this felt way more like Superman than Man of Steel did
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
this felt way more like Superman than Man of Steel did
this felt way more like Superman than Man of Steel did
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
>Mods IP range ban me for 6 months
>finally, I get to make a thread again!!
>make a thread of margot robbie, Emma stone and Emily blunt with the caption "fmk?"
>2 minutes later
>"posting from your IP range has been blocked due to abuse"
Even though aesthetically it felt like the old films there's a reason it was such a dud. As a boy he was my favorite hero and I saw this with my dad and we were both big DC guys and we both still found it completely forgettable. It was directed by a homosexual and it only focused on the romance plot, there wasn't any action or big stakes fight. Man of Steel was a success with people like me and my dad for a reason, it was the complete opposite and had high stakes and lots of action, I'm sorry but Man of Steel is 10x better than this shit
My exact experience and take. The only truly cool scene in Returns was the boat rescue.
I remember thinking that the airplane in the stadium scene was cool visually, and the bullet bouncing off his eye, but those scenes couldn't make up for the snorefest the rest of the film was
The only cool scene in Returns was the original opening of him journeying to destroyed Krypton, which cost them 10 million dollars to make and they cut it completely out until a home video re-release of the superman film collection
OK, that’s pretty cool.
Would you or anyone else care to hear me hold forth on what I’m pretty sure where I think Snyder was headed with his proposed quintology?
Didn’t they just shift this to later in the movie? I’m almost positive that I saw this, at least most of it, in the theatrical release.
IIRC there is a very small snippet of it when Lois is interviewing him on the roof in the theatrical version. Her first question to him is where he disappeared to since Returns is suppose to happen like 5 years after Superman 2. They just cut the complete intro from the theatrical version
Ahhh, that’s probably it. I definitely remembered the trickle of sweat bit.
WHY THE FRICK WAS THIS CUT OUT, I'M FRICKING MAD
>flies 2.5 years to Krypton to look at a bunch of rocks and almost die for 5 minutes
>flies 2.5 years back to earth
What did he learn from this? Was it worth it?
He just wanted to see what was left.
His dad told him it was destroyed, he wanted to see it for himself. He was holding out hope that at least something was left, that maybe someone else survived
>Manslaughter of Steel was better than this shit
Meds. Lots of them.
>an of Steel was a success with people like me and my dad for a reason,
It's becasue yo uar capeshitters and dont' care about the character or even movies
>OOOhhhh he ake explode things and he frowns a lot in this movie! Yayyy!!!
>It was directed by a homosexual and it only focused on the romance plot
Not only that but Bryan Singer is hopelessly inept at crafting heterosexual romance.
I watched the X Men trilogy as a kid, and granted the third was was by Brett Ratner, but Wolverine and Jean Grey's arc was set to conclude in that film, reliant on romantic foreshadowing in the prior films.
Yes–there is dialogue in X-Men and X2 which alludes to their romance but almost NOTHING by way of body language, chemistry, unspoken tension et al to foreshadow it. I watched The Last Stand and was truly and honestly taken by surprise when logan tells her "I love you"
Bryan Singer was already bad at romance and then in Returns he casts a twink superman and expects there to be obvious romance between him and tomboy Kate Bosworth. It could not have been worse.
If the only superman you know about us the reeve films sure
>If the only superman you know about us the reeve films sure
....as opposed to...all the other superman films
Superman content exists outside of movies if you weren't aware
Are you seriously arguing that the Snyderverse is more accurate to the comics? Really?
Sure is a hell of a lot more accurate than Superman lifting an island with giant kryptonite crystals jutting out of it literally meters away from him.
Kryptonite is definitely better when it's treated as something so radioactive it just kills everything around it rather than inconsistently depowering him but also weakening him just enough to not kill him
Lmao no. Execution easily tur him not only into another character, but in the opposite of Superman.
Who cares then, even if the stories resemble some (noncanon) comics?
Snyderverse is extremely accurate to the comics, specifically Byrne’s era of comics. Routh’s Superman is Reeve’s Superman, a different incarnation of the character.
It's accurate in terms of plot points matching from specific comics, but it's picking and choosing from multiple non-canon side stories / elseworlds so the execution and context make the story entirely different as a result. This is why it ends up making them feel like different characters and sometimes unsatisfying to fans. It really depends on how much you can accept alternate takes on a character.
Should have done the same for Green Lantern Secret Origin as well. They got smart and did it for Curse of Shazam and the first Shazam film however
It was too old school. It felt like a leftover script from the Reeves movies. There is no big villain for Superman to fight, just Luthor doing Luthor things again. And his plan is idiotic anyway. The romance and kid plot also distract away from anything interesting happening
The romance and kid plot was the only interesting thing happening
Nah, it felt like a rehash of the romance in Superman 1 and 2. And the kid plot was straight up cuck shit
absolute disaster of a movie that destroyed the careers of everyone involved
The character is at his most interesting when he's going on adventures to strange places or times and they emphasize the larger than life aspects of fiction. He's typically much more proactive in comics where as his movies have him just dick around aimlessly until he's told he should be Superman by a Jor-El hologram like he's a robot that needs to follow orders. Stop with the emotional trauma shit. Let him be cool again instead of a drag
This came out about 14 years ago and reads like a better version of the first Donner film. They should have just adapted this into a movie
Fricking A.
