Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Man of Steel, A+ (SPOILER-FILLED)
4 views
Skip to first unread message
KalElFan
Jun 14, 2013, 8:56:20 PM6/14/13
to
SPOILER warning in the thread title...
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
A
R
E
B
E
L
O
W
The movie was heavily spoiled before release and in a
post I identified two "supposed flaws" that seemed to
be getting the most discussion.
1. Superman Kills Zod
Yes, he does but the justification is even clearer than the
spoilers portrayed it. The other Kryptonians aboard the ship
have been disposed of so it's just Superman and Zod left.
Zod says it will only end when one of them is dead, and
the final part of their battle is at a train station. Superman
ends up getting the upper hand and has Zod in a choke
hold from behind. However, Zod begins using heat vision
across a far wall, because a family is there. Superman
warns Zod, but Zod won't stop and so just before the
beam starts frying the family he snaps Zod's neck and
kills him.
There's a good scene right after that where he grieves
having had to do it, and Lois Lane is there too to console
him. I thought it was played perfectly, and I see no way
"They've Made Superman a Killer!" or the like would ever
stick. He had no choice.
2. Non-Linear Pacing
This seemed capital-G Great in the SPOILERS, but again
I thought it was even stronger after seeing it. The first
15 minutes or so is Krypton and the origin story there, but
it gets right to it and never lets up. It's hands down not
just the best Krypton/Baby Kal-El origin IMO, but right up
there with the best opening 15 minutes ever. Very good
action, visuals, effects, and like the rest of the movie I
thought surprisingly good drama, dialogue, and SF. The
pseudo-science and technobabble is good when needed
but doesn't at all weigh the story down.
The dialogue of Crowe's Jor-El and others quickly and
seamlessly explains things at a few points throughout
the movie, such that non-fans of Superman or the genre
can understand it.
After the great Krypton opening sequence, at about the
15-minute mark, rather than get bogged down in a long
Smallville origin story the movie jumps right to the
bearded Clark working on a ship. The ship is in the
vicinity of an oil rig catastrophe in progress. There's a
very well done sequence there where Clark saves lives,
and soon after a flashback shows the saving of a school
bus by Clark. These scenes are a perfect setup for Lois
Lane to track down Clark and his story, such that she
ends up knowing of him, and encountering him, BEFORE
he even puts on the suit though that happens soon after.
Pa Kent dies in a tornado and at least two or three posts
on one board lamented that Clark should have saved him.
That's not the way it plays at all IMO. Most of the scene,
both Clark and Jonathan are helping people get to safety.
Twice Clark has to stop his mother from venturing out to
the area of the road/highway where Jonathan and the
approaching tornado is. Jonathan gets injured, severely
it seemed, and as the tornado is upon him he specifically
signals to Clark that he doesn't want him to try to save
him. There are many onlookers behind Clark that he's
already protecting in a way. It comes across as a "my
time is up" moment, and Clark has a line explaining it
to Lois as he "trusted" his father to make that decision.
That and other scenes were all impressive because of
the way the movie takes care to get it right. It might've
been easy to slip up, but the scenarios worked.
I mentioned the Superman Begins aspect of the movie
based on the ending spoilers where he wears glasses
for the first time as he gets the job at the Daily Planet.
Perry introduces Clark. Lois has the line "Welcome to
the Planet," which has the double-meaning as does
Clark's response "Glad to be here," the last line of the
movie. Superman Begins indeed, and no wonder the
sequel is being fast tracked. Man of Steel aced it.
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
A
R
E
B
E
L
O
W
The movie was heavily spoiled before release and in a
post I identified two "supposed flaws" that seemed to
be getting the most discussion.
1. Superman Kills Zod
Yes, he does but the justification is even clearer than the
spoilers portrayed it. The other Kryptonians aboard the ship
have been disposed of so it's just Superman and Zod left.
Zod says it will only end when one of them is dead, and
the final part of their battle is at a train station. Superman
ends up getting the upper hand and has Zod in a choke
hold from behind. However, Zod begins using heat vision
across a far wall, because a family is there. Superman
warns Zod, but Zod won't stop and so just before the
beam starts frying the family he snaps Zod's neck and
kills him.
There's a good scene right after that where he grieves
having had to do it, and Lois Lane is there too to console
him. I thought it was played perfectly, and I see no way
"They've Made Superman a Killer!" or the like would ever
stick. He had no choice.
2. Non-Linear Pacing
This seemed capital-G Great in the SPOILERS, but again
I thought it was even stronger after seeing it. The first
15 minutes or so is Krypton and the origin story there, but
it gets right to it and never lets up. It's hands down not
just the best Krypton/Baby Kal-El origin IMO, but right up
there with the best opening 15 minutes ever. Very good
action, visuals, effects, and like the rest of the movie I
thought surprisingly good drama, dialogue, and SF. The
pseudo-science and technobabble is good when needed
but doesn't at all weigh the story down.
The dialogue of Crowe's Jor-El and others quickly and
seamlessly explains things at a few points throughout
the movie, such that non-fans of Superman or the genre
can understand it.
After the great Krypton opening sequence, at about the
15-minute mark, rather than get bogged down in a long
Smallville origin story the movie jumps right to the
bearded Clark working on a ship. The ship is in the
vicinity of an oil rig catastrophe in progress. There's a
very well done sequence there where Clark saves lives,
and soon after a flashback shows the saving of a school
bus by Clark. These scenes are a perfect setup for Lois
Lane to track down Clark and his story, such that she
ends up knowing of him, and encountering him, BEFORE
he even puts on the suit though that happens soon after.
