RocShemp

You know, I mostly dislike Zack Snyder's output but it's ridiculous to give all the credit to Nolan (whose films I do enjoy a great deal). By Christopher Nolan's own admission, his only involvement in this movie was penning the first draft of the script with David Goyer. Which is why Nolan and Goyer share a Story credit. However, Nolan abandoned this project immediately after that and only has a producer credit so as to advertise the movie using his name. Nolan has been very hands off this project. Goyer wrote all the subsequent drafts of the script (which is why he also gets a Screenplay credit) and Snyder had final say on everything. Yes, Sucker Punch sucked more than anything has sucked before and it seems also tanked at the box office (the only thing WB cares about) but he also generated enough good will thanks to Watchmen (though lackluster it wasn't outright terrible and almost did the source material justice) which did decent business despite being an R-rated feature based on a comic book that is not widely known by general audiences. So Snyder was free to call the shots on Man of Steel and he did.

The good and the bad should fall squarely on Snyder and Goyer. Nolan deserves little to no credit for anything in this movie (good or bad).

Solid Snake

As God or a god?

redrum

so...you just want to watch Superman type up news stories at the Daily Planet the whole movie?

JumpCutz

TheHive08

Good Hitfix review. Especially loved this part:

http://www.hitfix.com/motion-capture...hero-thrills/2

DJariya

Yeah, he would rather remember the good old days when he was a little boy growing up in the 1950's watching this version of Superman instead:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/p0B1ufyXOds" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Paul_SD

Yup.

I'm glad we are starting to see some negative reviews. I need my expectations tempered. So far I'm reading complaints of dialogue being too clunky/on the nose as far as themes, etc and too much action that goes on too long among other things.

One is more a Goyer thing, the other a Synder- but in this case, both fall on Synders shoulders. He's ultimately responsible for going with dialogue that could more easily be addressed/massaged on the fly.

One thing I am disappointed to hear is that, and expect to be the case since it is fully implied in the trailers, is that there is so much carnage and destruction that this Superman is less concerned with stopping the fight to rescue people. It may not be explicitly shown on camera, but the implication that thousands of people will be killed during these fights can't help being present. Making Superman more of a the kind of warrior who dismisses/ignores/courts collateral damage to win the war, starts to lose an essential essence of the character, imo. I realize it's a tough balancing act because to make this more real you are going to have casualties- especially in an epic battle. It's one of the things that made Superman II seem so insubstantial to me. I know I'm going to be disappointed if this movie takes things too far in the other direction.

Unfortunately, I expect it will be this exact kind of thing that woos the audiences that have always felt this character was too goody goody and boring.

Geofferson

I agree on the need of a balancing act between action and substance. Doesn't necessarily mean it needs to be boring, but an all-out CGI fest numbs the senses after a certain point.

madcougar

I wish they would make a movie where Clark Kent uncovers some sort of conspiracy in City Hall and he take down the mayor without taking off this glasses. THAT'S the kind of Superman movie people want!

Jaymole

That's the Superman I want to see, especially at the 1 minute mark here:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tGf1r8-Snss" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

RocShemp

^ I loved that show and fully expect to love this movie too.

FRwL

I hope after this movie they never again relate to anything Krypton/Lex for future movies, in any way.

Paul_SD

moved post over to the other thread

Ash Ketchum

Best Superman ever:

Mr. Cinema

That was written by Scott Foundas. I found a snippet of his review for Superman Returns from Metacritic, where his review was given a score of 100.

I think I'll discard his negative take on Man of Steel. I guess we finally found the person who wanted a sequel to the drab Superman Returns.

Hokeyboy

Without defending or attacking MOS, I'll only say that everyone seems to have their own idea of what Superman "should" be, and many can't move outside of that sandbox. There are still people clamoring for BAM! POW! SOCK! Batman with the colorful villains and cheesy puns, for instance. These people should only be split in half with a boat hook.

ddrknghtrtns

I don't want to see Superman being compared to a god or the I Am at all. Calling Superman a god makes him seem unaproachable, ancient, and boring. It sort of destroys the perception in the movie that at any time he can be hurt or destroy.

If Doomsday or Luthor kills him, why worry? Jor-el the father, will raise him back from the dead and the newly rejuvinated Superman will easily take care of the threat the second go-around without breaking a sweat.

ddrknghtrtns

I prefer this take and the animated Fleischer cartoons, instead of the Superman as god nonsense.

Shannon Nutt

Good news - it's getting panned by a lot of the "major critics." Given the same critics gave As to IRON MAN 3 and STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS, I'm now hopefully optimistic.

Tom Creo

Agree. I also can't stand posts like: "you don't understand the character at all." Unless your Siegel or Shuster, STFU.

Hokeyboy

While I'd add Mort Weisinger, Curt Swan, Eliot S! Maggin, John Byrne, Alan Moore and Grant Morrison, I get yer meaning!

Jules Winfield

What would the sound effect be for being split in half with a fish hook? SPLISH?

Paul_SD

Ok then. I guess a Superman that blithely contributes to the deaths of thousands of innocent people because he engages the bad guys is the middle of highly populated urban areas instead of trying to steer the fight somewhere remote- IS a good understanding of the character.

I can take the destruction- but that + no attempt whatsoever to stop the fighting, get people to safety, engage them in some other way- seems to me a very thoughtless reading of the source material designed solely for the "fuck yeah!" crowd. That is going to give me big problems with this, moreso than any other superficial tweak or revision.

That is damn near impossible for me to ultimately embrace.

RocShemp

You know, it's kinda difficult to move the fight elsewhere when you're outnumbered and getting your ass handed to you.

Paul_SD

The criticisms I'm seeing are not that he couldn't avoid it, but that he willfully engages it. Punching the bad guy through multiple buildings resulting in their collapse is not something the character couldn't avoid. He chooses to do it that way.