> Clark accidentally taking Zod into Smallville.
Pro or Con depending on your subjective preferences!
> Killing Zod.
> Clark being genuinely conflicted about revealing himself to the public and the potential dire consequences of such.
> Fight scenes/battles are not short. IMO they are just the right length but some consider the final fight to have been overly long.
> No jokes breaking tension during the fight or life & death sequences.
Pros!
> Clark learning to fly + him stopping the world engine are universally praised scenes even among haters.
> Extremely well choreographed epic fight scenes.
> Simultaneously grounded in a realistic feeling earth but with a truly epic feel, scope & scale.
> Incredibly well crafted sets and outfits.
> Beautiful score.
> Flawless cast.
> Best, most competent, least overly emotional Lois Lane in the history of live action except MAYBE Durance.
> Zod is a great villain.
> Faora is iconic & sexy as frick.
> No homaging/copying/retreading the Donner films (aside from using zod)
> Fantastic Krypton opening.
> Some nice military porn without overdoing it or being "America frick yeah" like MBay.
> Inspiring despite the honest & slightly dour presentation of humanity being flawed. Scenes of the Daily Planet staff, the main solider & Toby from the West Wing being willing to sacrifice themselves are all well done.
Love her so much.
>Cons!
>KUNGFU FIIIIIIEEEETING JOR-EL
>SHIT PRODUCTION DESIGN FOR THE SCIFI SHIT B/C SNYDER
Nah the production design was beyond magnificent just needed some more crystaline aspects.
Nah added to the grounded realism.
>Cons!
>IHOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
>Best, most competent, least overly emotional Lois Lane in the history of live action except MAYBE Durance.
tf is ppl's problem w/ margot kidder? she was great. i guess not a hottie, but she pretty much delivered on the emotional axis of who lois was at the time and exceeded that.
>con
>Pa Kent's "maybe" line.
It's a good line. It paints Jonathan as a father struggling to deal with a difficult situation and trying to explain something to a kid who doesn't have to capability to understand it properly and when he's asked a difficult moral question he can't deliver a perfect answer when the choice is between revealing his son to the world which endangers his son's entire future vs people dying and there's no guarantee a small kid with powers could do anything except make things worse atop of revealing himself to the world. So Jonathan fumbles and says maybe because that's what every parent would do, first and foremost think of their child before anyone else. And then he immediately realizes he has to come forward and explain to Clark everything now so he can understand why he has to ve careful and hide
"We have to hide him or the goverment will do speriments on him and stuff. Im a good person overall because I care about my family and now ill die to prove that"
Oh yeah definately not moronic writing in a shitty movie by writers who have fricking clue how humans act or how morality works
t. someone who isn't a parent.
>> Clark learning to fly + him stopping the world engine are universally praised scenes even among haters.
It was purty!
>> Extremely well choreographed epic fight scenes.
The climactic fight with Zod was stupid, and did not live up to the Smallville fight, the only good fight.
>> Simultaneously grounded in a realistic feeling earth but with a truly epic feel, scope & scale.
So purty.
>> Incredibly well crafted sets and outfits.
Did I mention how purty it was?
>> Beautiful score.
Purty music too!
>> Flawless cast.
Lois is too old, Perry is an imbecile, but the main problem is that all the characters are written like shit, not that they don't look appropriate.
>> Best, most competent, least overly emotional Lois Lane in the history of live action except MAYBE Durance.
Yes, she can climb ice cliffs in lethally cold arctic nights in her mall-coat, wowzers.
>> Zod is a great villain.
He's a 40 IQ military strategist who gets his ass kicked by farmers and labcoats. He'd be low-tier in the MCU with Malekith and the like.
>> Faora is iconic & sexy as frick.
So, so purty.
>> No homaging/copying/retreading the Donner films (aside from using zod)
(aside from using all 3 of the villains from Donner effectively)
>> Fantastic Krypton opening.
Purty space dragons!
>> Some nice military porn without overdoing it or being "America frick yeah" like MBay.