Pa Kent dies in a tornado and at least two or three posts
on one board lamented that Clark should have saved him.
That's not the way it plays at all IMO. Most of the scene,
both Clark and Jonathan are helping people get to safety.
Twice Clark has to stop his mother from venturing out to
the area of the road/highway where Jonathan and the
approaching tornado is. Jonathan gets injured, severely
it seemed, and as the tornado is upon him he specifically
signals to Clark that he doesn't want him to try to save
him. There are many onlookers behind Clark that he's
already protecting in a way. It comes across as a "my
time is up" moment, and Clark has a line explaining it
to Lois as he "trusted" his father to make that decision.
That and other scenes were all impressive because of
the way the movie takes care to get it right. It might've
been easy to slip up, but the scenarios worked.
I mentioned the Superman Begins aspect of the movie
based on the ending spoilers where he wears glasses
for the first time as he gets the job at the Daily Planet.
Perry introduces Clark. Lois has the line "Welcome to
the Planet," which has the double-meaning as does
Clark's response "Glad to be here," the last line of the
movie. Superman Begins indeed, and no wonder the
sequel is being fast tracked. Man of Steel aced it.
gangle
Jun 15, 2013, 6:09:07 AM6/15/13
to
"KalElFan" wrote in message
I have always wanted to see. Everything you have written
is wonderfully accurate. My wife and I were overcome with
how amazing it developed and looked, especially in the last
30 minutes. (And my wife was NOT a Superman fan -- but now
IS as she waits for the sequel.) There are several "blah"
reviews out there in the mainstream press, but they are
written by people too concerned with their writing egos
and/or they are just senseless idiots.
Yes, Man of Steel not only aced it, it Super-aced it!
KalElFan
Jun 16, 2013, 3:36:31 PM6/16/13
to
"gangle" wrote in message news:kphe6t$ttc$1...@dont-email.me...
> I am 64 years old, and this is the Superman movie that
> I have always wanted to see. Everything you have written
> is wonderfully accurate...
Thanks! And good to know that you and your wife join the
list of those responding very favorably to the movie. It's
had many glowing reviews like yours and mine from not
just the base like us, but ordinary moviegoers like your
wife, and families with kids as I mention later.
It got an A- from CinemaScore, which polls moviegoers
throughout the U.S. usually on the opening Friday night.
In the under-18 demo and over-50 demo (yours and mine,
I'm 55) it got a full A. Having followed CinemaScore demos
for several years about a decade ago, it's not uncommon
for under 18 to give high scores. But for Superman especially
it's great news that he's attracting the younger set. Many
posts are out there from parents mentioning that their kids
loved the movie.
Older moviegoers tend to be more critical, hence the full
A for over 50 also being impressive. I attribute it in part
to exactly what you wrote. Those who are older have been
through incarnation after incarnation, in multiple media,
that just never quite seemed to get it right. In a few of
those incarnations it became a crash and burn spectacle.
My sister has a co-worker who said she was going with
family members including her 82-year-old grandfather.
He would have been 7 or so when the first comic came
out and I can imagine other seniors like him recognizing
this as the best live-action incarnation. The first Reeve
movie in 1978, sure, but II though IV seemed to almost
compete to drag that down further and further over the
following decade.
Users at IMDb had Man of Steel at 8.3/10 when I checked
in the last 24 hours. Rotten Tomatoes users 82%, Metacritic
users 8.7. But then there are some of those "professional
critic" reviews as you allude to here...
> There are several "blah" reviews out there in the
> mainstream press, but they are written by people
> too concerned with their writing egos and/or they
> are just senseless idiots.
C'mon gangle, don't hold back. Just tell us what you
really think! :-)
Indeed the average score is 6.3/10 and 56% positive,
which is in the < 60% "Rotten" range. The movie's
done great regardless, a June record 3-day opening
weekend, beating out three sequels now at 2, 3 and
4 (a Toy Story, Transformers, and Harry Potter).
The RT rating can have an effect though. Hopefully
here the Word of Mouth from moviegoers and the core
base will counteract that at least in part. I'll have
a follow-up on why I think there's a clear discrepancy
in how the "professional critics" have responded as
a group, vs. the rest of us (on average) who've seen
the movie.
> Yes, Man of Steel not only aced it, it Super-aced it!
And now that the box office success is official, unlike
Superman Returns we will get a sequel and potentially
a great series. More on that later too.
> I am 64 years old, and this is the Superman movie that
> I have always wanted to see. Everything you have written
Thanks! And good to know that you and your wife join the
list of those responding very favorably to the movie. It's
had many glowing reviews like yours and mine from not
just the base like us, but ordinary moviegoers like your
wife, and families with kids as I mention later.
It got an A- from CinemaScore, which polls moviegoers
throughout the U.S. usually on the opening Friday night.
In the under-18 demo and over-50 demo (yours and mine,
I'm 55) it got a full A. Having followed CinemaScore demos
for several years about a decade ago, it's not uncommon
for under 18 to give high scores. But for Superman especially
it's great news that he's attracting the younger set. Many
posts are out there from parents mentioning that their kids
loved the movie.
Older moviegoers tend to be more critical, hence the full
A for over 50 also being impressive. I attribute it in part
to exactly what you wrote. Those who are older have been
through incarnation after incarnation, in multiple media,
that just never quite seemed to get it right. In a few of
those incarnations it became a crash and burn spectacle.
My sister has a co-worker who said she was going with
family members including her 82-year-old grandfather.
He would have been 7 or so when the first comic came
out and I can imagine other seniors like him recognizing
this as the best live-action incarnation. The first Reeve
movie in 1978, sure, but II though IV seemed to almost
compete to drag that down further and further over the
following decade.
Users at IMDb had Man of Steel at 8.3/10 when I checked
in the last 24 hours. Rotten Tomatoes users 82%, Metacritic
users 8.7. But then there are some of those "professional
critic" reviews as you allude to here...
> There are several "blah" reviews out there in the
> mainstream press, but they are written by people
> too concerned with their writing egos and/or they
> are just senseless idiots.
really think! :-)
Indeed the average score is 6.3/10 and 56% positive,
which is in the < 60% "Rotten" range. The movie's
done great regardless, a June record 3-day opening
weekend, beating out three sequels now at 2, 3 and
4 (a Toy Story, Transformers, and Harry Potter).
The RT rating can have an effect though. Hopefully
here the Word of Mouth from moviegoers and the core
base will counteract that at least in part. I'll have
a follow-up on why I think there's a clear discrepancy
in how the "professional critics" have responded as
a group, vs. the rest of us (on average) who've seen
the movie.
> Yes, Man of Steel not only aced it, it Super-aced it!
Superman Returns we will get a sequel and potentially
a great series. More on that later too.
Mike Hall
Jun 16, 2013, 5:05:19 PM6/16/13
to
On 16/06/2013 20:36, KalElFan wrote:
> "gangle" wrote in message news:kphe6t$ttc$1...@dont-email.me...
> "gangle" wrote in message news:kphe6t$ttc$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Yes, Man of Steel not only aced it, it Super-aced it!
>
> And now that the box office success is official, unlike
> Superman Returns we will get a sequel and potentially
> a great series. More on that later too.
My only problems with it were that:
>
> And now that the box office success is official, unlike
> Superman Returns we will get a sequel and potentially
> a great series. More on that later too.
- most of the movie was just a lot of guys snarling at each other.
Superman was a just another American soldier. Only Superboy did any
heroing and his dad told him not to.
- the fight scenes were boring. Although nuking is passe, couldn't they
have at least MOABed the Kryptonians and used lasers on the World Engine?
- the FBI need to be monumentally incompetent to make the plot work.
- Kryptonian spacesuits were stolen off the Engineers in
Alien/Prometheus. Ok, that's an observation, not a real problem.
It was no means a bad film but I'd like to see them raise the ante for
the sequel, like they did in the Christopher Reeve movies.
Mike Hall
Captain Infinity
Jun 16, 2013, 8:40:43 PM6/16/13
to
Once Upon A Time,
high point.
**
Captain Infinity
Mike Hall wrote:
>It was no means a bad film but I'd like to see them raise the ante for
>the sequel, like they did in the Christopher Reeve movies.
Unfortunately, Richard Pryor is dead, so this new series will never hit that
>It was no means a bad film but I'd like to see them raise the ante for
>the sequel, like they did in the Christopher Reeve movies.
high point.
**
Captain Infinity
Mike Hall
Jun 17, 2013, 6:47:57 PM6/17/13
to
Smith as Darkseid in the sequel? This wasn't really Superman II as
Clark didn't go full retard here (aside from not saving his stepfather
surreptitiously).
Mike Hall
Bill Steele
Jun 18, 2013, 2:28:09 PM6/18/13
to
In article <ymMvt.44070$6w5....@fx21.am4>,
Why does it have to be a "sequel?" Why not just another Superman movie,
doing its own thing? And preferably not with Luthor, unless they
"reboot" him, too, as the mad scientist he once was. I wish they'd pick
up on Atom Man, although now he'd have to be Al Qaeda instead of a Nazi.
doing its own thing? And preferably not with Luthor, unless they
"reboot" him, too, as the mad scientist he once was. I wish they'd pick
up on Atom Man, although now he'd have to be Al Qaeda instead of a Nazi.
Mike Hall
Jun 18, 2013, 2:43:39 PM6/18/13
to
On 18/06/2013 19:28, Bill Steele wrote:
> Why does it have to be a "sequel?"
We have had 2 hours of character development, so the plots can be more
> Why does it have to be a "sequel?"
complicated, hopefully making them richer. Also it means that more
focus can be put on the villain/problem development. Only General Zod
got any real characterisation this time.
Finally, it cuts costs if the same CGI technology and costumes can be
used and if the actors are familiar with the routine.
A new generation has been introduced to a new superman, so there is no
reason why he can't fly around a bit.
Mike Hall
KalElFan
Jun 20, 2013, 5:43:53 PM6/20/13
to
IMPORTANT CORRECTION HERE! :-) ...
"KalElFan" wrote in message news:b21sk0...@mid.individual.net...
> SPOILER warning in the thread title...
>
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> S
>
> A
> R
> E
>
> B
> E
> L
> O
> W
>
> ...
"Glad to be here, Lois."
Lois introduces herself (again, just playing along since
she's known that he's Clark Kent for some time), then
has the great "Welcome to the Planet" line, followed by
Clark's final line in the movie. Which makes "Lois" the
last word in the movie. :-)
It's fitting since this is the strongest characterization of
Lois yet, and superbly sets up the already-strong-by-the-
end-of-Man-of-Steel romance for sequels.
"KalElFan" wrote in message news:b21sk0...@mid.individual.net...
> SPOILER warning in the thread title...
>
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> S
>
> A
> R
> E
>
> B
> E
> L
> O
> W
>
>
> I mentioned the Superman Begins aspect of the movie
> based on the ending spoilers where he wears glasses
> for the first time as he gets the job at the Daily Planet.
> Perry introduces Clark. Lois has the line "Welcome to
> the Planet," which has the double-meaning as does
> Clark's response "Glad to be here," the last line of the
> movie. Superman Begins indeed, and no wonder the
> sequel is being fast tracked. Man of Steel aced it.
The last line is actually:
> I mentioned the Superman Begins aspect of the movie
> based on the ending spoilers where he wears glasses
> for the first time as he gets the job at the Daily Planet.
> Perry introduces Clark. Lois has the line "Welcome to
> the Planet," which has the double-meaning as does
> Clark's response "Glad to be here," the last line of the
> movie. Superman Begins indeed, and no wonder the
> sequel is being fast tracked. Man of Steel aced it.
"Glad to be here, Lois."
Lois introduces herself (again, just playing along since
she's known that he's Clark Kent for some time), then
has the great "Welcome to the Planet" line, followed by
Clark's final line in the movie. Which makes "Lois" the
last word in the movie. :-)
It's fitting since this is the strongest characterization of
Lois yet, and superbly sets up the already-strong-by-the-
end-of-Man-of-Steel romance for sequels.
Russell Watson
Jun 23, 2013, 12:55:10 PM6/23/13
to
despite all the points you make in its favor being ones I concur with.
Good stuff:
The non-linear story worked great. Much better to have flashbacks to
Clark's formative years shown as context for the present than a linear
story depicting him growing up in Smallville.
The new Superman/Lois story worked great. I like that she knew he was
Superman before he BECAME Superman, as that business of her trying to
figure out his identity is the most worn-out part of the original story.
Because of the internet guy, everyone else also know she knows his
identity, which sets up the established "Lois Lane is how you get to
Superman" formula.
Based on the original trailers and Jonathan's "I don't know. Maybe..."
answer to "Should I have let them all die?" question I wasn't sure I
would like this version of the character, but once you saw the rest if
fell into place. Due to time constraints he didn't get the development
John Schneider was afforded in "Smallville" but did more with less
screen time than Glenn Ford was allowed in the original movie, and his
death was made much more meaningful.
I also didn't mind that Zod was somewhat less of a straight up
megalomaniacal villain and more the product of his genetic code. They
basically gave him the same treatment that the Star Trek reboot gave to
Khan in that respect.
The LEXCORP tanker trucks: harbingers of things to come.
But then there are the flaws, and they are hard to overlook:
No Kryptonite in this one, but Kryptonian atmosphere turns Kal El into a
normal human who can be strapped to a table and his skin penetrated with
a needle, yet Zod and company wear helmets full of it but are as strong
on Earth as he is? Sorry: doesn't compute in the least! As does their
strength equaling his when he has had 33 years to absorb our suns rays
and they just got here.
Then later, while subjected to near-Kryptonian levels of gravity, which
should have rendered him unable to fly, he zooms around pretty easily. I
know we are supposed to believe he was weakened but somehow found the
effort to prevail, but in defiance of the story's own internal physics
relating to his powers. It would have played better if he had to find a
SMARTER way to win instead of just being able to power through it.
Lastly, I have to agree with the people who think the entire final
battle scene and all the destruction (which appears to have inexplicably
occurred without a massive loss of human life despite the devastation to
the city) just carried on too long and got boring before it was over.
I'm sure it was meant to have been implied and that it was simply not
shown to keep the rating, but it's still a nit I can't help but pick.
Having said all that, I am a decade younger, but like Gangle, this is
still the Superman movie I have always wanted to see. Beats the earlier
attempts hands down, if for no reason other than it seems to be one made
by people who respect the material and the audience and take both
somewhat seriously. The Chris Reeve movies always seemed like a behind-
the-scenes battle between people who wanted to make a serious treatment
and people who said "It's based on a 'funny book': you can't do that!"
and so came out kind of schizo for their efforts. I was also a month shy
of 20 when the first one came out so I don't have the nostalgia for them
that people who were children when they first saw them do.
KalElFan
Jun 25, 2013, 2:53:30 PM6/25/13
to
"Russell Watson" wrote in message news:kq78vi$4q0$1...@dont-email.me...
>> S
>> P
>> O
>> I
>> L
>> E
>> R
>> S
>>
>> A
>> R
>> E
>>
>> B
>> E
>> L
>> O
>> W
[snip my A+ review to get to the very positive aspects of
Russell's review below]
> ... all the points you make in its favor... I concur with.
>
> ... The non-linear story worked great. Much better to have
>
> ... like Gangle, this is... the Superman movie I have
There've been several posts in various threads I hope
to respond to, and other aspects of yours including the
"flaws" issue or nit(s) as you called it at one point. But
on the Lois praise, I fully agree but I think the sequel
will make it even more interesting than you suggest.
