Now I will say I'm completely on page with you on Donner's exceptional Superman movie! It's still a gold standard to me, even now in this era of nearly overblow reliance on CGI.
And you are right in your critique of some of the MCU movies. A few are below par, even if still enjoyable. I guess when you're 18 movies into a franchise, it's going to happen that a few movies are going to be weaker than others. Just for the record, I think Thor: The Dark World gets panned a lot, yet for the wrong reasons. People criticize Chris Eccleston's Malekith as a bad villain but I would say that Kat Denning's stupid Darcy character and Natalie Portman's paper-thin Jane Foster character were the real reasons that movie scores so low. Also the story could have been more substantive.
It's hard to keep momentum in a successful move franchise. Just look at Nolan's outstanding Batman trilogy. A lot of well meaning people trashed The Dark Knight Rises but technically and story wise, it was a good movie. It's most glaring sin is that it wasn't The Dark Knight. Not many movies are or ever will be.
I'm just ready to see DC do a reset and start some real competition with Marvel in the movie realm. I think a magnificent way to do this would be to reboot the DCU with a new Batman stand alone movie and then incorporate a new Green Lantern in his on stand alone movie and go from there. And they should definitely make a Martian Manhunter movie. I think his character is so much more interesting than Cyborg.
Sorry about getting off on a tangent, I'm just real excited right now about all these superhero movies being made. It's a dream that's for real!
For the record (one last thing, I promise) Man of Steel was NOT a bad movie. I quite enjoyed it!
And the first two Rami Spider-man movies, both are still wonderful to watch.
reply
share
moviefanatic505 (6001)
6 years ago
I am glad someone else appreciates Donner's Superman like I do. Thing is people need to realize that is truly what showed the world doing a superhero on the big screen was possible. Tons of film makers such as Raimi and Nolan have used that as an influence in their films. They have often cited him also. I mean lets face it Raimi's first two Spider-man films basically replicate Donner's Superman films to a T. Watch Superman 1 and 2, then watch Spider-man 1 and 2 you will notice the story blueprint is strikingly similar. Raimi did a great job though, I love the first two Spider-man movies. The fact that with Superman they had limited technology and were able to make him come to life as well as they did is outstanding.
That is the thing 18 movies in I have became fatigued. Will I still watch the good ones of course, but the fact that it feels like a tv show on the biog screen is a little off putting. Thor the Dark world had awful juvenile humor, and a forced cliched romance I have seen done a dozen times before on tv. The romance bewteen Thor and Jane is not magical like Reeve and Kidder, or Maguire and Dunst it is just sappy and silly. The film was so forgettable as well. I could not sit through that film again.
Nolan's Batman trilogy was terrific. Thing is with The Dark Knight Rises is it had an impossible task. Topping the Dark Knight is virtually impossible. Thing is though I still think The Dark Knight Rises is a solid film as is Batman Begins. Just because something isn't quite as good as it's predecessor does not mean it is a bad film. Not topping the Dark Knight is fine at least it gave a solid finale. Unlike Spider-man 3...
The DCU is a joke, in my book the only film of out of that batch I have liked is Wonder Woman.
No your tangent is cool.
I respect that you liked Man of Steel I on the other hand did not.
The reason being is because it fell into the exact same trap amazing Spider-man did.
reply
share
moviefanatic505 (6001)
6 years ago
That trap being that it told a story we had already seen before with that specific character. Richard Donner did the origin of Superman and Raimi did the origin of Spider-man. Both of them did a great job also. So why redo it? Did they think they would be able to replicate the impact when those two did it? Did they think they could do it better?
The reason why Batman Begins worked so well was because it told a story with Batman we had not seen before. We had never seen Batman's origin before it only ever got alluded to in the Burton films, it was never delved into. So that made Batman Begins fresh and original. You did not have to compare it to Burton's because it used a new story blueprint.
Spider-man Homecoming while I was not crazy about I thought was good. Thing is the director said there was one rule going in to making it. If it was done in a previous Spider-man film we are not doing it. Wasn't it nice to see a different take on Spider-man as opposed to seeing an origin you have seen already?
Man of Steel should have taken that same approach. Superman's origins have been told, no need to do it again. The reason not to do it again is because lets face it Donner killed it and you will not be able to outdo his origin take on the character.
Here is what killed me okay if they were going to do the origin again why not change up the villain at the very least? Nope Zod again! Seeing him sentenced to the phantom zone again! Such a missed opportunity to use Brainiac! Brainiac we have not seen ever before on the big screen. He creates a physical threat as well as intellectual and has roots to his Kryptonian planet. Literally he is like a perfect villain on all fronts.
Man of Steel is Batman Begins, Superman 1 and 2 put into a blender. It almost was a borderline remake of Superman 1 and 2 just subtract Lex Luthor and change the tone. As opposed to the uplifting lighthearted cheese tone Donner had make it dreary, realistic and gritty.
The film looks great and some of the music and casting is solid. Unfortunately though I felt it was lazy. Sorry just my two cents.
reply
share
DarthRoger (867)
6 years ago
Cogent points again and thanks for reminding me about Wonder Woman. That was the best of the DCEU movies. I really liked Man of Steel but it does have it's problems. Pop Kent's logic just wasn't very sound to me in that one.
reply
share