Jets go whoosh!
>> Inspiring despite the honest & slightly dour presentation of humanity being flawed. Scenes of the Daily Planet staff, the main solider & Toby from the West Wing being willing to sacrifice themselves are all well done.
Despite the hackneyed "humans gonna freak" plotline, the humans all act completely reasonable at all points in the movie, aside from strafing the piss out of Smallville to "save it". Anything resembling a profound story is lost as soon as Snyder starts bashing his action figures together, and are never taken up again.
Yeah, being "purty" is not a bad thing in a visual medium. I don't like the movie at all but you type like a homosexual.
Being Purty is the ONLY merit the film has, and is the ultimate fall-back for Snyderpajeets.
And really it's purtiness relies heavily on your tolerance for oversaturation.
It's plot is garbage, it's characterization is garbage. But sooo sooo purty.
It’s spelled “pretty”
>> Clark learning to fly + him stopping the world engine are universally praised scenes even among haters.
I probably qualify as what you would consider a hater and I don't think the world engine scene works. I think it would've been better if it were actually around people so that it would have delivered on the whole "Clark will inspire people" thing.
As for your other pros, nah.
It's classic Hack Snyder:
>few good moments that pay homage and nail Superman
>80% of it is shit
snyder spiders
People who hate this movie tend to like All Star Superman and nothing else.
Hack Znyder's a cuck to the nth degree
It was a really good movie that did Superman good
Damn, homies. 70s Johnathan Kent was based af
>No, no. (raises a finger) Now, you listen to me. When you first came to us, we thought that people would come and take you away because, when they found out, you know, the things you could do...and that worried us a lot. But then a man gets older, and he thinks very differently and things get very clear. And there's one thing I do know, son, and that is you are here for a *reason*. I don't know whose reason, or whatever the reason is...maybe it's because...um...I don't know, it's uh...
>(exhales)
>But I do know one thing.
>(soft smile)
>It's *not* to score touchdowns. Huh?
If your dad is still alive Cinemaphile, did you call him today?
If he's gone, R.IP., man.
frick hack snyder
I know right. As if the content its self wasnt shit (His father commiting suicide, Superman barely talks) lets stand back and look at it from an artists point of view to see what this film conveys:
1) A bleak colorless atmosphere, worse than a regular movie. (comic book heros, THE comic book hero wears absurd bright colors)
2) One dimensional thinking thats unoriginal and indicative of borderline IQ: "Durr, uh, he real strong so he uhh must be like god/Jesus and is god/" Effectively giving Superman zero personality.
3) Superman kills, theres a thousand unlimited ways you could write him winning without having to kill since its fiction, just something to tell you Superman not killing is dumb and unrealistic
4) Jonathan Kent self murder - a hopeless attempt at something deep that ultimately comes across as stupid, when his son runs so fast no would see - but really only written in to give you a bleak atmosphere.
5) Murder City, not so much intentional, but just to make everything "cool" with disaster porn. Ultimately makes Superman incompetent and betrays what he stands for
6) Superman is mute and not uncharismatic, a loser even.
7) A one dimensional movie overall with none of the morality associate with Superman.
8) They didnt even want to title the Superman movie "Superman", because thats obviously stupid, amd Superman is stupid.
This is the quintessential non-Superman fan movie. And Cavill is sort if a victim here because he always wanted to play a proper Supermam but had to settle for this hoping it wouldnt suck ass as it went.
Now, I'm not a Reeve wanker, frankly I think people should get over him since Im tired of people aping him. But look at how his color pops and how he looks like Superman in his world. And frankly its quite sad Reeve is still Superman essentially because there have been so many flops or just mediocrity.
>8) They didnt even want to title the Superman movie "Superman", because thats obviously stupid, amd Superman is stupid.
Still something that infuriates me.
>Batman movies are called "The Dark Knight"
>Superman movies are "Man of Steel"
>Batman/Superman movies aren't "World's Finest"
At least be fricking consistent about it.