The movie makes BOTH Professional Lois AND Romantic
Lois iconic WITHIN the story. It's the best incarnation from
our point of view as viewers for the same reason. It has
both elements of Lois working better than any other, so
it's kind of Doubly-Greatest. :-) But because it's also true
WITHIN the story, it's all Quadruple Great. :-)
We learn she's a Pulitzer-Prize winner in that first scene
at the Daily Planet for example. But by then she has the
unpublished (and still unpublished by the end of the
movie) scoop on the Alien Among Us. She knows that
he's Clark Kent of Smallville. He's already saved her
once, and he's sporadically saved many others in the
four step saving-spree in various places around the
world that she traced back to the school bus saving
in Smallville. She's already met Ma Kent when we get
to that first scene at the Planet with Perry White. So
she knows everything, but neither she nor anyone has
seen Superman in the suit yet.
When Superman shows up, because of the Internet Guy
she gave the story to after Perry wouldn't publish it,
the world knows that she knows who Superman really
is. Internet Guy doesn't because Lois's story withheld
the Clark and Smallville details, but Lois's status at
that point is way beyond Pulitzer Prize. She's in effect
got the Alien Among Us story nailed before anyone
else, and its First Contact flip side is the biggest scoop
in the history of the world.
Then, to cap it off, three Planet staffers see The Kiss
between Superman and Lois after he saves her for the
third time. It takes place right after Lois has been
instrumental in helping destroy Zod's ship (along with
Dr. Hamilton and the American military including the
Colonel played by Meloni who sacrifices himself).
If three Daily Planet staffers saw it, others did too
and there are bound to be cell phone pictures or
videos. So now she and Superman are an item AND
she knows his alter ego.
Recall ealier, the second or middle time Lois was
saved, it's the first time by 'Superman" in the suit.
Yet as he flies off (there's no one around) she
shouts "Clark!". She sees him as Clark, but
everyone else sees her as the World's most
iconic reporter and Superman's girlfriend by
the end of Man of Steel. Clark Kent with the
glasses is as Not Famous as it gets, except to
the extent people may bother him about getting
Lois's autograph perhaps. :-)
In this Man of Steel-verse, where part of the approach
or shtick or conceit or whatever you want to call it is to
make the events like First Contact and Superman seem
"real," it's reasonable to ask how Our World would be
responding. Dwelling on the destruction in a major city
and blaming Superman or the like would make no sense.
He's been established as Of Earth mainly, and he saved
Earth and therefore 7 billion people. He's more a savior
figure. People and the media would more likely be talking
about whether he should be intervening in world crises
or the like to save even more people.
Not to say the carnage would be completely ignored,
but World War II killed 50 million - 70 million people
by many estimates. Yet the end of it is arguably most
famously marked by The Kiss in Times Square:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-J_Day_in_Times_Square
Yes, the 50-70M is still a horrific number, but again in
the context of the Man of Steel-verse it was only a very
small fraction of that, maybe 250K, and it COULD have
been 100 times WWII -- extinction. This is why I think the
very few criticisms (I only saw one) of The Kiss between
Superman and Lois, after Zod's ship has been destroyed
(and after Superman had destroyed the World Engine
linked to it on the other side of the world) misses the
point of the scenario entirely.
I think Lois Lane is probably still the subject of a
perpetual media frenzy by the second movie, or at
least she would have gone through that and got to
a point where it's manageable. It'll be interesting
to see how the sequel handles it. In Our World,
"Superman's Girlfriend Lois Lane" was a comic that
ran from the 50s through early 70s. In the Man of
Steel-verse, "Superman's Girlfriend Lois Lane" is a
real, iconic professional reporter, but also probably
a 24/7 reality show. :-) As famous as Superman in
a way, because the two are so connected and this
has NEVER been so perfectly the case in any other
incarnation.
>> S
>> P
>> O
>> I
>> L
>> E
>> R
>> S
>>
>> A
>> R
>> E
>>
>> B
>> E
>> L
>> O
>> W
Russell's review below]
> ... all the points you make in its favor... I concur with.
>
> ... The non-linear story worked great. Much better to have
> flashbacks to Clark's formative years shown as context
> for the present than a linear story depicting him growing
> up in Smallville.
>
> The new Superman/Lois story worked great. I like that she
> knew he was Superman before he BECAME Superman, as
> that business of her trying to figure out his identity is the
> most worn-out part of the original story. Because of the
> internet guy, everyone else also [knows] she knows his
> for the present than a linear story depicting him growing
> up in Smallville.
>
> The new Superman/Lois story worked great. I like that she
> knew he was Superman before he BECAME Superman, as
> that business of her trying to figure out his identity is the
> most worn-out part of the original story. Because of the
> identity, which sets up the established "Lois Lane is how
> you get to Superman" formula...
>
> ... like Gangle, this is... the Superman movie I have
> always wanted to see. Beats the earlier attempts hands
> down...
There've been several posts in various threads I hope
to respond to, and other aspects of yours including the
"flaws" issue or nit(s) as you called it at one point. But
on the Lois praise, I fully agree but I think the sequel
will make it even more interesting than you suggest.
The movie makes BOTH Professional Lois AND Romantic
Lois iconic WITHIN the story. It's the best incarnation from
our point of view as viewers for the same reason. It has
both elements of Lois working better than any other, so
it's kind of Doubly-Greatest. :-) But because it's also true
WITHIN the story, it's all Quadruple Great. :-)
We learn she's a Pulitzer-Prize winner in that first scene
at the Daily Planet for example. But by then she has the
unpublished (and still unpublished by the end of the
movie) scoop on the Alien Among Us. She knows that
he's Clark Kent of Smallville. He's already saved her
once, and he's sporadically saved many others in the
four step saving-spree in various places around the
world that she traced back to the school bus saving
in Smallville. She's already met Ma Kent when we get
to that first scene at the Planet with Perry White. So
she knows everything, but neither she nor anyone has
seen Superman in the suit yet.
