It’s almost like you have to suspend your disbelief when watching a guy flying around in a cape with a flying dog and wearing his pants on the outside of his tights.
Superman: Legacy
- Thread starter hyperseven
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,651
- Location
- Surrey
Yeah within seconds of the eviction being sounded, moments before full sky scrapers of people just watching the show.
Some how a sky scraper falling apart, superman can hold the whole thing up sideways with 2 hands. He's literally touching 4 bricks max, and the building stays together?
It was Superman straight out of the older comics really.
Does it all need to make logical sense? People are too caught up in thinking to hard about thing now they can't seem to just enjoy movies like they used to.
Its about an alien who was sent to earth and can fly and dresses funny. Why must everything make sense as if it's the real world.
Enjoy what? We've seen this movie before in that case. You think we can't be disappointed with a mviie because we should realise it's just a stupid film that doesn't make sense. That film has nothing other than that to offer
I didn’t mind the movie. Was good for what it was but Man of Steel was loads better. The darker Snyder-verse was a good contrast to the MCU stuff but definitely lacked commitment and direction.
Will be interesting to see how the rest of the universe develops.
Will be interesting to see how the rest of the universe develops.
Buddy I will watch Godzilla movies all day long, both east and west, and have an absolute blast. Sometimes the ability to suspend disbelief is too difficult, or something is so poorly done that it doesn't matter. I really don't feel the older Superman stuff aged well, trying to bring about a modernised "old school" era is not the way to do things. Why not come up with something new? Look at the recent TV Superman series, it was genuinely enjoyable and well received, we've never experienced that side of Superman on screen before.
I went to see this earlier with a friend who had a couple of tickets and a cancelled date.
Personally I didn't care for it that much, it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be admittedly and there were one or two good parts. I actually really enjoyed the portrayal of Lex Luthor, but ultimately thought the story relating to his actions was awful. It didn't feel like a Superman movie, the most stand out characters were Nathan Fillion and his haircut, which they actually made a gag out of (I'm deadly serious, it was pointed out to be awful), followed by Mr. Terrific. It almost felt more like an ensemble movie that tried to change direction part way through the production process.
Superman felt like a bit of a wimp, it's almost like they took the whole Cavil extreme and flipped it on its head, which wouldn't necessarily be bad were it done well but it honestly felt more like confused flip flopping. It was very much a "Gunn" movie, which I don't necessarily mind given my favourite MCU movies are the GotG trilogy. It just felt totally out of place with everything going on, almost like they were trying to emulate the height of the MCU rather than put out an actually good DC movie.
I hated the dog, fortunately it wasn't as prominent as I feared.
The cast by and large were actually really good, but while "fun" it didn't mesh and certainly wouldn't inspire me to want to see future DC projects if they're in the same vein. Perhaps I prefer a more focused story and I'm jaded at this point with big group casts for the sake of setting up spin off projects?
I'd give it a 5.5/10, I don't regret actually having seen it but it's a one and done.
I think DC were touching on something with taking a darker tone than the MCU and it fit with a lot of the storylines for major characters, but they watered it down and took half measures rather than going balls in on it. To this day my favourite live action iteration of Batman was Burton and Michael Keaton's.
Last edited:
What's the point in any continuity. Just go watch a film where the story makes no sense and random things happen all the time. Just pretend it's all OK and that you enjoy it none the less, right? Why didn't the buildings just become bendy and not fall over?
It's funny, an alien arriving on earth is actually much more believable that about a million people evacuating a square mile of skyscrapers in about 10 minutes.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,651
- Location
- Surrey
don't forget that bridge being almost entirely empty that when the building almost falls on it, only 1 car almost gets stuck under it, but luckily the whole building doesn't fall apart and crumble when leaning sideways because superman is holding 2 of the bricks from underneath. what a scene.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,543
- Location
- Surrey
You do get the impression some people just go see films to hate them. I can't imagine how boring this film would be if it was "realistic"
It's quite hilarious to me that, that was exactly what I thinking at the precise moment I watched that scene. Spooky.
It's always such a cop out argument to say we should become as dumb as an American to appreciate crap.
"This message was brought to you by Carl's Jr"
It's always such a cop out argument to say we should become as dumb as an American to appreciate crap.
"This message was brought to you by Carl's Jr"
Last edited:
So a man that can fly, shoot lasers from his eye and run at superseded and another being that makes objects from green light is perfectly fine as is a giant kaiju.
But said super being holding up a building where real world physics don't apply is totally unbelievable? Okay that just sounds ridiculous to me. These things have been taking place in comics since the 1930s. It’s escapism from reality. I'm not thinking about physics or mavity reading or watching these things.
That was the point of my post earlier, people take things way too seriously now and why people can't just sit and enjoy the wonder and amazement of a flying man fighting a giant monster, or travling to a pocket universe, or a superpowered dog smacking a bad guy in the face. They feel they need to over analyse and be hyper critical of every aspect. Where is the fun in that.
But said super being holding up a building where real world physics don't apply is totally unbelievable? Okay that just sounds ridiculous to me. These things have been taking place in comics since the 1930s. It’s escapism from reality. I'm not thinking about physics or mavity reading or watching these things.
That was the point of my post earlier, people take things way too seriously now and why people can't just sit and enjoy the wonder and amazement of a flying man fighting a giant monster, or travling to a pocket universe, or a superpowered dog smacking a bad guy in the face. They feel they need to over analyse and be hyper critical of every aspect. Where is the fun in that.
