Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Man of Steel - What Flaw(s) Might It Have? (SPOILERS)
5 views
Skip to first unread message
KalElFan
Jun 7, 2013, 5:08:23 PM6/7/13
to
Haven't seen it, but with all the trailers, interviews, press conferences
and the like, and the review embargo being broken reliably enough in
the last 24-48 hours, anyone who's fine with spoilers (like me! :-))
might already know quite a bit about the movie. In fact pretty much
everything. :-) It won't affect my enjoyment when I see it, but for
some it might so let's be meticulous about more SPOILER space
despite the warning also being in the thread title...
S
U
P
E
R
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
A
R
E
B
E
L
O
W
E
H
What I'm hoping, and what I think is possible, is that the movie has
no flaws. Yes, a Flawless Superman Movie is what I'm rooting for.
We've never had one and this would be a first. Marvel's had more
than one flawless movie IMO, and the Batman / TDK trilogy is darn
close to flawless too. I'd have a few nitpicks perhaps, but all three
were darn good. Superman, never happened yet in 75 years. Parts
of I and II were superb, but that combo had flaws
Man of Steel will have some controversy, though, and there will be
people who disagree that is has no flaws. Let's start with how a
bunch of Kryptonians led by Zod are going to be disposed of. The
trailers alone, including the great Nokia one released yesterday,
make this an obvious issue. At the end there, Jor-El's holo-avatar
tells his son that he can "save them all". How?
Does Kal have a Phantom Zone Projector? Gold K? Will Zod and
his crew fall for the ol' Red Sun Rays switcheroo treatment at the
end of the 1980 movie? Does he shrink them all and banish them
to the Bottled City of Kandor? Give Zod the ol' amnesia superkiss
and make him think he's a car salesman? Rank these by Degree
of Modern Lameness, if you like, but rest assured no none of those
happen. The last one might, or perhaps should, in parody versions. :-)
No, at least one apparently reliable account indicates that for Zod,
Superman personally kills him. Just snaps his neck is the way I've
seen it described - quick but very effective. I'd have preferred a bit
different way than that, but it works for me. The rest of them get
dispatched indirectly via an attack on their ship.
This is already getting a few folks up in arms, because they think
Superman should never kill. But to me it was obvious that was
the way to do it. He's not Superpacifist Idiot Man, which he would
have to be to refuse to kill any one or all of the frakers who were
trying to invade and take over his adopted home planet, killing
Earth folk indiscriminately along the way. So he does the Right
Thing. He kills the fraker. Had to be done. He gets appropriately
choked up about having had to do it.
One supposes they could have had Zod getting impaled on a
sharp kryptonite object after Superman pushes him off a platform,
but screw that IMHO. :-) So I like it, but to others maybe this will
be bigger than just a flaw, it'll be like a sacrilege. We'll see.
From the trailers and the massive lightning bolts for heat vision
that were coming out of Superman's eyes, I was kinda hoping
that might be how he dispatched Zod. Superman's been on Earth
all his life, these new arrivals haven't, and maybe that was what
Jor-El was getting at on how he can save them all. He can power
up much more, like a super solar battery, which is why we see
those scenes in orbit is what I was hoping. Then he heads back
like Zeus and fries Zod with those stereo lightning bolts.
Anyway, more spoilers in followup posts perhaps, or perhaps not.
But that killin' thing seems to be the biggie for some. At one point
I thought they might actually kill off Lois Lane, in part because
Warners has so fraked that relationship up every single time and
in part because of the concern they were about to lose the rights
and Lois was there in the 1938 comic. But a U.S. 9th Circuit Judge
named Otis (yes, Otis) got Warners out of that. So whether they
ever half thought of it or not, a Death of Lois and he moves on to
Wonder Woman in a sequel ain't happening. And that, of course,
may be somebody's else's flaw in this and any sequel movie. :-)
and the like, and the review embargo being broken reliably enough in
the last 24-48 hours, anyone who's fine with spoilers (like me! :-))
might already know quite a bit about the movie. In fact pretty much
everything. :-) It won't affect my enjoyment when I see it, but for
some it might so let's be meticulous about more SPOILER space
despite the warning also being in the thread title...