When Superman shows up, because of the Internet Guy
she gave the story to after Perry wouldn't publish it,
the world knows that she knows who Superman really
is. Internet Guy doesn't because Lois's story withheld
the Clark and Smallville details, but Lois's status at
that point is way beyond Pulitzer Prize. She's in effect
got the Alien Among Us story nailed before anyone
else, and its First Contact flip side is the biggest scoop
in the history of the world.
Then, to cap it off, three Planet staffers see The Kiss
between Superman and Lois after he saves her for the
third time. It takes place right after Lois has been
instrumental in helping destroy Zod's ship (along with
Dr. Hamilton and the American military including the
Colonel played by Meloni who sacrifices himself).
If three Daily Planet staffers saw it, others did too
and there are bound to be cell phone pictures or
videos. So now she and Superman are an item AND
she knows his alter ego.
Recall ealier, the second or middle time Lois was
saved, it's the first time by 'Superman" in the suit.
Yet as he flies off (there's no one around) she
shouts "Clark!". She sees him as Clark, but
everyone else sees her as the World's most
iconic reporter and Superman's girlfriend by
the end of Man of Steel. Clark Kent with the
glasses is as Not Famous as it gets, except to
the extent people may bother him about getting
Lois's autograph perhaps. :-)
In this Man of Steel-verse, where part of the approach
or shtick or conceit or whatever you want to call it is to
make the events like First Contact and Superman seem
"real," it's reasonable to ask how Our World would be
responding. Dwelling on the destruction in a major city
and blaming Superman or the like would make no sense.
He's been established as Of Earth mainly, and he saved
Earth and therefore 7 billion people. He's more a savior
figure. People and the media would more likely be talking
about whether he should be intervening in world crises
or the like to save even more people.
Not to say the carnage would be completely ignored,
but World War II killed 50 million - 70 million people
by many estimates. Yet the end of it is arguably most
famously marked by The Kiss in Times Square:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-J_Day_in_Times_Square
Yes, the 50-70M is still a horrific number, but again in
the context of the Man of Steel-verse it was only a very
small fraction of that, maybe 250K, and it COULD have
been 100 times WWII -- extinction. This is why I think the
very few criticisms (I only saw one) of The Kiss between
Superman and Lois, after Zod's ship has been destroyed
(and after Superman had destroyed the World Engine
linked to it on the other side of the world) misses the
point of the scenario entirely.
I think Lois Lane is probably still the subject of a
perpetual media frenzy by the second movie, or at
least she would have gone through that and got to
a point where it's manageable. It'll be interesting
to see how the sequel handles it. In Our World,
"Superman's Girlfriend Lois Lane" was a comic that
ran from the 50s through early 70s. In the Man of
Steel-verse, "Superman's Girlfriend Lois Lane" is a
real, iconic professional reporter, but also probably
a 24/7 reality show. :-) As famous as Superman in
a way, because the two are so connected and this
has NEVER been so perfectly the case in any other
incarnation.
Russell Watson
Jun 25, 2013, 5:51:21 PM6/25/13
to
what they have set up with this movie is the first real partnership we
have seen between them onscreen except maybe in "Lois and Clark", which
I never took seriously because I saw it as basically a chick-oriented
version of the story. I was tickled spitless when I heard that Amy Adams
got the part, one because I think she's a doll, but also because she's a
spunky little critter who I could not see taking on the role as written
for previous gals who have played it. It >almost< made up for my sorrow
that Dana Delaney only ever got to play Lois as a voice part in animated
series.
KalElFan
Jun 25, 2013, 8:05:20 PM6/25/13
to
"Russell Watson" wrote in message news:kqd32l$ech$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> S
>>> P
>>> O
>>> I
>>> L
>>> E
>>> R
>>> S
>>>
>>> A
>>> R
>>> E
>>>
>>> B
>>> E
>>> L
>>> O
>>> W
>
22+ million viewers for an episode where Lois got super
powers. Those numbers were driven by the romance.
The B-plots and villians were pretty stupid but it didn't
matter, again because the romance was riding high. The
show was on a slow and steady path to Lois learning the
secret, then engagement, then marriage which they could
have easily run for 5-7 seasons with.
Instead, they advertised a real wedding in February of
1996, complete with TV Guide photos. Then Lois
turned out to be a frog-eating clone. Within five eps
or so the show had lost about half its viewers, 80%
or so after it got buried on Saturday. The already-
announced season 5 renewal was cancelled and
that was it for the show. It's the quickest and most
spectacular crash and burn in the history of television,
to have so quickly dropped such a high percentage
of its viewership in half a season. It takes at least
a season or two to achieve such a superfeat with
most other spectacularly failing shows!
The moral of the story is that, just as was the case
with the first two Reeve movies, there is enormous
upside in getting the romance right. But if TPTB
break faith with their viewers or audience and frak
it up beyond belief, their series or movie franchise
is dead, Dead, DEAD and it may take years or even
decades to get a crack at another successful reboot.
No pressure or anything. :-) But they need to get the
romance right (check!) but also NOT SCREW IT UP.