All Snyder had to do was address the ONE big criticism of MoS and it would've worked fine as a Superman origin story and the point Clark grows from.
But Snyder can't stop himself from sacrificing character for destructive spectacle.
He wants a Clark that won't act to save his father's life, but will turn a truck into a pretzel. He wants a Batman that is opposed to Superman's wanton destruction, but also has a massive bodycount. He wants a Batman who kills, but for there to still somehow be a Joker.
I think the best scene of the DCEU is still the opening scene of BvS because it actually seems to know this and to orient itself towards fixing Man of Steel's problems. It addresses the wanton destruction, actual people die and survivors experience consequence, it's not like in MoS when the Daily Planet staff escape their crumbling office and are back at work in the final scene.
It sets up the central confict between a Batman who values life and a Superman who can't stop destruction and wants to do better, and with every subsequent scene Snyder shits on that promise. Batman kills, Superman kills, both are high and mighty about the other killing, the confict doesn't develop in any substantial way until the final scene, yadda yadda, we've all heard these gripes before...
But no shared universe has delivered a scene where they have their cake and eat it. Where they can turn the camera on themselves and change the context in which an earlier film operates. Marvel's work is too cookie-cutter to ever have the level of self-awareness this scene has, and I don't understand why Snyder couldn't take the lessons of it, but then he missed the point of Watchmen too so I guess the guy just has no clue about the messages of his own works.
>He wants a Batman that is opposed to Superman's wanton destruction, but also has a massive bodycount.
The hypocrisy is intentional, you fricking idiot.
>He wants a Batman who kills, but for there to still somehow be a Joker.
And? Joker even in the comics survives from all kinds of shit, and Batman is still incapable of finding Joker if he's hiding. Batman turning unhinged is a new development. You're proving that Snyder it too smart for you with such stupid complaints. You're a whiny fanboy buttmad you didn't get the version you wanted in your own developed hype
>The hypocrisy is intentional
Explain why. Explain why it's not a bad thing that these characters stand for nothing and have no redeeming qualities.
>Joker even in the comics survives from all kinds of shit
And it's dumb as frick there too. And there Batman isn't living, eating, breathing and shitting murder. Batman goes out of his way in the comics to save Joker a stupid amount of times. If Batman put that same effort into killing him, as DCEU Batman presumably has, why is he alive?
>Batman is still incapable of finding Joker if he's hiding
In Suicide Squad he goes to Arkham after killing Robin, escapes with Harley Quinn, goes to a nightclub, and Batman finds him there on his personalized lamborghini.
I know that's not a Snyder movie, but still.
>Batman turning unhinged is a new development
If you think "Batman, but with muder" is an original Zack Snyder idea (TM), you are in no position to lecture people about Batman.
>Explain why it's not a bad thing that these characters stand for nothing and have no redeeming qualities.
Because they're human and err. Batman deranged and drunk on his fear and anger because he's lost faith in humanity as a bitter, broken man is important factor when Superman proves you can be better and literally inspires Bruce to get his shit together.
>And there Batman isn't living, eating, breathing and shitting murder.
Batman is focused on destroying Superman, not running around murdering everyone, you stupid c**t. He's slowly growing more erratic and sadistic instead of being murder man from day one.
>and Batman finds him there on his personalized lamborghini
And then he loses him when he saves Harley. Just because you can find someone occasionally doesn't mean you can always find them.
>Superman proves you can be better and literally inspires Bruce to get his shit together
Superman is also a sad man struggling with his faith, and he doesn't do much better than Batman, considering he's still murdering people with impunity and not working to establish a relationship with the world he intends to save and represent.
Lois' entire arc in the UE is struggling to explain to people that Superman didn't execute someone with a gun, something people struggle to believe. That's your inspirational Superman?
>Batman isn't murder man from day one
He brands the human trafficker in his introductory scene, and then Clark explains that the brand is a death sentence in prison. In the UE it's explained that Lex is orchestrating the murders, but Batman still knows its a death sentence and continues to do it. So he is a murderer from day one. There is no progression in Batman or Superman's character from the first scene until they fight.
