Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Man of Steel

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> RE: Man of Steel Page: <<   < prev  101 102 [103] 104 105   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 1:48:39 PM   
Alistair

 

Posts: 2397
Joined: 1/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: musht
Fair points Alistair but it's still all bit too convenient for my liking


Haha! So you're saying it's convenient that they have superpowers and are able to do these things?

_____________________________

Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift...that's why they call it the present.

(in reply to musht)
Post #: 3061
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 1:52:23 PM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alistair

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht
Fair points Alistair but it's still all bit too convenient for my liking


Haha! So you're saying it's convenient that they have superpowers and are able to do these things?

As convenient as Clark finding an 18000 year old space craft that just happend to have a House of El suit in just his size. Must of been his uncles ship I guess! still very convenient . Now where is Kara?

< Message edited by Dannybohy -- 28/6/2013 1:53:00 PM >


_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to Alistair)
Post #: 3062
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 2:03:37 PM   
musht


Posts: 1863
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alistair

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht
Fair points Alistair but it's still all bit too convenient for my liking


Haha! So you're saying it's convenient that they have superpowers and are able to do these things?

Exactly

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

"color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color"

(in reply to Alistair)
Post #: 3063
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 2:17:22 PM   
shool


Posts: 10076
Joined: 24/3/2006
From: In The Pipe, Five by Five.

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alistair

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht
Fair points Alistair but it's still all bit too convenient for my liking


Haha! So you're saying it's convenient that they have superpowers and are able to do these things?

Exactly


Thats not a fault with this film though.

Thats the same with Superman in any film, comic or guise.

_____________________________

Invisio Text for Spoilers
[ color=#F1F1F1 ] Spoiler text [ /color ] , remove spaces between square brackets

"No one knows what it means, but it's provocative... It gets the people going!"

(in reply to musht)
Post #: 3064
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 3:14:13 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2615
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alistair

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht
Fair points Alistair but it's still all bit too convenient for my liking


Haha! So you're saying it's convenient that they have superpowers and are able to do these things?

As convenient as Clark finding an 18000 year old space craft that just happend to have a House of El suit in just his size. Must of been his uncles ship I guess! still very convenient . Now where is Kara?



You know what, I think most of your points for dislike of the film are pretty thin, but the suit thing was something that I picked up on - not the size issue obviously, thats fucking stupid - but why was there a suit from the House of El in that ship from thousands of years ago? I would've much preffered for the suit to have been sent with Kal El in his ship. It wouldve taken some thought to how to work it into this story, (Pa Kent would've had to keep it from him and we wouldve needed that angle of the story, and Clarke would've had to return to the farm to find it, which wouldve been another uncessary detour) but I think it would've been nicer.

I wonder how the real world approach will accomodate the suit being under his Daily Planet/Clarke Kent get up in the sequel? I think we can safely assume they wont do it, so sadly no shirt rips!

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 3065
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 3:53:48 PM   
musht


Posts: 1863
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: shool


quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alistair

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht
Fair points Alistair but it's still all bit too convenient for my liking


Haha! So you're saying it's convenient that they have superpowers and are able to do these things?

Exactly


Thats not a fault with this film though.

Thats the same with Superman in any film, comic or guise.

Oh absolutely, I wasn't directing the criticisms/observations at MoS, just at Superman in general. I think for Superman to truly work on screen his powers need to be dialed back. Am I correct in saying that he didn't start off this powerful? Would taking away his ability to breathe in space be extremely upsetting for dedicated fans? I can accept that he's stronger on earth but that a yellow sun somehow allows his body to create oxygen for itself in the vacuum of space is just waaaaay too far.

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

"color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color"

(in reply to shool)
Post #: 3066
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 5:35:21 PM   
Vadersville


Posts: 3081
Joined: 30/9/2005
I've read all your posts over the past couple of pages, musht and I have to ask, if you are so determined to not like Superman then why bother going to see Man of Steel in the first place? You ask why Kryptons need spaceships and even more bizzarely, a planet? As Alistair said, Kryptonians only have powers when they're in the vicinity of a yellow sun and don't have any powers on their homeworld. And why do they need a planet? Well, besides the previous point, presumably they need somewhere to have come from in the first place! But you've already had this explained to you and you called it convinent. What I find even odder, is that you say that Superman is way too powerful but when someone's just told you that actually he's not as powerful as you thought, you take fault with it... Also, his powers don't conjur up a random supply of oxygen for him when he's in space, he can just hold his breath for a really long time.

As for the suit thing, I just presumed that part of the Jor-El master program clark uploaded to the ship when he inserted his key had the suit built for him. Not that much of a stretch is it?

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to musht)
Post #: 3067
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 6:15:47 PM   
musht


Posts: 1863
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville

I've read all your posts over the past couple of pages, musht and I have to ask, if you are so determined to not like Superman then why bother going to see Man of Steel in the first place? You ask why Kryptons need spaceships and even more bizzarely, a planet? As Alistair said, Kryptonians only have powers when they're in the vicinity of a yellow sun and don't have any powers on their homeworld. And why do they need a planet? Well, besides the previous point, presumably they need somewhere to have come from in the first place! But you've already had this explained to you and you called it convinent. What I find even odder, is that you say that Superman is way too powerful but when someone's just told you that actually he's not as powerful as you thought, you take fault with it... Also, his powers don't conjur up a random supply of oxygen for him when he's in space, he can just hold his breath for a really long time.

As for the suit thing, I just presumed that part of the Jor-El master program clark uploaded to the ship when he inserted his key had the suit built for him. Not that much of a stretch is it?

I do get frustrated with Superman but I did actually quite enjoy Man of Steel. I accepted Alistair's explanation of how he can survive in space but it barely makes him less powerful than I originally thought, it merely limits that power to a yellow sun solar system. When I asked why they need a spaceship or planet I wasn't being entirely serious but merely exaggerate in an attempt to illustrate how over powerful Kryptonians are (in the presence of a yellow sun). I would debate that Superman can only hold his breath, I've seen cartoons where he talks in space and in MoS it's not really explained.

I went to see MoS because I was genuinely curious how Snyder/Nolan/Goyer would handle Superman's invulnerability and despite the observations made above I think it was handled quite well. I did hate Lois though, mainly because she fell into the cliché action movie love interest pigeon hole. I'll take a break from Supes bashing now but you can look forward to the reruns of my comments when we get closer to the sequel

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

"color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color"

(in reply to Vadersville)
Post #: 3068
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 8:08:38 PM   
Vadersville


Posts: 3081
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

I do get frustrated with Superman but I did actually quite enjoy Man of Steel. I accepted Alistair's explanation of how he can survive in space but it barely makes him less powerful than I originally thought, it merely limits that power to a yellow sun solar system. When I asked why they need a spaceship or planet I wasn't being entirely serious but merely exaggerate in an attempt to illustrate how over powerful Kryptonians are (in the presence of a yellow sun). I would debate that Superman can only hold his breath, I've seen cartoons where he talks in space and in MoS it's not really explained.

I went to see MoS because I was genuinely curious how Snyder/Nolan/Goyer would handle Superman's invulnerability and despite the observations made above I think it was handled quite well. I did hate Lois though, mainly because she fell into the cliché action movie love interest pigeon hole. I'll take a break from Supes bashing now but you can look forward to the reruns of my comments when we get closer to the sequel


Fair enough. I'm surprised that you did enjoy the film, I wouldn't have gotten that from your recent posts at all! You're right that Superman can be too powerful at times. There's been numerous attempts to downscale his skills et in the comics over the years, (personally I think they got it right best with Superman The Animated Series and Justice League cartoon) and this has lead to a lot of inconsistency and some rather strange powers making random, one off appearances (e.g. when Supes rebuilds The Great Wall of China with his eyes in Superman 4!). As a rule of thumb though I think it's always generally been a given that Supes can hold his breath / go a long time without needing to breathe whilst flying round space rather than breathing...space air. In Superman 2 Zod and co are seen talking on the moon which might lead to some confusion. But in the comics and cartoon he usually needs a helmet or a "Hal bubble" to speak in space because sound can't travel through a vacuum.

I actually thought they did a good job of depicting Supes powers in MoS. Yes he's powerful but he does take some pounding throughout and I liked seeing him learn to fly for the first time. What's interesting about Snyder's Superman is that wilst he'sgrown up dealing with his developing powers and travelled the world in search of answers, he's unique in not having the benefit of training by Jor-El in the Fortress of Sollitude. This was one of the film's strongest points in my opinion as we got to see a Superman who is learning by doing and still finding his feet. Something which i hope they carry over into the sequel.


_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to musht)
Post #: 3069
RE: Man of Steel - 28/6/2013 10:05:42 PM   
Dirk Miggler


Posts: 1106
Joined: 14/1/2009
If this minor "plot hole" if that's even what it's is, gets your knickers in such a twist why watch any movie ? I can think of far better films than MoS with a lot bigger plot holes.

I wouldn't even call it a plot hole as it can be easily explained, either created by the drone or simply the ship itself is of house El so has a nice supply of them, not much of a stretch is it ?

I wish people would stop nitpicking this film to death, it's has problems that merit far worthier discussion than "Superman let people die" even though he didnt or "the suit just appeared on the ship" even though it can be explained, I mean do people really need every minor detail explained to them up on screen? And "the film had no humour" even though it does, like these trivial things are what makes a movie good. Come on get a grip FFS !!

< Message edited by Dirk Miggler -- 28/6/2013 10:07:50 PM >

(in reply to Vadersville)
Post #: 3070
RE: Man of Steel - 29/6/2013 12:11:25 AM   
musht


Posts: 1863
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville


quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

I do get frustrated with Superman but I did actually quite enjoy Man of Steel. I accepted Alistair's explanation of how he can survive in space but it barely makes him less powerful than I originally thought, it merely limits that power to a yellow sun solar system. When I asked why they need a spaceship or planet I wasn't being entirely serious but merely exaggerate in an attempt to illustrate how over powerful Kryptonians are (in the presence of a yellow sun). I would debate that Superman can only hold his breath, I've seen cartoons where he talks in space and in MoS it's not really explained.

I went to see MoS because I was genuinely curious how Snyder/Nolan/Goyer would handle Superman's invulnerability and despite the observations made above I think it was handled quite well. I did hate Lois though, mainly because she fell into the cliché action movie love interest pigeon hole. I'll take a break from Supes bashing now but you can look forward to the reruns of my comments when we get closer to the sequel


Fair enough. I'm surprised that you did enjoy the film, I wouldn't have gotten that from your recent posts at all! You're right that Superman can be too powerful at times. There's been numerous attempts to downscale his skills et in the comics over the years, (personally I think they got it right best with Superman The Animated Series and Justice League cartoon) and this has lead to a lot of inconsistency and some rather strange powers making random, one off appearances (e.g. when Supes rebuilds The Great Wall of China with his eyes in Superman 4!). As a rule of thumb though I think it's always generally been a given that Supes can hold his breath / go a long time without needing to breathe whilst flying round space rather than breathing...space air. In Superman 2 Zod and co are seen talking on the moon which might lead to some confusion. But in the comics and cartoon he usually needs a helmet or a "Hal bubble" to speak in space because sound can't travel through a vacuum.

I actually thought they did a good job of depicting Supes powers in MoS. Yes he's powerful but he does take some pounding throughout and I liked seeing him learn to fly for the first time. What's interesting about Snyder's Superman is that wilst he'sgrown up dealing with his developing powers and travelled the world in search of answers, he's unique in not having the benefit of training by Jor-El in the Fortress of Sollitude. This was one of the film's strongest points in my opinion as we got to see a Superman who is learning by doing and still finding his feet. Something which i hope they carry over into the sequel.


Absolutely agree with this. It's the best depiction of his powers I've seen and I think that's mainly due to having a villain who can actually compete. Seeing him learn as you said was also well done, it was done without a montage and it also created that bond with Earth and humanity.

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

"color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color"

(in reply to Vadersville)
Post #: 3071
RE: Man of Steel - 29/6/2013 3:08:24 PM   
pete_traynor


Posts: 3010
Joined: 28/11/2006
From: Balboa Towers, Balboa Island, CA
RE Nitpicking:

I think Kermode said it best when he was wondering how Supes could breath in space. In short, it shouldn't matter or be an issue... If the film is pulling its weight on a narrative and emotional level, because the audience will go with it if they are invested. Unfortunely, MoS has very little to offer on either if those levels. So audience members are picking up on small (but legitimate) issues because they simply do not find it a very good, engaging piece of film.

The film as a whole I personally disliked intensely. But the last hour is unbelievably tedious and repetitive! Is it any wonder more than a few minds wandered and picked up on things that didn't make sense.

_____________________________

EXTREMELY LIMITED 1/1 FILM DIRECTOR HAND DRAWN ORIGINALS COMING SOON - http://lomierart.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to musht)
Post #: 3072
RE: Man of Steel - 30/6/2013 11:14:57 AM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
Hows about Jason Statham as Lex Luthor in Man Of Steel 2?

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to pete_traynor)
Post #: 3073
RE: Man of Steel - 30/6/2013 5:23:27 PM   
Sutty


Posts: 3552
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: the front row
Bruce Willis as Luthor.

_____________________________

"Lord, make me your instrument of peace. Where there is hatred, let me bring love.
Where there is darkness, light."

"When you're pushed, killin's as easy as breathin'"

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 3074
RE: Man of Steel - 30/6/2013 6:20:56 PM   
Ref


Posts: 7461
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Leicester

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty

Bruce Willis as Luthor.


You didn't, by any chance, listen to Kevin Smith's thoughts on MoS did you? His reasoning for Bruce Willis to be Lex, was so he could watch him repeatedly get punched in the face by Supes. I like his thought process.




_____________________________

Viewers of a nervous disposition may be interested to know that your television is off and I am speaking to you from inside your head...

Hugh Dennis, Mock the Week

Icon created by the talented JaD

(in reply to Sutty)
Post #: 3075
RE: Man of Steel - 30/6/2013 8:19:37 PM   
TomTron


Posts: 874
Joined: 2/10/2006
One liberty that they definitely should take if they decide to do Lex in the next one: He doesn't have to be bald.

(in reply to Ref)
Post #: 3076
RE: Man of Steel - 1/7/2013 8:11:37 AM   
Sutty


Posts: 3552
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: the front row
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ref


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty

Bruce Willis as Luthor.


You didn't, by any chance, listen to Kevin Smith's thoughts on MoS did you? His reasoning for Bruce Willis to be Lex, was so he could watch him repeatedly get punched in the face by Supes. I like his thought process.





I did!! And I know there were some "personal" reasons for his choosing of Willis, but he gave a couple of decent reasons why Willis could be the man for this role. It would certainly give Luthor a menacing side that we haven't seen live action. And Willis does have a smarmy edge to him that could work well. Imagine Luthor with THAT smirk. Plus it would feel a touch more even in the danger stakes between Luthor and Superman if you had a real hollywood legend tough guy in the role. Certainly worth considering in my opinion.

