This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I mean he literally saves a squirrel and then goes nuts saving a dog. Seems like that has a lot about kindness to living creatures.
You kind of expected to dislike it, right?
No. That was just about the director stepping in it, rather ironically.
Individual acts, sure. But as a central theme explored it developed in ways not already baked into the character or explored over the years? Not really.
I don’t think anybody said they were trying to break new ground with the character here. They were trying to return him to his optimistic roots after the darker version in man of steel and that stupid *** Batman/Superman movie.Individual acts, sure. But as a central theme explored it developed in ways not already baked into the character or explored over the years? Not really.
I can agree they at least did that - although I'll always be a defender of MoS. But yeah, anything after that is unwatchable.I don’t think anybody said they were trying to break new ground with the character here. They were trying to return him to his optimistic roots after the darker version in man of steel and that stupid *** Batman/Superman movie.Individual acts, sure. But as a central theme explored it developed in ways not already baked into the character or explored over the years? Not really.
I don’t think anybody said they were trying to break new ground with the character here. They were trying to return him to his optimistic roots after the darker version in man of steel and that stupid *** Batman/Superman movie.Individual acts, sure. But as a central theme explored it developed in ways not already baked into the character or explored over the years? Not really.
Well said. While I have a soft spot for 'Superman: The Movie' in general and Reeve's performance in particular, this might be my favorite Superman movie. It's not flawless by any means, but it's the one I feel I'll revisit the most. It is definitely the most "comic booky" of the Superman movies.
That really is dire. Social media would be brutal.
I say absolutely, but to each their own. My 10 year old daughter enjoyed it.
1/4 stars for me.
I saw it with my son and wife.....20 minutes in I begged them to walk out....I lost.
It really rubbed me the wrong way. And completely discredited the entire movie for me. The relationship he had with Ma and Pa Kent was reduced to comic relief and making them out to be total country bumpkins who shop exclusively at a Super Walmart.
As a Superman super fan, do you give this opinion piece any sway? It was written in 2017 so isn't influenced by the current movie and with Supe's parents message I went to the google machine to research if it was valid. Turns out it may be.
Not a word about Jorel as he and his wife Lara had a natural birth in defiance of Kryptonian ways. My point is strictly about them and their sacrifice to save Kalel and send him to earth where he would thrive and be a hero to the people of Earth. Jorel warned the powers that be about Krypton's imminent doom. He was against the military coup of General Zod and his treason. Jorel stood for the good of Krypton....not this total anti Kryton article.
At least they had the wherewithal to keep (or at least pay homage to) the John Williams theme for this movie.
I don't think it was. I mean, I get why pureists hate it and even myself thinks that the idea of changing the lore of an established character/franchise is blasphemous and writers and studios (mostly studios) shouldn't be (or rather I wish they weren't) as afraid to try new things. That said, I've never watched any of the Superman movies or Clark and Louis or Smallville so I'm not super familiar with the lore but I understand enough to understand @Todems point. While I tend to agree, from the point of James Gunn and Warner Brothers, changing the lore and trying to distance yourself from previous Superman movies while trying to eke out the last few $$$ from a franchise/character that's been done a zillion times makes plenty of sense from their POV. Without it, one of the big plot points doesn't happen. Basic logic says it doesn't make sense but it's a movie written by James Gunn so...You probably could have kept the same plot point and not changed the lore so it was a bit of sloppy writing, IMHO.
If i didnt bring 8 year old twins with me that have never seen any other Superman movie other than Man of Steel, id agree mostly. But in that sense it was nice and campy for us. But im a batman guy.
I’m sorry but how do you make a decision on literally any movie after 8 minutes.
Simple. I use my beautiful rights as an American. Just kidding. Ha ha. Seriously though. You can't do this for all movies, but for something like Superman, that has decades of history, I had an expectation of the "tone" I was expecting. Silly dialogue and a dog with a cape did not meet "my" expectations. I respect the board and it's positive opinion on the movie and will try to restart tonight though. I'll go into it like a 13 year old boy looking to be entertained, instead of a 50 year old man curious about where they take the Supeman character. All my get off my lawn opinion of course.
What? Which alternate cartoons on Netflix? Why are you looking forward to hating this?
I'm trying to figure out what was so off putting in the first 8 minutes?
I commented about it above. How about a super dog in cape? Not my thing. Ha ha
Fair enough. So you aren't a fan of comics in general? Or just superman?
I was kidding about the looking forward to hating this.
Red Son was one of them I watched on Netflix. Essentially, he was found in Russia instead of Kansas (or wherever he is found here.)
Alternative versions of Superman - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