If they feel they can't help but screw it up, then they
may as well go the Kingdom Come story route, the
"Elseworlds" where the Joker kills Lois Lane or the
like. That would be an awful waste of the Man of
Steel-verse IMO, but at least more memorable than
a Superman III and IV or Lois & Clark wimper. There
is no reason they can't keep getting it right for a
few more sequels.
Your "chick-oriented" point applied to Lois & Clark
AFTER it broke faith with the viewers. The vast
majority of guys CAN NOT STAND what one male
viewer of Lois & Clark dubbed Romance Gone Bad.
The female AP movie critic in 2006 gave Superman
Returns an absolutely glowing review, possibly the
best of all critics. But it's "highlight" went something
along the lines of how great the impossible romance
was, aching with longing and sadness.
Geez, you didn't even have to have seen the movie to
know that it was in humongous trouble with its core
male demos. As part of the action, effects, etc., they
can love a straight-ahead romance as much as women.
It can take three seasons or three movies to gradually
get there. But give them Romance Gone Bad or the
Triangle thingies (as Lois & Clark had in season 1 and
almost got cancelled because of it -- Lex Luthor was
a regular and courting Lois) and they're outta there.
Same thing with...
"Is she in love with the Vampire Guy or the Werewolf
Guy? Whatever shall she do?"
"Aiiieeeeee!" screams the male market if we could put
a thought bubble over that. :-) It doesn't stop Twilight
from being a successful series, but it's still just a chick
flick niche and always will be. The guys that went were
dragged there by their wives and girlfriends mainly.
On the other hand, superhero fights alone are no way
to attract the female demo in large numbers. One of
the reasons Man of Steel isn't doing even better is,
I believe, that too few know how good the Lois Lane
Professional and Romance elements are in Man of
Steel, and how enormously promising that aspect of
the movie sets up the sequel(s).
> I was tickled spitless when I heard that Amy Adams
> got the part, one because I think she's a doll, but
> also because she's a spunky little critter who I
> could not see taking on the role as written for
> previous gals who have played it...
She tried three times apparently, to get the Lois role,
and it was third time lucky. Not bad for a one-time
Freak of the Week on Smallville Season 1, eh? :-)
At least that's when Smallville was good. :-)
When she was first cast I made the mistake of
thinking her age might be an issue. Cavill is now
30, Adams is 38 (turning 39 in August per IMDb).
With sequels she'd be mid-40s and still 8-9 years
older than him. Thing is, she hasn't aged since
she played the Freak of the Week more than a
decade ago, and she looks more gorgeous. :-)
Botox, portrait in the attic, whatever it is she's
one of those actresses who has no problem at
all playing younger than her age. The Freak of
the Week she played would have been in high
school and she would have been 27 or close at
the time she played that character.
>>> S
>>> P
>>> O
>>> I
>>> L
>>> E
>>> R
>>> S
>>>
>>> A
>>> R
>>> E
>>>
>>> B
>>> E
>>> L
>>> O
>>> W
>
> I agree that she is the best incarnation of the character
> yet, and that what they have set up with this movie is
> the first real partnership we have seen between them
> onscreen except maybe in "Lois and Clark", which I
> never took seriously because I saw it as basically a
> chick-oriented version of the story.
It was a near top 10 show for ABC and had a series high
> yet, and that what they have set up with this movie is
> the first real partnership we have seen between them
> onscreen except maybe in "Lois and Clark", which I
> never took seriously because I saw it as basically a
> chick-oriented version of the story.
22+ million viewers for an episode where Lois got super
powers. Those numbers were driven by the romance.
The B-plots and villians were pretty stupid but it didn't
matter, again because the romance was riding high. The
show was on a slow and steady path to Lois learning the
secret, then engagement, then marriage which they could
have easily run for 5-7 seasons with.
Instead, they advertised a real wedding in February of
1996, complete with TV Guide photos. Then Lois
turned out to be a frog-eating clone. Within five eps
or so the show had lost about half its viewers, 80%
or so after it got buried on Saturday. The already-
announced season 5 renewal was cancelled and
that was it for the show. It's the quickest and most
spectacular crash and burn in the history of television,
to have so quickly dropped such a high percentage
of its viewership in half a season. It takes at least
a season or two to achieve such a superfeat with
most other spectacularly failing shows!
The moral of the story is that, just as was the case
with the first two Reeve movies, there is enormous
upside in getting the romance right. But if TPTB
break faith with their viewers or audience and frak
it up beyond belief, their series or movie franchise
is dead, Dead, DEAD and it may take years or even
decades to get a crack at another successful reboot.
No pressure or anything. :-) But they need to get the
romance right (check!) but also NOT SCREW IT UP.
If they feel they can't help but screw it up, then they
may as well go the Kingdom Come story route, the
"Elseworlds" where the Joker kills Lois Lane or the
like. That would be an awful waste of the Man of
Steel-verse IMO, but at least more memorable than
a Superman III and IV or Lois & Clark wimper. There
is no reason they can't keep getting it right for a
few more sequels.
Your "chick-oriented" point applied to Lois & Clark
AFTER it broke faith with the viewers. The vast
majority of guys CAN NOT STAND what one male
viewer of Lois & Clark dubbed Romance Gone Bad.
The female AP movie critic in 2006 gave Superman
Returns an absolutely glowing review, possibly the
best of all critics. But it's "highlight" went something
along the lines of how great the impossible romance
was, aching with longing and sadness.
Geez, you didn't even have to have seen the movie to
know that it was in humongous trouble with its core
male demos. As part of the action, effects, etc., they
can love a straight-ahead romance as much as women.