S
U
P
E
R
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
A
R
E
B
E
L
O
W
E
H
What I'm hoping, and what I think is possible, is that the movie has
no flaws. Yes, a Flawless Superman Movie is what I'm rooting for.
We've never had one and this would be a first. Marvel's had more
than one flawless movie IMO, and the Batman / TDK trilogy is darn
close to flawless too. I'd have a few nitpicks perhaps, but all three
were darn good. Superman, never happened yet in 75 years. Parts
of I and II were superb, but that combo had flaws
Man of Steel will have some controversy, though, and there will be
people who disagree that is has no flaws. Let's start with how a
bunch of Kryptonians led by Zod are going to be disposed of. The
trailers alone, including the great Nokia one released yesterday,
make this an obvious issue. At the end there, Jor-El's holo-avatar
tells his son that he can "save them all". How?
Does Kal have a Phantom Zone Projector? Gold K? Will Zod and
his crew fall for the ol' Red Sun Rays switcheroo treatment at the
end of the 1980 movie? Does he shrink them all and banish them
to the Bottled City of Kandor? Give Zod the ol' amnesia superkiss
and make him think he's a car salesman? Rank these by Degree
of Modern Lameness, if you like, but rest assured no none of those
happen. The last one might, or perhaps should, in parody versions. :-)
No, at least one apparently reliable account indicates that for Zod,
Superman personally kills him. Just snaps his neck is the way I've
seen it described - quick but very effective. I'd have preferred a bit
different way than that, but it works for me. The rest of them get
dispatched indirectly via an attack on their ship.
This is already getting a few folks up in arms, because they think
Superman should never kill. But to me it was obvious that was
the way to do it. He's not Superpacifist Idiot Man, which he would
have to be to refuse to kill any one or all of the frakers who were
trying to invade and take over his adopted home planet, killing
Earth folk indiscriminately along the way. So he does the Right
Thing. He kills the fraker. Had to be done. He gets appropriately
choked up about having had to do it.
One supposes they could have had Zod getting impaled on a
sharp kryptonite object after Superman pushes him off a platform,
but screw that IMHO. :-) So I like it, but to others maybe this will
be bigger than just a flaw, it'll be like a sacrilege. We'll see.
From the trailers and the massive lightning bolts for heat vision
that were coming out of Superman's eyes, I was kinda hoping
that might be how he dispatched Zod. Superman's been on Earth
all his life, these new arrivals haven't, and maybe that was what
Jor-El was getting at on how he can save them all. He can power
up much more, like a super solar battery, which is why we see
those scenes in orbit is what I was hoping. Then he heads back
like Zeus and fries Zod with those stereo lightning bolts.
Anyway, more spoilers in followup posts perhaps, or perhaps not.
But that killin' thing seems to be the biggie for some. At one point
I thought they might actually kill off Lois Lane, in part because
Warners has so fraked that relationship up every single time and
in part because of the concern they were about to lose the rights
and Lois was there in the 1938 comic. But a U.S. 9th Circuit Judge
named Otis (yes, Otis) got Warners out of that. So whether they
ever half thought of it or not, a Death of Lois and he moves on to
Wonder Woman in a sequel ain't happening. And that, of course,
may be somebody's else's flaw in this and any sequel movie. :-)
BTR1701
Jun 7, 2013, 10:50:32 PM6/7/13
to
"KalElFan" <kale...@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> What I'm hoping, and what I think is possible, is that the movie has
> no flaws. Yes, a Flawless Superman Movie is what I'm rooting for.
Well, that ship has already sailed. With a score by Hans Zimmer, it's
> What I'm hoping, and what I think is possible, is that the movie has
> no flaws. Yes, a Flawless Superman Movie is what I'm rooting for.
anything but flawless.
KalElFan
Jun 8, 2013, 1:58:01 PM6/8/13
to
"BTR1701" wrote in message
news:1252701642392350345.456294...@news.giganews.com...
Well, with 8 Oscar nominations and a win, and maybe 9 and 2 after
Man of Steel, I doubt many will be citing the score as a flaw. The
trailer showcases his score, with Crowe's words bookending the
rapid-fire cuts highlighting the superfights, effects, romance and
whole gamut of great visuals from the movie.