I just hope that they dont go for another land development story line with Luthor should they use him. Why not make him a senator? Someone on the verge of the presidency that the people believe in? So that the peoples allegiences are torn between Superman (Savior and Alien) and Luthor (Savior in their eyes and human/but a secret villian). If people - or certainly a proportion of them - distrusted superman and he was less deified, that may prove a more substantial weakness initially. It could even carry over in to a couple of movies.



_____________________________

"Lord, make me your instrument of peace. Where there is hatred, let me bring love.
Where there is darkness, light."

"When you're pushed, killin's as easy as breathin'"

(in reply to Ref)
Post #: 3077
RE: Man of Steel - 1/7/2013 8:57:24 AM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009
quote:

ORIGINAL: pete_traynor

RE Nitpicking:

I think Kermode said it best when he was wondering how Supes could breath in space. In short, it shouldn't matter or be an issue... If the film is pulling its weight on a narrative and emotional level, because the audience will go with it if they are invested. Unfortunely, MoS has very little to offer on either if those levels. So audience members are picking up on small (but legitimate) issues because they simply do not find it a very good, engaging piece of film.

The film as a whole I personally disliked intensely. But the last hour is unbelievably tedious and repetitive! Is it any wonder more than a few minds wandered and picked up on things that didn't make sense.


Which is exactly why Avengers and Iron-man 3 are superior in every way!, I had far too much fun watching those movies to care. I watched IM3 again at the weekend! great CGi, at no point did I think " oh man that looked shit". Whereas I was so mind fucked over bad editing, gaping plot holes and terrible terrible CGi. I almost shed a tear watching Man of No appeal. I got to thinking, has DC made a decent movie yet? TDK is the closest they have come to decent, and that was only down to Heaths Joker.

< Message edited by Dannybohy -- 1/7/2013 8:58:12 AM >


_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to pete_traynor)
Post #: 3078
RE: Man of Steel - 1/7/2013 12:41:04 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy

quote:

ORIGINAL: pete_traynor

RE Nitpicking:

I think Kermode said it best when he was wondering how Supes could breath in space. In short, it shouldn't matter or be an issue... If the film is pulling its weight on a narrative and emotional level, because the audience will go with it if they are invested. Unfortunely, MoS has very little to offer on either if those levels. So audience members are picking up on small (but legitimate) issues because they simply do not find it a very good, engaging piece of film.

The film as a whole I personally disliked intensely. But the last hour is unbelievably tedious and repetitive! Is it any wonder more than a few minds wandered and picked up on things that didn't make sense.


Which is exactly why Avengers and Iron-man 3 are superior in every way!, I had far too much fun watching those movies to care. I watched IM3 again at the weekend! great CGi, at no point did I think " oh man that looked shit". Whereas I was so mind fucked over bad editing, gaping plot holes and terrible terrible CGi. I almost shed a tear watching Man of No appeal. I got to thinking, has DC made a decent movie yet? TDK is the closest they have come to decent, and that was only down to Heaths Joker.


I thought you liked Green Lantern Danny

As for comparing Man Of Steel to the likes of Iron Man 3, the CGI in IM3 is indeed superb, the problem however is that film had a rubbish and nonsensical plot with one of the most ridiculous plot '' twists '' in years which also managed to shit all over Starks greatest enemy from the comics.Even in the context of the film itself it was just way too silly.

I think Man Of Steel tops Iron Man 3 for sheer spectacle easily and at least the filmakers behind MOS had the balls to show Supes killing the bad guy in such a brutal fashion whereas in Iron Man 3 .....SPOILER ALERT..........Starks ditzy girlfriend does away with the baddie.

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 3079
RE: Man of Steel - 1/7/2013 12:58:54 PM   
Ref


Posts: 7461
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Leicester

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ref


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty

Bruce Willis as Luthor.


You didn't, by any chance, listen to Kevin Smith's thoughts on MoS did you? His reasoning for Bruce Willis to be Lex, was so he could watch him repeatedly get punched in the face by Supes. I like his thought process.





I did!! And I know there were some "personal" reasons for his choosing of Willis, but he gave a couple of decent reasons why Willis could be the man for this role. It would certainly give Luthor a menacing side that we haven't seen live action. And Willis does have a smarmy edge to him that could work well. Imagine Luthor with THAT smirk. Plus it would feel a touch more even in the danger stakes between Luthor and Superman if you had a real hollywood legend tough guy in the role. Certainly worth considering in my opinion.

I just hope that they dont go for another land development story line with Luthor should they use him. Why not make him a senator? Someone on the verge of the presidency that the people believe in? So that the peoples allegiences are torn between Superman (Savior and Alien) and Luthor (Savior in their eyes and human/but a secret villian). If people - or certainly a proportion of them - distrusted superman and he was less deified, that may prove a more substantial weakness initially. It could even carry over in to a couple of movies.



Dude, that would be an awesome plot - I like your thinking.


