What film did you watch last night?

Combat Fighter said:
This is taken from a review I read last night when I got home from the cinema which pretty much sums up why I came out feeling the way I did. It's got a lot of valid points which I agree with.

I'll be honest here... This movie does not do justice to Superman. I mean, for a person who doesn't know anything about Superman except that he flies around in a blue suit, will find the movie exceptionally good. But for a person who has ever tried to read Superman or watched Superman stuff before, this movie is going to be a disappointment.

The movie doesn't portray what Superman stands for. For the last 75 years, Superman has been a pacifist. He JUST DOESN'T KILL...NO MATTER WHAT.. HE JUST DOESN'T KILL....

SPOILER ALERT: 1. The movie shows that the blue suit was given to Superman by Jor-El. But this hasn't appeared in any version of Superman so far. In fact, its Martha Kent, who gave the suit to him.

2. Clark finds the suit on an abandoned Kryptonian Scout Ship. Now the point to be noted is... the ice around the ship was found to be over 3000 years old... So the ship must have landed there over 3000 years ago... While Clark's age is shown to be only 33 years... Does that mean Jor-El sent a ship to Earth 3000 years ago, with a suit that he wanted to give as a gift to his son 3000 years later??? 3. Jonathan Kent didn't die in a tornado... he died of a heart attack in all versions of Superman ever published...

4. The Genetic data of all kryptonians was never a part of Superman's body cells.. In fact, there were only a handful of survivors which escaped in the bottled city of Kandor.

5. Clark Kent grows up on Earth and spends 33 years of his life adjusting to his powers... Zod does that in minutes?????? 6. The much awaited Superman's Rippled Shield of the house of El which was much advertised... I didn't see in on Superman's suit... I saw it at the end-credits...

7. Superman goes super-sonic??? Blasphemy.... He is the guy who can travel faster than the speed of light... and they only manage to make him go super-sonic??? 8. Superman never lets innocent civilians get hurt... NEVER... He will give up his own life to protect them... Yet in the entire fight sequence he never tries to take the fight away from Metropolis. Instead he keeps on ramming Zod into buildings and brings down half the city...killing God know how many...

9. Helicopter sequence... Superman saves the guy who fell from the Helicopter which has gone out of control... But he lets the pilot and remaining crew perish and crash to the ground.

10. Superman coughs up in smoke... as shown in the movie itself... when he was a kid... he saved a bus from drowning... and then saved Pete Ross too... He is able to hold his breath under water... In the oil- rig scene... he stays under water when the oil rig explodes... When he takes flight for the first time he goes in the orbit in the outer space... all of that... and amidst a little smoke... he stars coughing like he has contracted Tuberculosis??? 11. Superman collapses and "BLEEDS" from the mouth when he enters Zod's ship... Dude.. seriously... Kryptonite makes him weak... and he becomes like an ordinary human in presence of a Red Sun like Krypton had... But never does he BLEED...

12. And the best one of all of them... Zod is trying to kill a few people with his heat vision... Superman has Zod in a vice and he is holding Zod's head... perfectly capable of directing Zod's heat vision wherever he pleases... or he could have covered up Zod's eyes with his hand... But instead... He chose to break his neck... Wow Superman... way to stand by everything to symbolized for the last 75 years...

Believe me when I say this... the movie was good.. but it just wasn't Superman... it was some random guy in a blue suit who flies around killing people.
Click to expand...

I said it with another poster who compared Superman with the Comic, that poster actually LOVED Man of Steel, I thought it was average and wasn't that great.

The point I was making that he compared it to the comics and I said the movie should stand on its own, forget its association to its source material. As the audience, you should only judge the movie from what it is being presented, if it falls shorts then it falls short, if it is good then it is good.

That is how I judge it, same principle when I apply to watching Game of Thrones, where lots of people tell me it is amazing (and then they mention the book), which means what is on screen has failed if you rely on supplimentary material to realise what they tried to convey across.

So, if you think the movie is good if you don't think about the comics then the movie is good. Period.
 
Raymond Lin said:
... I said the movie should stand on its own, forget its association to its source material. As the audience, you should only judge the movie from what it is being presented, ...

That is how I judge it, same principle when I apply to watching Game of Thrones, where lots of people tell me it is amazing (and then they mention the book), which means what is on screen has failed if you rely on supplimentary material to realise what they tried to convey across.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.
If I want to watch a movie, there should be no pre-requisite of having to read a book. A movie or tv show should be able to stand on its own. Similarly, a book should stand on its own (ie. you shouldnt have to watch a movie, to read a book).

I always score a movie based purely on its own merit and not on any other material, I have previously read.
 
A Good Day to Die Hard

:( very disappointing, in fact shocking. An action film I couldn't get into.
4/10
I like all the die hard films, but this wasn't good. I like being able to disengage brain and just be taken along, but this did not keep my attention.
 
Indeed!

It does my head in when reading people's opinions on TV shows, movies (that are based on the comics/books), "nowhere as good as the comics/books, should have kept to the comic/book storyline", especially when it comes to the walking dead........ and even more so when the writers etc. specifically say that they don't want to just copy it exactly.....

I personally find it very silly.
 
Nexus18 said:
Indeed!

It does my head in when reading people's opinions on TV shows, movies (that are based on the comics/books), "nowhere as good as the comics/books, should have kept to the comic/book storyline", especially when it comes to the walking dead........ and even more so when the writers etc. specifically say that they don't want to just copy it exactly.....

I personally find it very silly.
Click to expand...

Yes, and no, most of the time these guys are trying to buy an audience by taking a story people know and then just ignoring huge chunks of it. Its lazy and cheating, if you don't want to do a film/tv version of "story X" then come up with something original.

Fact is its often crap writers who can't come up with anything original but have a few idea's so nick another writers work and force their stuff into it making a half arsed copy and a not quite working story(in a huge number of cases).

I'm getting more and more bored with the lack of originality. Yes the same general ideas get used over and over again. But why redo story X badly when you can do your own thing, stealing the individual parts you want to nick but gelling it with their own ideas and making something new that makes sense.

when you steal a complete idea but add in stuff randomly and leave stuff out randomly you end up with a really disjointed crap. It angers people who were expecting the original content in a new format and new viewers who have no idea about the original content still get a story that just doesn't quite make sense and feels like two different stories mashed together with too much lost in the mix.

Make an entire new film called "Flying man in cape" and get rid of Lois Lane, superman, clark kent, but have another guy who works in another profession, with a girlfriend who works there and he has super powers and a secret identity... still a rip off but you aren't writing contradictory things to other Superman films or the general idea about him.
 
Django Unchained - First time watching this Tarantino "southern" western. It was obviously going to be extremely violent and funny and didn't disappoint! I loved it but if I had to compare it to Inglorious then it would come second but there is no real reason to compare them. Oh and Christoph Waltz is my new hero, two Tarantino films, two great roles, two Oscars - not bad! 5/5
 
Olympus has Fallen. 2/10

Just terrible.

How did the plane get anywhere near Washington without being taken down?
It takes that long for the army to get to the white house when it is attacked?
The secret service are only armed with pistols? within the white house?
It is possible to lock the president's bunker out using the PC in the CCTV room?!?!

I could go on and on.
 
Olympus has fallen is not suppose to be taken seriously! :p it is the equivalent of the good old Arnie and sly Acton films (not as good though!)

Turn your brain of and enjoy it for what it is.
 
Parker - Was like watching two films at once, the bits with Jenn lopez in could have been left out and it would not have affected the story one bit plus would have shaved 30 minutes of the total time of the film.

Overall not bad for a switch off brain and watch type film, won't be watching it a second time though.
5/10
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom