View in: Desktop
Copyright @2024 TigerDroppings.com. All rights reserved.
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Posted by
Message
re: Man of Steel - upon further review...Posted by H-Town Tiger on 8/23/13 at 8:49 am to MrFreakinMiyagi
quote:
He basically had no choice in MOS, but in Superman 2, Zod had no powers, and Supes could have just taken him to the authorities, but no, he kills his arse instead
exactly. Personally i wish he put Zod back in the NZ so there could be the possibily of using him again or at least he could serve as kind of a McGuffin if you will and just breaking his neck was both greusome and anti climatic at the same time. Funny how a guy going over cliff and disappearing into snow doesn't sink in as killing to most people.
re: Man of Steel - upon further review...Posted by GeauxTigerTM on 8/23/13 at 8:50 am to udtiger
quote:
I for one LOVED MOS
Flaws aside, so did I.
There's too much cynicism with critics nowadays. I could go on a long rant about it, but the short of it is that they either love a film or hate it. There's no middle ground. I mentioned before that there were several action/superhero movies from the earlier part of the millennium that I felt weren't as good as MoS (First two Spidermans, first two X-Men movies), yet had RT% in the high 80's/low 90's. Back then, critics were just looking for a movie that they felt was entertaining. They only cared if a movie was worth the time to sit and watch and all of those movies were. Thus the Fresh rating. Now, critics are just looking for reasons to tear down a movie rather than enjoy it.
That's where there is a huge disconnect between them and the audience. They want films to be a certain way no matter the genre. You can't compare Toy Story to The Departed to The Hangover to The Dark Knight. You have to judge them individually, yet critics don't want to do it. They go to movies to tear them down while audiences go to enjoy themselves, well at least most people.
That's where there is a huge disconnect between them and the audience. They want films to be a certain way no matter the genre. You can't compare Toy Story to The Departed to The Hangover to The Dark Knight. You have to judge them individually, yet critics don't want to do it. They go to movies to tear them down while audiences go to enjoy themselves, well at least most people.
TD SponsorTD Fan
USA
Member since 2001
USA
Member since 2001
Thank you for supporting our sponsors Posted by Site Sponsor to Everyone
Advertisement
quote:
There's too much cynicism with critics nowadays. I could go on a long rant about it, but the short of it is that they either love a film or hate it. There's no middle ground. I mentioned before that there were several action/superhero movies from the earlier part of the millennium that I felt weren't as good as MoS (First two Spidermans, first two X-Men movies), yet had RT% in the high 80's/low 90's. Back then, critics were just looking for a movie that they felt was entertaining. They only cared if a movie was worth the time to sit and watch and all of those movies were. Thus the Fresh rating. Now, critics are just looking for reasons to tear down a movie rather than enjoy it.
Two words: John Carter
And it isn't just critics, it's people too. (I do think the critiques of MoS are generally valid though, but again, it isn't a BAD film, just a pretty good one).
Then, whenever we get into a dialog with each other, everyone becomes entrenched and goes overboard on their opinion when they are probably far more agreeable in general (there will always be the stubborn though).
Cynicism breeds defensiveness. The internet allows it all to explode.
I think what makes MOS interesting is that it is a film franchise in infancy; Superman still doesn't know how to harness his powers like a superhero and all of a sudden he has to superhero-fight in highly occupied cities. Yes, Superman screwed up, he wasn't "Superman." The question is, is this how the Snyder Superman really is, or does it become a plot point for the next movie?
Does Batman show up to hold Superman accountable for his actions? Does Luther, in his own self interested way?
MOS was early Superman caught in a disaster movie. Making a realistic Superman movie wouldn't allow for him to save the day cleanly. But it can still be one good part of a very good Superman movie franchise. As long as every movie isn't Superman and the City Destroying Special Effects.
Does Batman show up to hold Superman accountable for his actions? Does Luther, in his own self interested way?
MOS was early Superman caught in a disaster movie. Making a realistic Superman movie wouldn't allow for him to save the day cleanly. But it can still be one good part of a very good Superman movie franchise. As long as every movie isn't Superman and the City Destroying Special Effects.
This post was edited on 8/23 at 6:04 pm
quote:
Does Batman show up to hold Superman accountable for his actions? Does Luther, in his own self interested way?
Since all billionaires know each other, a Luther / Wayne partnership in an attempt to bring Superman to justice for his actions sounds like a really great idea.
I like the idea that you are onto.
re: Man of Steel - upon further review...Posted by Patrick_Bateman on 8/23/13 at 6:17 pm to udtiger
I saw Man of Steel once. I'm glad I saw it, and it was a decent movie.
But. . . 2 things: 1. I don't really have an interest in seeing it again (versus, say, Batman Begins, which I immediately wanted to watch again and again), and 2. I have no interest in seeing a sequel to it. It wasn't a good enough movie to make me invest in a trilogy.
ETA: Actually, with as many superhero movies as are being made today, I should say infinity-ogy. There is no end to them.
But. . . 2 things: 1. I don't really have an interest in seeing it again (versus, say, Batman Begins, which I immediately wanted to watch again and again), and 2. I have no interest in seeing a sequel to it. It wasn't a good enough movie to make me invest in a trilogy.
ETA: Actually, with as many superhero movies as are being made today, I should say infinity-ogy. There is no end to them.
This post was edited on 8/23 at 6:19 pm
re: Man of Steel - upon further review...Posted by RonBurgundy on 8/25/13 at 10:20 pm to Patrick_Bateman
Man of Steel- RT audience reviews-76%
Superman Returns- RT audience reviews- 63%
Man of Steel was more liked than Superman Returns.
/thread
Superman Returns- RT audience reviews- 63%
Man of Steel was more liked than Superman Returns.
/thread
quote:
a Luther / Wayne partnership in an attempt to bring Superman to justice for his actions sounds like a really great idea.
Never thought of that plot point. Obviously I could see where Luthor and Wayne would butt heads on how exactly Superman would pay for his actions.
re: Man of Steel - upon further review...Posted by DURANTULA on 8/26/13 at 12:27 am to Patrick_Bateman
quote:
Actually, with as many superhero movies as are being made today
2007: Two Superhero movies
2008: Three
2009: Two
2010: One
2011: Four
2012: Three
2013: Three
Yeah woe is you for having to suffer through 18 superhero movies in 7 years.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News