_____________________________

Viewers of a nervous disposition may be interested to know that your television is off and I am speaking to you from inside your head...

Hugh Dennis, Mock the Week

Icon created by the talented JaD

(in reply to Sutty)
Post #: 3080
RE: Man of Steel - 1/7/2013 1:10:34 PM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ref


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ref


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty

Bruce Willis as Luthor.


You didn't, by any chance, listen to Kevin Smith's thoughts on MoS did you? His reasoning for Bruce Willis to be Lex, was so he could watch him repeatedly get punched in the face by Supes. I like his thought process.





I did!! And I know there were some "personal" reasons for his choosing of Willis, but he gave a couple of decent reasons why Willis could be the man for this role. It would certainly give Luthor a menacing side that we haven't seen live action. And Willis does have a smarmy edge to him that could work well. Imagine Luthor with THAT smirk. Plus it would feel a touch more even in the danger stakes between Luthor and Superman if you had a real hollywood legend tough guy in the role. Certainly worth considering in my opinion.

I just hope that they dont go for another land development story line with Luthor should they use him. Why not make him a senator? Someone on the verge of the presidency that the people believe in? So that the peoples allegiences are torn between Superman (Savior and Alien) and Luthor (Savior in their eyes and human/but a secret villian). If people - or certainly a proportion of them - distrusted superman and he was less deified, that may prove a more substantial weakness initially. It could even carry over in to a couple of movies.



Dude, that would be an awesome plot - I like your thinking.



Well considering this Superman bought the bad guys to earth which caused all the death and destruction, then helped level a city, smashed a million dollar satellite up for the funnies and kept stealing clothes!!! I would vote Luthor too!..

Seriously, I like the Luthor as Senator idea and Willis would be great if a little obvious. But then most of the casting in MoS was pretty obvious and it was the one of the good aspects of the movie (except Adams ;) )

_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to Ref)
Post #: 3081
RE: Man of Steel - 1/7/2013 3:53:50 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1836
Joined: 30/9/2005
I would keep Luthor for the third film (if they do indeed get to make a trilogy).

In the 18,000 year old scout ship there was a pod that was open. Who was in that pod? Is that Supergirl? I may have missed it but I don't think we found out?

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 3082
RE: Man of Steel - 1/7/2013 4:15:34 PM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009
quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

I would keep Luthor for the third film (if they do indeed get to make a trilogy).

In the 18,000 year old scout ship there was a pod that was open. Who was in that pod? Is that Supergirl? I may have missed it but I don't think we found out?


Well the 18,000 year old scout also just happened to have a House of El suit in exactly Clarks size so I suppose anything is possible, but to ease the pain and embarrassment of the whole suit being there being a massive plot hole lets assume it was a House of El scout ship and yeh why not! it was Super-girl. She had just woken from an 18,000 year cryosleep and now shes naked because the suit didn't fit! that's why we didn't see her, she was hiding because she hadn't shaved her legs for a long long time!

Luthor will be in the sequel I am sure and if they knock the castings out of the park of like they did with TDK/Joker it could make the sequel decent. Personally I think it would be great if part 2 was handed to completely different writers/director! whats Tim up to ! :)

< Message edited by Dannybohy -- 1/7/2013 4:22:17 PM >


_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to Private Hudson)
Post #: 3083
RE: Man of Steel - 1/7/2013 9:54:47 PM   
Vadersville


Posts: 3081
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy

Well the 18,000 year old scout also just happened to have a House of El suit in exactly Clarks size so I suppose anything is possible, but to ease the pain and embarrassment of the whole suit being there being a massive plot hole lets assume it was a House of El scout ship and yeh why not! it was Super-girl. She had just woken from an 18,000 year cryosleep and now shes naked because the suit didn't fit! that's why we didn't see her, she was hiding because she hadn't shaved her legs for a long long time!


This is really not a plot hole. Jor-El's A.I. opens up the chamber to reveal the suit. Obviously part of the program that was uploaded from on the data stick that Clark used had the suit built by the ship for him. Get over it. Move on. It's not that much of a stretch seeing as the ship can grow entire Kryptonians. Do you really need every little thing explained to you in minute detail?

Also, in regards to the open chamber. Blatant sequel bait. Goyer has also confirmed as much. A prequel comic that was released (which may or may not prove canon in the long run) has the ship carrying Kara Zor-El...


_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 3084
RE: Man of Steel - 2/7/2013 8:50:59 AM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy

Well the 18,000 year old scout also just happened to have a House of El suit in exactly Clarks size so I suppose anything is possible, but to ease the pain and embarrassment of the whole suit being there being a massive plot hole lets assume it was a House of El scout ship and yeh why not! it was Super-girl. She had just woken from an 18,000 year cryosleep and now shes naked because the suit didn't fit! that's why we didn't see her, she was hiding because she hadn't shaved her legs for a long long time!


This is really not a plot hole. Jor-El's A.I. opens up the chamber to reveal the suit. Obviously part of the program that was uploaded from on the data stick that Clark used had the suit built by the ship for him. Get over it. Move on. It's not that much of a stretch seeing as the ship can grow entire Kryptonians. Do you really need every little thing explained to you in minute detail?