>Superman is also a sad man struggling with his faith
No, he's struggling with the pressures of being a public hero, like the impossibility of being sure that every action he takes doesn't have unwanted consequences, either indirectly or by ther people.
>and he doesn't do much better than Batman, considering he's still murdering people with impunity
Nope, wrong again.
>and not working to establish a relationship with the world he intends to save and represent.
He just wants to help, and not be the story. Him appearing at the senate hearing is him accepting that he cannot just go around saving people like a good Samaritan anymore, and has to get personally involved to control the narrative told about him. It's another lesson and development for the character.
>That's your inspirational Superman?
My inspirational Superman is someone who takes a man who's lost in his own fear and rage and lifts him up and makes him become a better man again. Superman singlehandedly restores Batman's hope and faith in humanity by proving Batman's cynical fears wrong.
>He brands the human trafficker in his introductory scene, and then Clark explains that the brand is a death sentence in prison
I.e. he isn't murdering people directly. It's an indication of him turning more sadistic, brutal and cruel and that's why his actions develop more violent and erratic until he's about to murder Superman with his own hands.
Again, you're too stupid to understand the movie, ya silly c**t.
He does still murder people with impunity. He flies those terrorists through concrete walls. His propensity for killing with impunity is so well known in-universe that Lois struggles to convince people he didn't execute someone with a gun.
Nobody in the DCEU looks up to Superman. The people he saves are grateful to him, the people he is against are usually murdered or fear murder, and most people don't trust him.
DCEU Superman is not an inspirational figure, least of all to Batman, whose opinion of Superman doesn't evolve for 3 hours of the movie up until the Martha scene.
There is functionally no difference between many indirect murders via torture, imprisonment and shanking vs killing one guy yourself. The moral difference there is something you've invented to sell yourself a character arc that doesn't exist. Again, most of what you like in this movie isn't actually in the movie. You silly c**t.
>Nobody in the DCEU looks up to Superman
Hey now, that's not true, he had plenty of cultists who worshiped him like the second coming of Jesus.
Killing in defense of others isn't fricking murder.
He could've easily disarmed them, stood in front of the bullets, etc., but he flies him through a concrete wall.
Again, he acts so brutal that Lois struggles to convince people he didn't commit a war crime.
If Clark had grown from the ending of Man of Steel, he'd be more careful about applying lethal force. But Snyder wants him to kill people because that's realism bro, realism is when things are badass.
It's also not something Superman does.
>He flies those terrorists through concrete walls.
No. Knyazev was the one who killed Amajagh. Not Superman.
I'm gonna have to ask you to cite specific lines from the movie as I haven't seen it since the UE came out and you've been making shit up this whole thread.
Superman flies the head terrorist through a wall and kills him. The other terrorists are left for authorities, but found later to have been killed execution style. Thus the Lois plot of the UE.
The tub scene with Lois. Clark says, "I didn't kill those men". Later we find out it was Luther who ordered the hit on Amajagh to make Superman look bad.
I assumed that meant the remaining men. He clearly takes out Amajagh with excessive force.
Either way, even the negligibility of the kill, and the fact that most people Lois encounters readily believe Superman kills, shows that he's not putting enough emphasis on disavowing lethal force to take the high road when it comes to Batman, thus the entire central conflict and character arcs are sacrificed for wanton violence, as is my original argument.
He gets a statue after he dies because Snyder wants to treat Superman as a god figure in the back end of the movie without doing any of the work in the front end showing him or his perception by the world changing. The same thing happens with Batman.
Pivotal scene my ass, it's called a character arc, not a character straight-line-until-it-veers-wildly-at-the-end. Batman's opinion doesn't evolve. Contrary to what that other anon says, he doesn't get more unhinged through the movie, he's killing people from day one. The character is stagnant up until his opinion takes a 180. Snyder had three hours of a movie to build something leading up to that, his best attempt was to show us the Waynes being shot... again.