Why is it so hard for DC to move past the Christopher Reeve Superman movies? They make the classic Superman movies starting in the 70s and keep going for a decade until it stops making money. Then 20 years go by and it's time to bring Superman back to the screen, so they continue the Christopher Reeve series. The movie flops and DC has the most kneejerk reaction possible with Man of Steel which is the polar opposite of the last movie in every way. People complain the new one went too far so DC has the new Superman, Cavill, revert back to doing a Christopher Reeve impression and even drudge up the old theme.
This was never a problem with Batman, we were able to move on from the Keaton movies.
Because Reeves Superman was the ideal for the character for generations. It hit all the notes of who Superman is suppose to be. Its hard to set a bar that high for other actors to measure up to
But so was Keaton's Batman and yet in the last 50 years we've had 4 separate incarnations of Batman on the big screen (that is if you count the Burton and Schumacher movies as the same despite being such different interpretations of the character). Superman has only had 2. For some reason in the 00s DC decided to reboot Batman, but with Superman they decided to do a sequel. Why is that? And don't say it's because the Reeve movies were so great because 3 & 4 were complete dogshit.
Whatever the reason it didn't involve brains
Returns is suppose to happen after 2. It was that same kind of shit they did with Terminator where they just ignored what they considered the bad movies and tried to restart after the last good one
I always kind of felt like at some point there was some discussion of continuing the movies with the kid being Superboy/Man. I think some of that survived into ManOf Steel, specifically the reference to him struggling to breathe as a child.
>For some reason in the 00s DC decided to reboot Batman, but with Superman they decided to do a sequel. Why is that?
Are you serious? it's because in the previous decade, the 90s, there were four batman films of a very distinct and quickly dating style. The superman movies of the 70s and 80s were the original capeshit and they set the tone.
So 9/11 happens and superman is relevant again and they wanted to recapture that wonderful optimism of those earlier films. They were gonna do something wildly different at first, of course, Nicholas Cage superman, but scrapped it.
>For some reason in the 00s DC decided to reboot Batman, but with Superman they decided to do a sequel. Why is that?
Smallville is the reason. Or at least one of the leading factors for why we got Returns instead. Both Returns and Man of Steel were meant to be Superman films for Tom Welling. I will always believe Bruce Wayne was saved by Welling Superman at the end of Dark Knight Rises.
>For some reason in the 00s DC decided to reboot Batman, but with Superman they decided to do a sequel. Why is that?
After the success of X-Men 1 and 2 WB called Singer and offered him a Superman film with 200mil budget and total creative freedom. Singer adores Donner's Superman, so he wanted to make a semisequel to those.
>so he wanted to make a semisequel to those.
You sure it was his own idea? Sounds more like corporate gimmick
Yes. I remember the news/rumors from those times.
>Director, screenwriter and producer Bryan Singer conceived the storyline of "Superman returning to Earth after a five-year absence" during the filming of X2 (2003). He presented the idea to X-Men (2000) and X2 producer Lauren Shuler Donner and her husband Richard Donner, director of Superman (1978). Donner greeted Singer's idea with positive feedback.[13]
https://web.archive.org/web/20090112111229/http://www.superherohype.com/news/featuresnews.php?id=4196
>This was never a problem with Batman, we were able to move on from the Keaton movies.
And now you'll see Burton's batman and Nolan's batman beign rehashed forever, because whatever followed was dogshit, like anything Superman past Reeve.
Or Wonder Woman past Lynda Carter, I guess.
Some things have their time, and then they become lost art, so to speak
That's because it had a great Superman casting, had some truly amazing Superman fight/rescue scenes, the old music will never be topped, and there was optimism to it. These were all wasted in a terrible story and some bad design decisions, along with confusion about whether it was truly the same continuity.
It was the closest we'll get to old school Superman ever again though. From this point forward it's going to just be bad CGI messes crowded with too many heroes and a bland kind of nihilism. Even the upcoming one that everyone's excited about is still going to have too many characters and dilute the character. It'll just be quippy, everyone has powers" kind of reheated capeshit soup.
>Has AI make hot outfits for his waifu
One of us.
Hope starts with an H, stupid!
>Mr. Mxyzptlyk arranging pepes in the clouds to distract him
Another story that probably would have been received better if adapted
The Superman parts were genuinely okay, loved the saving plane scene, but everything involving Luthor sucked ass, and what's his face pedo is overrated as frick.