It can take three seasons or three movies to gradually
get there. But give them Romance Gone Bad or the
Triangle thingies (as Lois & Clark had in season 1 and
almost got cancelled because of it -- Lex Luthor was
a regular and courting Lois) and they're outta there.
Same thing with...
"Is she in love with the Vampire Guy or the Werewolf
Guy? Whatever shall she do?"
"Aiiieeeeee!" screams the male market if we could put
a thought bubble over that. :-) It doesn't stop Twilight
from being a successful series, but it's still just a chick
flick niche and always will be. The guys that went were
dragged there by their wives and girlfriends mainly.
On the other hand, superhero fights alone are no way
to attract the female demo in large numbers. One of
the reasons Man of Steel isn't doing even better is,
I believe, that too few know how good the Lois Lane
Professional and Romance elements are in Man of
Steel, and how enormously promising that aspect of
the movie sets up the sequel(s).
> I was tickled spitless when I heard that Amy Adams
> got the part, one because I think she's a doll, but
> also because she's a spunky little critter who I
> could not see taking on the role as written for
She tried three times apparently, to get the Lois role,
and it was third time lucky. Not bad for a one-time
Freak of the Week on Smallville Season 1, eh? :-)
At least that's when Smallville was good. :-)
When she was first cast I made the mistake of
thinking her age might be an issue. Cavill is now
30, Adams is 38 (turning 39 in August per IMDb).
With sequels she'd be mid-40s and still 8-9 years
older than him. Thing is, she hasn't aged since
she played the Freak of the Week more than a
decade ago, and she looks more gorgeous. :-)
Botox, portrait in the attic, whatever it is she's
one of those actresses who has no problem at
all playing younger than her age. The Freak of
the Week she played would have been in high
school and she would have been 27 or close at
the time she played that character.
Russell Watson
Jun 25, 2013, 9:57:51 PM6/25/13
to
On 6/25/2013 8:05 PM, KalElFan wrote:
> "Russell Watson" wrote in message news:kqd32l$ech$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> S
>>>> P
>>>> O
>>>> I
>>>> L
>>>> E
>>>> R
>>>> S
>>>>
>>>> A
>>>> R
>>>> E
>>>>
>>>> B
>>>> E
>>>> L
>>>> O
>>>> W
>>
>
> "Russell Watson" wrote in message news:kqd32l$ech$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> S
>>>> P
>>>> O
>>>> I
>>>> L
>>>> E
>>>> R
>>>> S
>>>>
>>>> A
>>>> R
>>>> E
>>>>
>>>> B
>>>> E
>>>> L
>>>> O
>>>> W
>>
>
>> I was tickled spitless when I heard that Amy Adams
>> got the part, one because I think she's a doll, but
>> also because she's a spunky little critter who I
>> could not see taking on the role as written for previous gals who have
>> played it...
>
> She tried three times apparently, to get the Lois role,
> and it was third time lucky. Not bad for a one-time
> Freak of the Week on Smallville Season 1, eh? :-)
> At least that's when Smallville was good. :-)
>
> When she was first cast I made the mistake of
> thinking her age might be an issue. Cavill is now
> 30, Adams is 38 (turning 39 in August per IMDb).
> With sequels she'd be mid-40s and still 8-9 years
> older than him. Thing is, she hasn't aged since
> she played the Freak of the Week more than a
> decade ago, and she looks more gorgeous. :-)
>
> Botox, portrait in the attic, whatever it is she's
> one of those actresses who has no problem at
> all playing younger than her age. The Freak of
> the Week she played would have been in high
> school and she would have been 27 or close at
> the time she played that character.
If I saw her on "Smallville" as a KFOTW it is lost in the mists of time.
>> got the part, one because I think she's a doll, but
>> also because she's a spunky little critter who I
>> could not see taking on the role as written for previous gals who have
>> played it...
>
> She tried three times apparently, to get the Lois role,
> and it was third time lucky. Not bad for a one-time
> Freak of the Week on Smallville Season 1, eh? :-)
> At least that's when Smallville was good. :-)
>
> When she was first cast I made the mistake of
> thinking her age might be an issue. Cavill is now
> 30, Adams is 38 (turning 39 in August per IMDb).
> With sequels she'd be mid-40s and still 8-9 years
> older than him. Thing is, she hasn't aged since
> she played the Freak of the Week more than a
> decade ago, and she looks more gorgeous. :-)
>
> Botox, portrait in the attic, whatever it is she's
> one of those actresses who has no problem at
> all playing younger than her age. The Freak of
> the Week she played would have been in high
> school and she would have been 27 or close at
> the time she played that character.
Almost made a crack about your "...when 'Smallville' was good..."
statement because I'm not sure when that was! :-P In the part I snipped
about L&C you commented on the drudgery of the endless love triangle
(with an apt comparison to "Twilight") and damned if "Smallville" didn't
beat that to death (albeit with Lana instead of Lois, at first) right
out of the starting gate, then threw a few other on again/off again
romances into the mix with Chloe, Lois, Oliver, etc. to make it even
more sickening. Of course I was in my 40s when that show started and the
whole teen aspect was not my deal anyway.
But I digress: Amy was not even on my radar in any form I can recall
until I saw "Enchanted" at the local $1 theater with the ex. I thought
"That is a gorgeous girl!" and assumed she was in her early 20s, so I
was shocked to look her up on IMDb and see that she was 33!
0 new messages