>He gets a statue after he dies
No, the statue is built after the events of MoS. You also see him saving people and articles detailing his heroism and media debating his role and how to view him. It's all part of the larger narrative about Superman's existence dividing people until there's unity when he publicly sacrifices himself to save the world.
Superman didn't kill Amajagh. That was a plot point. It's shown later in the Ultimate Edition.
He pushed the guy at high speed through two brick walls. Is it like the later DCEU scenes of carnage where we are assured "that entire section of the city has been evacuated."?
They're never shown to have been evacuated, there's no sirens or anything, but conveniently it's mentioned after they blow up the district.
I guess Batfleck didn't kill any of Luthor's guards, including the one he dropped his tank on from the second story.
Superman headbutted the walls I'm pretty sure. And in the original theatrical cut Clark says he didn't kill anyone. In the Ultimate Edition it's made even more clear by showing us that the killer was Anatoli.
>He pushed the guy at high speed through two brick walls
Yeah, and? Where is it shown he's dead instead of just injured?
>I guess Batfleck didn't kill any of Luthor's guards, including the one he dropped his tank on from the second story.
Batman killing people with a vehicle has always been fair game.
>Nobody in the DCEU looks up to Superman
Plenty of people do. He even has a statue.
>>east of all to Batman, whose opinion of Superman doesn't evolve for 3 hours of the movie up until the Martha scene.
Almost as if that's a pivotal scene climaxing in Batman realising he's been in the wrong that whole time, ya dumb fricking troglodyte.
>Superman singlehandedly restores Batman's hope and faith in humanity by proving Batman's cynical fears wrong.
That happened in the most contrived and stupid way possible which is why the no one takes this movie seriously outside die hard cultist.
>Superman is also a sad man struggling with his faith
Sort of? They really fricked up by not giving Clark the character of "Clark Kent: mild mannered reporter for the Daily Planet."
Like, idgaf about some hobo gayface
Sorry, I forgot to call you a stupid c**t for making up scenes in a movie you claim to like so you can like it more.
Delusional schizo.
>DCucks still whining about a movie a decade later
It's over. Move on. What happened to that CW shit you morons couldn't stop sucking the wiener of for like a month?
>What happened to that CW shit you morons couldn't stop
It was pro North Korea globalist commie propaganda.
>Son, the world must never know of your powers, you must never risk exposing yourself even if it means kids might die
>but if you want to turn some trucker frick's cab into an Optimus Prime skewer, go for it
Nice movie, Snydergays.
What's with some people's obsession with cavill? He can barely act.
>while calling themselves “Superman fans”
They don't. They're Synder cultists
Ye cuz Superman movies are just that boring usually.
I think being so concerned with "branding" (is it appropriate for Sonic to have mature themes or these things in it? Or Mario? Or what about Pokemon?) is sign of corporatist brain-rot where storytelling has been monopolized by IP-holders and the extent of media criticism by their target audiences isn't with respect to art's meaning but instead whether or not it's "on-brand". You'd have children's stories all throughout history where animals maim each other or little kids were devoured by demons, cute aesthetics that go dark by the end, but what apparently counts as legitimate criticism now is to point out that something that looks childish goes to dark places and how awful that is for a children's IP.
Nah. IT's called a property having a consistent tone and how weird that gets when the tone is all over the fricking place. Sonic is a good example.
It has some good parts to it, like Zimmer's music and the Smallville battle. Or the final aerial battle with Zod (if you can somehow ignore the scores of dead people). I think Snyder captured the visuals of Superman's flight and the impact of his punches better than anyone else did.
But yeah overall it sucks, and BvS was somehow even worse. The third trailer for it is absolute kino though.
i think this movie was supposed to be a doomsday movie, the metropolis fight scene and Superman killing zod makes more sense if you think that way
also Superman returns is better
I'm curious. Do you guys that like this movie type up your responses each time, or do you have a file that you copy and paste it from?