Also, in regards to the open chamber. Blatant sequel bait. Goyer has also confirmed as much. A prequel comic that was released (which may or may not prove canon in the long run) has the ship carrying Kara Zor-El...



lol, sorry but I couldn't get past your first sentence. Not a plot hole? jut terrible film making then, its the equivalent of Jor El pulling it out of his hologram ass.

_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to Vadersville)
Post #: 3085
RE: Man of Steel - 2/7/2013 10:05:53 AM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2615
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy

Well the 18,000 year old scout also just happened to have a House of El suit in exactly Clarks size so I suppose anything is possible, but to ease the pain and embarrassment of the whole suit being there being a massive plot hole lets assume it was a House of El scout ship and yeh why not! it was Super-girl. She had just woken from an 18,000 year cryosleep and now shes naked because the suit didn't fit! that's why we didn't see her, she was hiding because she hadn't shaved her legs for a long long time!


This is really not a plot hole. Jor-El's A.I. opens up the chamber to reveal the suit. Obviously part of the program that was uploaded from on the data stick that Clark used had the suit built by the ship for him. Get over it. Move on. It's not that much of a stretch seeing as the ship can grow entire Kryptonians. Do you really need every little thing explained to you in minute detail?

Also, in regards to the open chamber. Blatant sequel bait. Goyer has also confirmed as much. A prequel comic that was released (which may or may not prove canon in the long run) has the ship carrying Kara Zor-El...



lol, sorry but I couldn't get past your first sentence. Not a plot hole? jut terrible film making then, its the equivalent of Jor El pulling it out of his hologram ass.


Just out of curiosity, what do you make of the Donner/Reeve era Superman movies? And what do you make of the nonsense in those? Because, as much as I wondered why the suit was on board a ship from 18k years ago, I can't consider it a plot hole, it isnt a plot hole at all. IM3 was amazing was it? Didnt you find the inconsistensies of the Iron Man armour ridiculous? The plot hole of Tony being stuck in a small town and then suddenly having an Audi to drive off in? Is that a plot hole? Movies don't have to explain every little detail. Fuck me sideways, how do you enjoy any movie when trying to find error to that level of detail? I simply can't take your criticism seriously. The film has issues, the suit in Clarkes size on board the 18k year old ship is not one of them.......

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 3086
RE: Man of Steel - 2/7/2013 11:30:58 AM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy

Well the 18,000 year old scout also just happened to have a House of El suit in exactly Clarks size so I suppose anything is possible, but to ease the pain and embarrassment of the whole suit being there being a massive plot hole lets assume it was a House of El scout ship and yeh why not! it was Super-girl. She had just woken from an 18,000 year cryosleep and now shes naked because the suit didn't fit! that's why we didn't see her, she was hiding because she hadn't shaved her legs for a long long time!


This is really not a plot hole. Jor-El's A.I. opens up the chamber to reveal the suit. Obviously part of the program that was uploaded from on the data stick that Clark used had the suit built by the ship for him. Get over it. Move on. It's not that much of a stretch seeing as the ship can grow entire Kryptonians. Do you really need every little thing explained to you in minute detail?

Also, in regards to the open chamber. Blatant sequel bait. Goyer has also confirmed as much. A prequel comic that was released (which may or may not prove canon in the long run) has the ship carrying Kara Zor-El...



lol, sorry but I couldn't get past your first sentence. Not a plot hole? jut terrible film making then, its the equivalent of Jor El pulling it out of his hologram ass.


Just out of curiosity, what do you make of the Donner/Reeve era Superman movies? And what do you make of the nonsense in those? Because, as much as I wondered why the suit was on board a ship from 18k years ago, I can't consider it a plot hole, it isnt a plot hole at all. IM3 was amazing was it? Didnt you find the inconsistensies of the Iron Man armour ridiculous? The plot hole of Tony being stuck in a small town and then suddenly having an Audi to drive off in? Is that a plot hole? Movies don't have to explain every little detail. Fuck me sideways, how do you enjoy any movie when trying to find error to that level of detail? I simply can't take your criticism seriously. The film has issues, the suit in Clarkes size on board the 18k year old ship is not one of them.......


Not a plot hole, just a mistake?. I enjoy hundreds of movies, plenty so far this year , some have issues and I am not trying to find errors, its just that when one believes they cocked up the main parts so badly (origins), wasted some great casting talent and outputted some of the worst designs and CGi I have seen in quite some time, then its fair game as far as I am concerned.

I didn't notice/forgive the issues with IM3 because I was enjoying the experience as a whole, plus they created a great origins story in IM and have never taken it all so seriously!. So I can forgive a bit of ridiculous.

The difference is I am not going to seriously make up so nonsense bollocks to justify movie mistakes! What the fuck was the Audi doing there!. Why did he fill that lads garage up with all that great stuff (which would likely get open his house up to theft and send his mothers insurance premiums thru the roof! instead of just buying him a nice new house! the guy is a billionaire for Christ sake!.