It does feel that way at times, I remember when people were saying it was going to be awful based on some snapped pictures of the suit. I lolled quite hard at that one, because some productions will use multiple suits depending on how long/close a shot is and what is needed*, and almost every film has the colours adjusted either during filming with the choice of lens/lighting, or afterward (I was watching a behind the scenes video of something and the carpet on set was dayglow green, but when you watched the actual finished product it was a normal green due to the choice of lens and application of a colour filter that gave everything a slight darker tint).
It really does feel like some people are negative from the moment something is announced and will find any reason to justify that.
The amusing thing there is that there are videos of buildings, including quite high blocks of flats toppling over largely intact.
Different modes of construction and materials can have some really funky failure modes and unexpected levels of resilience.
Not to forget Lex Luthor's office building, with it's drop off flying greenhouse released, IIRC like all true evil genius devices, by pulling lever
*I can't remember what film it was, but watching the commentary for one a while back one of the people involved casually mentioned they'd had something like 6 different versions of a "superhero" style suit, because they found no single version could look right in all the scenes/all the actions and still be both durable enough, and flexible enough (not to mention any versions needed for the stunts, where they might have impact armour to reduce injuries, or concealed harnesses to allow for wires etc).
Last edited:
I love the passive aggressive non responses to valid criticism in this thread. 
Where did anyone say that exactly?
Edit: Apologies, potato brought it up.
Where did anyone say that exactly?
Edit: Apologies, potato brought it up.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,651
- Location
- Surrey
But these are of course things to find fault with.It does feel that way at times, I remember when people were saying it was going to be awful based on some snapped pictures of the suit. I lolled quite hard at that one, because some productions will use multiple suits depending on how long/close a shot is and what is needed*, and almost every film has the colours adjusted either during filming with the choice of lens/lighting, or afterward (I was watching a behind the scenes video of something and the carpet on set was dayglow green, but when you watched the actual finished product it was a normal green due to the choice of lens and application of a colour filter that gave everything a slight darker tint).
It really does feel like some people are negative from the moment something is announced and will find any reason to justify that.
The amusing thing there is that there are videos of buildings, including quite high blocks of flats toppling over largely intact.
Different modes of construction and materials can have some really funky failure modes and unexpected levels of resilience.
Not to forget Lex Luthor's office building, with it's drop off flying greenhouse released, IIRC like all true evil genius devices, by pulling lever
*I can't remember what film it was, but watching the commentary for one a while back one of the people involved casually mentioned they'd had something like 6 different versions of a "superhero" style suit, because they found no single version could look right in all the scenes/all the actions and still be both durable enough, and flexible enough (not to mention any versions needed for the stunts, where they might have impact armour to reduce injuries, or concealed harnesses to allow for wires etc).
I can hope after the first joker movie, that they continue in that style, and be disappointed and find fault that the second joker movie becomes a musical. Surely you don't post in the joker thread that there is a comic from 100 years ago where the joker is a musical, and that we shouldn't expect better.
Yes aliens that they set up in previous movies and even this, that gain powers from the sun, makes sense. They don't need to go further with this because that's the set up. Buildings that don't crumble when held up by 2 bricks is a paid critique.
Just make superman grab the girl and run. He has super speed and he decides to hold the building maybe, rather than grab the girl and get her out of the way.
It's a stupid film. What was the benefit of that scene? Did you get goosebumps? Did it excite anyone? Wow them? Literally nothing
Superman holding a huge building up to show his strength is a much bigger spectacle than running in and whipping her out of a car of lifting the car out of the way.
Who knows maybe there were others we didn't see on screen as it focused on her just about to be crushed in her car.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 3,746
I'm still sore that we didn't get to see the sequel to the Snyder cut of Justice League. Nobody does live action like Snyder, and the Darkseid confrontation would have been epic.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,651
- Location
- Surrey
Sure, but this isn't a comic with just static images. This is a movie, in 2025. There are a billion more interesting ways to show his strength no?
The thing is in some ways it's quite a throw away nothing scene, but the trouvle is the movie doesn't have much else. These are the best "heroic" moments to show superman at his best.
My thoughts entirely. Throw away scenes and goofy action, it's a comedy.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 9,945
- Location
- London UK
Just got back from seeing this and really enjoyed it. As much as I liked Cavil it was good to see Superman being done differently and yes there there was a shed load of characters being thrown at you left, right and centre but the pacing worked and would say James Gunn has pulled off creating a DC Universe in a single film where previous films kinda failed.
8/10 for me.
8/10 for me.
James Gunn blames ‘anti-American sentiment’ for Superman’s international performance
‘Superman is not a well-known superhero in some places like Batman is,’ claimed the director
www.independent.co.uk
Lol, let the excuses flow.
What excuses, its total BO is at least $430 million so far. Its done reasonably well.James Gunn blames ‘anti-American sentiment’ for Superman’s international performance
‘Superman is not a well-known superhero in some places like Batman is,’ claimed the director
Lol, let the excuses flow.
Funny, but that article is one of the laziest articles I've ever readJames Gunn blames ‘anti-American sentiment’ for Superman’s international performance
‘Superman is not a well-known superhero in some places like Batman is,’ claimed the director
Lol, let the excuses flow.
er, no