I also want to say that WB's weird decision to make all their superheroes 30-somethings who have to have arguments with their Mommy/Daddy/parent-figure/gf so they can go out and superhero (like they are 16 yr olds who want to go to a house party past 9pm) is baffling.
This shit really started with Bale-bats and his israeli Mom-Butler, and has not let up since.
They aren't teenagers, but apparently all the Superfriends need to seek parental permission.
>israeli Mom-Butler
My Cocaine is English-Irish
Yes, but he harps on Bruce like his israeli mother. It's okay for him to have adventures shooting up the third world for the Crown (probably at an earlier age than 30), but Bruce is absolutely a fool for trying to undo the havoc he created by pissing off a cult of assassins.
Better to leave the city to their revenge!
It's creepy how middle-aged DC superheroes need permission. Man of Autism seeks it out in all 3 movies. What an inspiring guy.
I mean, if you're a 35 yr old billionaire and you are still shouting "YOU AREN'T MY DAD" at your manservant unironically, you have problems.
It's like the DC movies are made for autists who will never leave the nest.
It’s obviously not a good movie but it’s not as bad as a lot of people say
It's a lot of money to throw away on a tedious, off-tone Superman movie, when the PREVIOUS Superman movie was the same expensive tedious off-tone shit.
Is it really necessary to reinvent Superman as a sad, reluctant man of constant sorrow?
Wtf are you talking about? The movie made like $1 billion adjusted for inflation.
>The movie made like $1 billion adjusted for inflation.
Can I have what you are smoking? Man of Steel was not made in 1970.
$328,276,427 domestic box office adjusted for inflation
$151,359,070 domestic home market adjusted for inflation
~$485,820,000 international box office adjusted for inflation [this one is a bit funky] [it's a conservative estimate]
The movie made WB a lot of money.
You know desperation has set in when Blu Rays and T-shirts start getting added into Box office.
Only DCKeks do this. I have never seen anyone try to justify Eternals by Blu Ray/4k sales, and the Eternals 4k was phenomenally expensive.
I mean 328 million adjusted for inflation is pretty decent- it's higher than Thor Ragnarok.
Even without the Blu-ray, DVD, and streaming sales (which is all perfectly legitimate taking into account ZSJL and movies such as Turning Red are made to turn a profit and have successfully done so) that's still like $850 million. I don't understand that criticism.
Stop trying and failing to do math. I'm second hand embarrassed for you.
I'm not failing anything though. Those numbers all cut off at like May.
I don't really care if you do or don't hate it. The fact is that MoS made around $1 billion. Removing the $150-$175 million it made from DVD sales and such, it's sitting around $800-$850 million.
>The fact is that MoS made around $1 billion.
It made $750 million adjusted, and absolutely no one but Snyderpajeets figure in vidya sales into box office. You absolute kek.
You can't just make up figures, you aren't Orange Leader.
>no one but Snyderpajeets figure in vidya sales into box office
$485,820,000 international box office adjusted for inflation
$328,276,427 domestic box office adjusted for inflation
This is already over $800 million. And it doesn't account for DVD sales.
>$485,820,000 international box office adjusted for inflation
This is a number you have completely made up, unless you want to cite it.
It's an estimate for the international box office adjusted for inflation. And you can calculate for inflation in other countries.
https://fxtop.com/en/inflation-calculator.php
Try it out for yourself.
I know you want to believe that the international sales experienced no inflation whatsoever, but they did. And now who is really fudging numbers?
>I know you want to believe that the international sales experienced no inflation whatsoever
THE YEAR that Man of Steel made money, all that International money was converted to Dollars, Hollywood does not vault Rupees.
TODAY, those DOLLARS convert up to 113%, you do NOT figure all International Box office by the inflation rate of the Rupee, you beyond ignorant Poo.
Hollywood does actually hold foreign currency. And if you want the numbers adjusted for the inflation rate of the dollar then...
