you can't take me seriously? how do you think i feel? according to you, having wise and decent parental figures figures in Kent's life that teach him to be good and help/save people = not truly a hero. also:
Superman had no super villains.
he didn't need any in the first movie. it was literally the first ever legit live action superhero film (batman 66 doesn't count. that was pure camp and cheesiness only for children). it was enough to simply show him doing incredible things with his powers and saving people. it was a great start to the superhero film genre.
They overdid Clark's dorkiness.
100% pure, uncut opinion on YOUR part.
Lex Luthor was way off the mark.
is this a remark about him not being like he was in the comics? because that would be a fanboy complaint, not a "this is a bad movie" complaint.
Lois Lane was basically the Mary Jane of the 70s and 80s.
that's fair, but it doesn't detract much from the movie.
It had a terrible cast.
again, your opinion, and it's worthless and vague.
Superman becomes unsympathetic when he rewinds time to save Lois, as he essentially killed millions of people that he had otherwise saved.
this is a plot hole, yes, but it doesn't ruin the movie.
The whole time travel power is stupid since it means that Superman could rewind time whenever he wanted. He has too many powers as it is.
not a flaw. you already know he isn't the type of person who would do that at every opportunity. by the way, none of these "flaws" makes it the worst superman movie ever made. if you believe it is, you haven't seen II, III, or IV. you could even possibly argue returns is worse, as well as MOS.
Man of Steel is more realistic. It gives Superman a bad guy that can actually match him.
so realistic = better by default now? i never got that memo. and his battle with Zod makes no sense. if they're both invincible, superman shouldn't have been able to break his neck, even if he is infinitely strong. in fact, the fact that he breaks Zod's neck is a paradox.
He also CHOOSES to be a hero.
simply wrong. pa Kent talks to him about the values of helping people and since you forgot, Bore-El tells him this on the ship:
"what if a child aspired to something greater? you were the embodiment of that belief. you can embody the best of both worlds. [the people of earth] won't necessarily make the same mistakes we did. not if you guide them. not if you give them hope. the symbol of the house of El means hope. embodied within that hope is the fundamental belief in the potential of every person can be a force for good. that's what you can bring them."
you don't have to apologize for being so wrong on that one. it's easy to forget dialogue from such a forgettable movie.
Lois Lane is pretty generic but she's still better than Margot Kidder or whatever her name is.
fair point, but you had no reason to speak of Margot Kidder that way. that was nonsensical and immature.
Well Tony, nobody wants a war. If we can't do business why we'll just shake hands and that'll be it!
reply
share
JasonRebourne
8 years ago
according to you, having wise and decent parental figures figures in Kent's life that teach him to be good and help/save people = not truly a hero.
Well, since he only became a hero because Jor-El brainwashed him rather than choosing to on his own free will, yeah Man of Steel did it better.
he didn't need any in the first movie. it was literally the first ever legit live action superhero film (batman 66 doesn't count. that was pure camp and cheesiness only for children). it was enough to simply show him doing incredible things with his powers and saving people. it was a great start to the superhero film genre.
Nope, he didn't have anybody that could match him. They should that just used Zod in the first film. Though you are right about Batman 66 being worse.
is this a remark about him not being like he was in the comics? because that would be a fanboy complaint, not a "this is a bad movie" complaint.
He wasn't a good villain in his own right, either.
Lois Lane was basically the Mary Jane of the 70s and 80s.
that's fair, but it doesn't detract much from the movie.
Until you combine it with everything else wrong with it.
It had a terrible cast.
again, your opinion, and it's worthless and vague.
Okay, you want me to be more specific? Christopher Reeve overdid his dorkiness. Margot Kidder only came across as whiny. Their romance was forced. Gene Hackman was even more over the top than Jesse Eisenberg.
not a flaw. you already know he isn't the type of person who would do that at every opportunity. by the way, none of these "flaws" makes it the worst superman movie ever made. if you believe it is, you haven't seen II, III, or IV. you could even possibly argue returns is worse, as well as MOS.
Which just makes him look selfish when he decides to rewind time to save Lois, especially since it means he killed all the people he had otherwise saved. All of the these flaws combined make it the worst Superman film ever. And I've seen Superman II, III and IV. Superman II was the best of the Reeve film, as it has ONE good actor in it (Terence Stamp) and better than Returns, as Superman II actually has a super villain in it. Superman III and IV are both better than Superman 1 as they at least have super villains.
so realistic = better by default now? i never got that memo. and his battle with Zod makes no sense. if they're both invincible, superman shouldn't have been able to break his neck, even if he is infinitely strong. in fact, the fact that he breaks Zod's neck is a paradox.
Again, given the many many flaws with Superman 1, Man of Steel is gonna be better. As for Superman and Zod being invincible, that's not actually the case. Superman has had his ass kicked by Doomsday, Mongul, Darkseid, etc. Kryptonians are merely highly endurable but not invincible. So it's no question one would be able to break the other one's neck.
simply wrong. pa Kent talks to him about the values of helping people and since you forgot, Bore-El tells him this on the ship:
"what if a child aspired to something greater? you were the embodiment of that belief. you can embody the best of both worlds. [the people of earth] won't necessarily make the same mistakes we did. not if you guide them. not if you give them hope. the symbol of the house of El means hope. embodied within that hope is the fundamental belief in the potential of every person can be a force for good. that's what you can bring them."
you don't have to apologize for being so wrong on that one. it's easy to forget dialogue from such a forgettable movie.
That is not the same thing as twelve years of brainwashing in Superman 1. In Man of Steel, all Jor-El did was talk to him. He didn't force him to become Superman. In the end it was Clark Kent's choice to be a hero.
fair point, but you had no reason to speak of Margot Kidder that way. that was nonsensical and immature.
I wouldn't talk if I were you.
reply
share
roflwaffle357
8 years ago
so basically, 90% of your counter argument is "this is not the way i personally want it to be" (the characters personalities, having no supervillain to "match" superman) and the remaining 10% is nitpicking objectively trivial flaws in the movie. you're not doing a good job of convincing me that MOS isn't boring.
Well Tony, nobody wants a war. If we can't do business why we'll just shake hands and that'll be it!
reply
share
JasonRebourne
8 years ago
90% is how they completely missed the point of a superhero film.
10% is pointing our major flaws in Mind Controlled Slave Man that you have overlooked.
You're not doing a good job of convincing me that your Superman isn't a boring Mary Sue and an embarrassment to superheroes.
reply
share
roflwaffle357
8 years ago
so what you're saying is the movie is bad because it doesn't do precisely what you want it to do, so you'll keep stating your opinions as facts.
Well Tony, nobody wants a war. If we can't do business why we'll just shake hands and that'll be it!
reply
share
JasonRebourne
8 years ago
No, that's your argument for MOS, fool.
Look, it's been fun watching you make a fool of yourself but I grow bored of your stupidity.
Try not to wet your nappy.
reply
share
roflwaffle357
8 years ago
now you're mad, you're gonna ignore me and try to forget this embarrassing loss you've just endured. that's what happens when you state personal opinions as absolute facts and hope nobody notices.
Well Tony, nobody wants a war. If we can't do business why we'll just shake hands and that'll be it!
reply
share