When a movie like MoS takes it upon itself to be all "realistic" " real world" (all bullshit concepts) then a small thing like Clark not saving his idiot Dad who went back for a fucking dog! (even though earlier he suggested a school bus full of children should have been left to die) or House of El suit being conveniently in an 18,000 spacecraft that conveniently gets found just before Zod turns up! then yeah, those plot points are very much open to ridicule and debate. Or maybe I am acting out like a little bitch because I am just upset its not the Superman movie I was hoping for and lead to believe it would be?.

If you enjoy a movie as a whole you let it slide, if not you pick it apart and try an understand if its just you or you trash it for fun! welcome to movie discussions on internet! .

How did a loner who was staying off the grid manage to get work on top secret military installation?.

_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 3087
RE: Man of Steel - 2/7/2013 12:21:13 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2615
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield
Just because a comic book movie takes a serious approach to the material at hand, doesn't mean it needs to have an explanation for every element of the universe it portrays, sometimes just showing something on screen is enough, without having to say to the audience 'Oh yea, this tiny element of story, it's not important, but here you go, here is the whole backstory'.

Superman needs to get the suit, it's his costume and they need to have him interact with the AI memory of his dead father in the 'Fortress' setting, and they did that with just the right amount of explanation needed. There is no need to explain why the suit fits Clarke, there is no need to really explain why it is on a ship from 18k years ago, it's totally insignificant to the story being told (and in reality, they show what needs to to explain why the suit is there - the House of El is clearly shown as a part of the exploring parties that go off to terraform duing Jor El's exposition piece - thats all we need). To me, it's similar to the people who moaned about Bruce Wayne returning to Gotham from his pit cell in TDKR, we dont need to see it, a shot of Bruce heading towards civilisation is all we need. Why dont cops underground have beards and why do they look healthy? All that needs to be established is the fleeting shot of them washing, shaving, drinking coffee and receiving supplies, that's all the movie needs as that isn't what is important to the story. How does Clarke get a job at a military installtion? Do we seriously need that explaining, simply because the movie is approaching the material in a serious way, rather than having the approach of IM3 (which is such a terrible fucking movie I dont even know where to begin - head over to the rewview for my thoughts on that fucking turd)? It's established in a couple of fleeting lines that Clarke is creating fake identities, we dont need more than that, cos it isnt fucking important to the story. And as for the Pa Kent death scene, and more importantly the 'let the kids die', that isnt what Kent is saying at all, and if you dont get that, then I dont know why I would want to discuss that aspect of the film with you, cos it appears your wilfully ignoring the point the story is trying to get across. A few people on here have explained why they prefer the heart attack approach for Pa Kent, and I can understand their reasoning, although I dont agree it would work for MoS. At least those people dont seem to be ignoring what was actually put on screen though... Pa Kent isnt suggesting they should be left to die, he's forcing Clarke to think about the consequences of his actions. He is making the point (and it's an interesting question of the Superhero/Comic Book movie genre) that, just because we can intervene, doesnt mean we always should. Actions have consequences. Again, MoS has issues, but these arent really them.

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 3088
RE: Man of Steel - 2/7/2013 1:17:30 PM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper

Just because a comic book movie takes a serious approach to the material at hand, doesn't mean it needs to have an explanation for every element of the universe it portrays, sometimes just showing something on screen is enough, without having to say to the audience 'Oh yea, this tiny element of story, it's not important, but here you go, here is the whole backstory'.

Superman needs to get the suit, it's his costume and they need to have him interact with the AI memory of his dead father in the 'Fortress' setting, and they did that with just the right amount of explanation needed. There is no need to explain why the suit fits Clarke, there is no need to really explain why it is on a ship from 18k years ago, it's totally insignificant to the story being told (and in reality, they show what needs to to explain why the suit is there - the House of El is clearly shown as a part of the exploring parties that go off to terraform duing Jor El's exposition piece - thats all we need). To me, it's similar to the people who moaned about Bruce Wayne returning to Gotham from his pit cell in TDKR, we dont need to see it, a shot of Bruce heading towards civilisation is all we need. Why dont cops underground have beards and why do they look healthy? All that needs to be established is the fleeting shot of them washing, shaving, drinking coffee and receiving supplies, that's all the movie needs as that isn't what is important to the story. How does Clarke get a job at a military installtion? Do we seriously need that explaining, simply because the movie is approaching the material in a serious way, rather than having the approach of IM3 (which is such a terrible fucking movie I dont even know where to begin - head over to the rewview for my thoughts on that fucking turd)? It's established in a couple of fleeting lines that Clarke is creating fake identities, we dont need more than that, cos it isnt fucking important to the story. And as for the Pa Kent death scene, and more importantly the 'let the kids die', that isnt what Kent is saying at all, and if you dont get that, then I dont know why I would want to discuss that aspect of the film with you, cos it appears your wilfully ignoring the point the story is trying to get across. A few people on here have explained why they prefer the heart attack approach for Pa Kent, and I can understand their reasoning, although I dont agree it would work for MoS. At least those people dont seem to be ignoring what was actually put on screen though... Pa Kent isnt suggesting they should be left to die, he's forcing Clarke to think about the consequences of his actions. He is making the point (and it's an interesting question of the Superhero/Comic Book movie genre) that, just because we can intervene, doesnt mean we always should. Actions have consequences. Again, MoS has issues, but these arent really them.


