Yo, the critics already going ham on Man of Steel

[The Frozen One]

Honestly the avengers wasn't that good. It was mediocre filled with plot holes and shytty dialogue.

People just liked it because it put their favorite superhero into one big movie.

I hated that Ironman was the focal point of the movie. But anyways this thread is about man of steel. Stop

 

[Colilluminati]

I have never seen a good Superman movie.

 

[duncanthetall]

Elaborate? Sure. There are just as many, actually more, reviews that had more positive things to say about the movie. The loud negative ones are brought up more often than anything else, however. Understandable, but we haven't seen the movie. I'm sill excited for it and the reviews have reinforced that. What do you guys want from a Superman movie this day in age? I mean, it's telling us a story that we pretty much all know. Story isnt a big deal here in the first place. I mean these are the same guys sho LOVED and gave such high ratings to turds like IM2 and 3. But, once again, its all subjective. Going to this with an open mind is still possible. not like it stands at 5% overall.

Bring the character into the new generation, modernize him, and make it as big as possible.

Just sayin

The fukking Coen Brothers don't make Superman movies for a reason.

 

[Mr. Somebody]

Have you ever seen a Superman film before? This one is nothing like any of the others (not that they were any good, besides the first one.) And my standards are fine- if anything, yours are the kind that lead to trash, since you seem to think WildCATS and Superman are the same.

All of the superman films werent very good. This one is better than all of them.

I dont think superman and wildcats are the same. Im talking about the reasons you go see certain films. I dont go to see superman films to be moved mentally. I got to see fighting and alot of action. You go to see Clark kent and lois lane talk about their problems. Not so much with me, friend.

 

[JayYoung314]

Honestly the avengers wasn't that good. It was mediocre filled with plot holes and shytty dialogue.

People just liked it because it put their favorite superhero into one big movie.

I hated that Ironman was the focal point of the movie. But anyways this thread is about man of steel. Stop

actually low key hulk was the focal point. ironman is the most entertaining character of the bunch tho so it was only logical he get the most quotes. and why expect oscar worthy script from a comic book movie? ur not going to get a lord of the rings script from an avengers movie anytime soon. although a darker element is definitely necessary next time.

 

[The Frozen One]

...

Exactly, different people have different perspectives of the movie they watch.

But if you read the reviews, it's the direction of the movie that the critics have criticized.

Not surprising since this is the same director that made 300 and sucker punch, which I've never watched, but have gotten the same treatment that man of steel has been receiving.

Coincidence? I think not. I shudder to think how this movie would have turned out without Nolan writing it. Probably worse than all superman movies combines.

 

[The Real]

All of the superman films werent very good. This one is better than all of them.

You haven't seen the film.

I dont think superman and wildcats are the same. Im talking about the reasons you go see certain films. I dont go to see superman films to be moved mentally. I got to see fighting and alot of action. You go to see Clark kent and lois lane talk about their problems. Not so much with me, friend.

I go to see Superman to see an entertaining action movie. The movie failed to provide that. One mindless, generic action scene after another isn't entertaining... it's boring.

 

[Mr. Somebody]

You haven't seen the film.



I go to see Superman to see an entertaining action movie. The movie failed to provide that. One mindless, generic action scene after another isn't entertaining... it's boring.

Mindless action as opposed to intelligent action.

 

[The Real]

Mindless action as opposed to intelligent action.

As opposed to entertaining action, which requires some intelligence, yes. You sound like you have no standards for movies at all. You're the type to have Daredevil and Steven Seagal DVDs in your collection.

 

[duncanthetall]

Exactly, different people have different perspectives of the movie they watch.

But if you read the reviews, it's the direction of the movie that the critics have criticized.

Not surprising since this is the same director that made 300 and sucker punch, which I've never watched, but have gotten the same treatment that man of steel has been receiving.

Coincidence? I think not. I shudder to think how this movie would have turned out without Nolan writing it. Probably worse than all superman movies combines.

We'll see. If I see the faults ill (sadly) call it out after I see. Just trying to be optimistic breh

 

[Darts]

As opposed to entertaining action, which requires some intelligence, yes. You sound like you have no standards for movies at all. You're the type to have Daredevil and Steven Seagal DVDs in your collection.

I was kinda with you throughout the thread before this...Steven Seagal got some classics breh

 

[The Real]

I was kinda with you throughout the thread before this...Steven Seagal got some classics breh

Guilty pleasures, sure... but classics?

And if you don't agree there, replace it with something else- American Ninja 4 or something. My point is that dude has no standards.

 

[Mr. Somebody]

As opposed to entertaining action, which requires some intelligence, yes. You sound like you have no standards for movies at all. You're the type to have Daredevil and Steven Seagal DVDs in your collection.

You're saying that this film is on the same level as Daredevil.

 

[Darts]

....... *takes deep Breath*....... You can sit here with a straight face and tell me from an action standpoint that those TF movies did replicate the same type of action that you saw in the cartoons. Mindless action FOH, its a movie about a cartoon based on a kids toy, it wasnt supposed to be story line driven, your crazy for thinking that....... back to topic, too much action in a superhero movie is about the worst critique i have ever heard, like I said fukk a RT and the people who agree with them

Yeah go ahead and take a few more breaths. First I specifically said TF3 not the other two (TF1 was great, TF2 was hot trash).

The final action sequence of Transformers 3 was on some energizer bunny tip...it just kept going and going and going and going. Its was the first time i've ever watched an action movie where I felt like "wrap this shyt up b "

 

[Rapmastermind]

I have never seen a good Superman movie.

"Superman 78" and "Superman II 80" were both Classic films. "Superman III" had it's moments but wasn't great overall. "Superman IV" was a disaster. "Superman Returns" was basically just a homage film to the original films so it had no originality and Brandon Routh was just trying to be Christopher Reeves. So that leaves us here. 26 years since Christopher Reeves put down the costume and Warner Bros has not been able to make a great Superman movie. "Returns" just didn't live up. Both "Smallville" and "Lois and Clark" were both great shows but we just haven't had a great Superman MOVIE in a long time.

Now "Man of Steel" reviews are shocking but it seems even Nolan couldn't save Zack Synder from the critical hatred he gets. Like Michael Bay and M. Knight Shyamalan the Critics have been kinda lukewarm with Zack. "Suckerpunch" didn't help matters. "Watchman" was polarizing. "300" the fans and audiences loved it, the critics were mixed. "Dawn of the Dead" remake was probably the best critical reception he got. As for the criticism I'm hearing, some sound valid but I have to see the film 1st. But the criticism of "Too Much Action", they said the same thing about "Transformers".

Superman is an action superhero movie. If you don't want to see action then you came to the wrong movie. Sure the originals had a nice mix of Action/Drama but I think because Superman I and II are so Classic, critics seem to not be willing to let anything outshine them. "Batman" was a different case cause Nolan really did do the damn thing. So the critics respected it. But Zack turning Superman to an all out Action film may be turning critics off. But that's what I wanted. "Returns" was way to dramatic and nobody gave a damn about Superboy and baby momma drama. But 58% on Rotten Tomatoes for "Man of Steel" is very surprising. And that's exactly the reason why I don't mess with RT like that. They gave "Spiderman 3" a Fresh as well as "Superman Returns". They said "Iron Man 3" was a 78% and I feel like it's really where "Man of Steel" is now, should of been under 60%.