I also think people got confused because they didn't realise that this was direct sequel to 70s movies.
Also Brandon Routh was really good pick for Superman.
He looks way better here than he did in the movie.
He had some more age on him for that. He was a little too baby faced in Returns
Absolutely. It's literally the only thing Crisis on infinite Earths did well. Then they went and electrocuted Kevin Conroy's Batman to death and Batwoman became Guardian of Justice.
Oh crap, I forgot that newish Superman series. They still making that?
I think they got few seasons out of that, but as is a norm nowadays, first season was okay, but then all the parasites with the message to preach jumped on it.
>Electrocuted Batman to death? He already did that
The plane rescue is the most Superman thing ever landed on scren.
It's mistake was being in continuity with Reeve's movies
Man of Shit could only dream to be as good as this 5/10 movie.
>It's mistake was being in continuity with Reeve's movies
It would have worked IF they'd been really clear about it, changed the costume less, and had a good story. So, in other words, an altogether different movie, BUT Routh was perfect and the place scene, the boat scene, the fricking bullet to the eyeballs, even the island (but without the bullshit that led to it, so like a different island with different reason), we all brilliant.
Yeah, but being in continuity with Reeve is what gave us real estate Luthor rehash, the kid and absentee father subplot.
Dunno.
All I know is that Routh and many rescue scenes were extremely good and were wastd in a movie that didn't resonate, and by not resonating led to snydershit
>but being in continuity with Reeve is what gave us real estate Luthor rehash
They chose the lazy route with Hackman Lex. He could have become much more than just real estate scheming. This scene from the first film shows his intellect.
Hackman’s Lex is great, but he’s only barely recognizable as Luthor. He still has one of the best Luthor lines of all time, even if it’s being spoken by an incarnation that’s more a conman with delusions of grandeur:
>Some people can read "War and Peace" and come away thinking it's a simple adventure story. Others can read the ingredients on a chewing gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the universe.
Still the best villain line
>being in continuity with Reeve is what gave us real estate Luthor rehash
All they had to do was just not do Lex. Get some other villain. Could have been a new villain. Almost doesn't matter because the idea is to just have an excuse for Superman to be inspiring and save the day. Continual reuse of the same main villain is one of the things that ruins capeshit. We have too many Joker and, now, too many Luthors. Just make up some non-fantasy villain and that's all you need for an establishing film, which, despite the shared continuity, Returns was aiming to be. Establishing films need to feel smaller scale, never more than one villain, and, ideally, one that's not also super powered or supernatural/spaceshit. A villain we can believe would exists in the real world. Let's the hero be the only thing requiring massive suspension of disbelief. Then, if it works, in the subsequent films, get a little more out there with the crazy shit. Just too many wannabe franchises trying to jump ahead to unearned "epic" stuff.
>Just make up some non-fantasy villain and that's all you need for an establishing film
It doesn't need to be some Galaxy threat, just some guy who puts Superman's values to the test, not his strength, because that is who Superman is, his values. There is metric fucton of supes who have Clark Kent's abilities, yet he stands above all due to his character.
That's what I meant. A "villain" that is more a test of his character. That's one reason the '78 Superman film worked. His alien backstory felt powerful against the backdrop of everyone else being human, even Lex. Then, when Superman II came out, it was an earned superpowered villain, and even then they kept it within the same system of a singular fantasy element in a real world. Part of the reason modern capeshit feels so meaningless is, if everyone is "super" in some way, it's not really special anymore.
If you're curious to see what a much better version of Batman v Superman might have looked like, read Lex Luthor: Man of Steel
Feels like this movie was memory holed. No one ever talks about it.
I grew up a diehard capeshitter and most comic films should be forgotten, just like most comics. Gotta wade through a lot of trash to find the good stuff in any kind of entertainment
It was a novelty throwback to the Reeves movies. They tried to revive the franchise by retconning the third and fourth movie with it. Didn't work out well so it just kind of exists
>looks better than modern superhero movies
Of course it did. It was a love letter to the Donner films.
Man of Steel feels cold and sterile. Lois and Clark have no chemistry whatsoever.
>Lois and Clark have no chemistry whatsoever.
Them kissing in the graveyard of Metropolis after she fell from the ship while half of city was pulled up into the blackhole was something else.
I just got a craving for super hero Cinemaphile and was going to watch this movie because as bad as it is for 2006 it's still probably amazing by today's standards. But I ended up watching The New Adventures of Lois and Clark instead which, although quite campy, is probably my favorite depiction of Superman. Superman is an inherently campy character so I think it works quite well, at least in the first season which is very chill and good
>But I ended up watching The New Adventures of Lois and Clark instead which, although quite campy, is probably my favorite depiction of Superman
No wonder. The main duo is extremely likeable and hot of course, and I absolutely don't mind campy.
It's something you watch after a shitty shift, like Hercules and Xena, and you feel a bit better.