I hardly think Superman getting into the suit is a tiny element of the story, or at least it shouldn't be. But they skirted over everything else so why not. All this stuff you say isn't important to the story! I am trying to figure out whats left of any importance to you? what do you deem key moments!.

The Pa Kent death scene is ridiculous and your right, whats the point in discussion it further, there is no defending it, its just shit storytelling. I have already covered why the heart attack or some other method works better.

What do you think MoS issues are?




_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 3089
RE: Man of Steel - 2/7/2013 1:26:05 PM   
Vadersville


Posts: 3081
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy
Not a plot hole, just a mistake?. I enjoy hundreds of movies, plenty so far this year , some have issues and I am not trying to find errors, its just that when one believes they cocked up the main parts so badly (origins), wasted some great casting talent and outputted some of the worst designs and CGi I have seen in quite some time, then its fair game as far as I am concerned.

I didn't notice/forgive the issues with IM3 because I was enjoying the experience as a whole, plus they created a great origins story in IM and have never taken it all so seriously!. So I can forgive a bit of ridiculous.

The difference is I am not going to seriously make up so nonsense bollocks to justify movie mistakes!


No you're just gonna make up nonsense bollocks to criticise a movie needlessly.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy
When a movie like MoS takes it upon itself to be all "realistic" " real world" (all bullshit concepts) then a small thing like Clark not saving his idiot Dad who went back for a fucking dog! (even though earlier he suggested a school bus full of children should have been left to die) or House of El suit being conveniently in an 18,000 spacecraft that conveniently gets found just before Zod turns up! then yeah, those plot points are very much open to ridicule and debate. Or maybe I am acting out like a little bitch because I am just upset its not the Superman movie I was hoping for and lead to believe it would be?.

If you enjoy a movie as a whole you let it slide, if not you pick it apart and try an understand if its just you or you trash it for fun! welcome to movie discussions on internet! .

How did a loner who was staying off the grid manage to get work on top secret military installation?.


I am almost positive now that you didn't actually watch the film and just had a brief overview read aloud to you by someone who couldn't be arsed going into much detail. Seriously? Did you watch the movie? When Clark first entered the ship, it reactivated from hybernation and sent out a distresss signal that Zod intercepted, leading them to Earth! It's made abudantly clear, more than once, especially since Zod says it was Clark who led them to Earth in the first place.


quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper

Just because a comic book movie takes a serious approach to the material at hand, doesn't mean it needs to have an explanation for every element of the universe it portrays, sometimes just showing something on screen is enough, without having to say to the audience 'Oh yea, this tiny element of story, it's not important, but here you go, here is the whole backstory'.

Superman needs to get the suit, it's his costume and they need to have him interact with the AI memory of his dead father in the 'Fortress' setting, and they did that with just the right amount of explanation needed. There is no need to explain why the suit fits Clarke, there is no need to really explain why it is on a ship from 18k years ago, it's totally insignificant to the story being told (and in reality, they show what needs to to explain why the suit is there - the House of El is clearly shown as a part of the exploring parties that go off to terraform duing Jor El's exposition piece - thats all we need). To me, it's similar to the people who moaned about Bruce Wayne returning to Gotham from his pit cell in TDKR, we dont need to see it, a shot of Bruce heading towards civilisation is all we need. Why dont cops underground have beards and why do they look healthy? All that needs to be established is the fleeting shot of them washing, shaving, drinking coffee and receiving supplies, that's all the movie needs as that isn't what is important to the story. How does Clarke get a job at a military installtion? Do we seriously need that explaining, simply because the movie is approaching the material in a serious way, rather than having the approach of IM3 (which is such a terrible fucking movie I dont even know where to begin - head over to the rewview for my thoughts on that fucking turd)? It's established in a couple of fleeting lines that Clarke is creating fake identities, we dont need more than that, cos it isnt fucking important to the story. And as for the Pa Kent death scene, and more importantly the 'let the kids die', that isnt what Kent is saying at all, and if you dont get that, then I dont know why I would want to discuss that aspect of the film with you, cos it appears your wilfully ignoring the point the story is trying to get across. A few people on here have explained why they prefer the heart attack approach for Pa Kent, and I can understand their reasoning, although I dont agree it would work for MoS. At least those people dont seem to be ignoring what was actually put on screen though... Pa Kent isnt suggesting they should be left to die, he's forcing Clarke to think about the consequences of his actions. He is making the point (and it's an interesting question of the Superhero/Comic Book movie genre) that, just because we can intervene, doesnt mean we always should. Actions have consequences. Again, MoS has issues, but these arent really them.


Absolutley agree with all of this!


_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 3090
Page:   <<   < prev  101 102 [103] 104 105   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> RE: Man of Steel Page: <<   < prev  101 102 [103] 104 105   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.170