Clean your own house before criticizing others.
You are using the inflation rate of the US economy, rather than the inflation rate of ticket costs. Ticket prices have not inflated at the same rate as the cost of gas or broad economy.
It's 291mil domestic, adjusted to 328 million
and 377mil worldwide adjusted to 426 million
Added together that's 754 million, not a billion, not "close to a billion, not 800 million.
You do not get to make up your own math.
You don't get to bargain like a Persian Bazaar; it's a simple process of MATH.
>box office inflation
Dude, do you understand how money works? Each country has its own inflation rate. Worldwide box office inflation is an impossible calculation to perform.
That being said MoS did respectable in the domestic box office all in all. The problem is that the movie opened so well it should have done more.
>Worldwide box office inflation is an impossible calculation to perform.
All that world box office is converted to American dollars; those dollars are convertible through ticket inflation. I'm aware you are using moron-mathestimacation to try and make Man of Steel a bigger success than it was, and I am asking you to cut it out.
>All that world box office is converted to American dollars
I can't believe this is something I have to explain to an adult human capable of typing words on the internet, but here we go:
The amount of USD a ticket in Japan cost in 2013 is almost identical to the amount of USD a ticket in Japan costs today. WB, from Japan, has made "no more" money from inflation with MoS in Japan, because if they sold the same amount of tickets they would get the same amount of USD out today.
On the other hand domestically the inflation rate has made US/Canada tickets worth more. So if they sold the same amount of tickets in US/Canada today as they did in 2013, they would make more money than they did back then. That's why you can't just say "lmao just do 1.13 x worldwide gross" for an accurate adjusted picture.
This is why box office sites only report "domestic inflation adjusted" instead of "worldwide inflation adjusted," because they aren't total morons like you. Tell me, where's the "international adjusted" tab? If it's 750M like you're saying then why isn't it an official stat?
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Man-of-Steel#tab=box-office
And you should note that I am not a Snyder shill. I overall dislike Man of Steel and I think it would have easily made 800M+ in 2013 if it was a better movie, given how well it opened.
Yes but that money doesn't stay in Japan (outside of the theater's cut). So it's irrelevant what Japan's inflation is, Hollywood isn't in Japan. Their banks aren't either.
>Dude, do you understand how money works? Each country has its own inflation rate.
I am aware.
Btw, using a computer, Man of Steel's box office inflation is 113%. 113% of it's (rounded up) box office is 754 million. Not even close to a billion.
According to Thenumbers.com, Man of Steel made close to $750 million adjusted for modern ticket prices. it's budget would also be closer to $300 million by those same adjustments.
It had a phenomenal opening weekend, but collapsed when audiences got a good taste of it and word spread.
Basically DC's ambitious tentpole, that cost as much as an Avengers movie, made Thor: Dark World money, and that's FINE.
MoS made WB so much money, giving the company the buying power of around $1 billion, and you're going to have to swallow that fact. It was an incredibly successful movie all-around.
Criticizing the film's revenue is laughable. Find something else to criticize because you won't succeed making fun of its box office.
I maintain this movie is the victim of bad timing more than bad execution. People just weren’t interested in dour dramatic superheroes at this time thanks to Ironman and Avengers. Lots of other movies got an unfair shake for the same reason like Amazing Spider-Man. I have a feeling in years to come people will look back more kindly on it for its attempt at deeper themes and forget about all the cheap meme reviews that blasted it for superficial reasons.
>People just weren’t interested in dour dramatic superheroes at this time thanks to Ironman and Avengers.
Or maybe Superman isn't a dour character?
Why didn't he just fly up while bending backwards so the eye laser goes straight up?
Because that would destroy the ceiling of the building they were in.
Because Zod would fly down with equal force and they'd go nowhere. Because he was visibly struggling already to hold Zod's head where it was.
>And then what? They'll just keep fighting forever because they're evenly matched and by evenly matched I mean Zod is stronger because he has to be a threat but also Clark is still strong enough to break his neck.