Out of 4.5 million views in barely 2 days, 803 or 1 in 5,620 have
currently voted it thumbs down. It's been extremely well received
and consistently had higher % thumbs up than even the best movie
trailers, at every level of views since it was put up on Thursday.
(Viewers have to have an account to vote so as views get up in
the 100K and millions the *percentage* of thumbs up do go way
down, but during the earlier run-up the % for this trailer was
consistently higher than the best other trailers at different view
levels.)
Glowing praise for the trailer fills the internet, from AICN to any
major site you can think of with SF or movie-related Comments or
Talkbacks and the like. By tomorrow sometime, after about three
days, the trailer will likely surpass Nokia's Dark Knight one for
most viewed of the 808 videos or so on its site.
The first time I saw the trailer I didn't realize how good it was.
It's only 2 minutes 14 seconds, starting rather silently and then
the Crowe voiceover, followed by a slightly louder Crowe on
screen. Then the barrage of visuals starts, with this interesting,
original-sounding score that really enhances it throughout. Then
the stop near the end for Crowe, followed by a drumbeat-using
flourish with an almost buzz-like part a couple of times during it.
I didn't even notice that end part the first time through. One
poster mentioned that the score had evoked Terminator 2
and I had no idea what he was talking about. When I went
back the second time, I realized okay that was the very end
with the drumbeat. It is superficially similar to T2 in that
sense, or BSG or anything that uses drumbeats. But still
original, in particular that buzz-like part. I've interpreted it
as possibly deriving from the lightning-like heat vision that
we see in visuals. It sounds like that heat vision searing
through Kryptonian villian steel perhaps. :-)
Anyway, the second time as I was searching for that T2-
evoking part and finally found it at the end, I realized how
fraking great the trailer really was, because of the music
and the way it really enhanced the barrage of visuals. No
talkey, or very little with the guy you'd want to do the very
little talkey. :-) Then that great drumbeat part at the end.
So no, if Hans ever was The Flaw in any of his movies,
there's no way he was in this one. But I'll put your flaw
3rd on the list of Supposed Flaws. First was the one in
the original thread, and second to follow in a bit.
news:1252701642392350345.456294...@news.giganews.com...
Man of Steel, I doubt many will be citing the score as a flaw. The
trailer showcases his score, with Crowe's words bookending the
rapid-fire cuts highlighting the superfights, effects, romance and
whole gamut of great visuals from the movie.
Out of 4.5 million views in barely 2 days, 803 or 1 in 5,620 have
currently voted it thumbs down. It's been extremely well received
and consistently had higher % thumbs up than even the best movie
trailers, at every level of views since it was put up on Thursday.
(Viewers have to have an account to vote so as views get up in
the 100K and millions the *percentage* of thumbs up do go way
down, but during the earlier run-up the % for this trailer was
consistently higher than the best other trailers at different view
levels.)
Glowing praise for the trailer fills the internet, from AICN to any
major site you can think of with SF or movie-related Comments or
Talkbacks and the like. By tomorrow sometime, after about three
days, the trailer will likely surpass Nokia's Dark Knight one for
most viewed of the 808 videos or so on its site.
The first time I saw the trailer I didn't realize how good it was.
It's only 2 minutes 14 seconds, starting rather silently and then
the Crowe voiceover, followed by a slightly louder Crowe on
screen. Then the barrage of visuals starts, with this interesting,
original-sounding score that really enhances it throughout. Then
the stop near the end for Crowe, followed by a drumbeat-using
flourish with an almost buzz-like part a couple of times during it.
I didn't even notice that end part the first time through. One
poster mentioned that the score had evoked Terminator 2
and I had no idea what he was talking about. When I went
back the second time, I realized okay that was the very end
with the drumbeat. It is superficially similar to T2 in that
sense, or BSG or anything that uses drumbeats. But still
original, in particular that buzz-like part. I've interpreted it
as possibly deriving from the lightning-like heat vision that
we see in visuals. It sounds like that heat vision searing
through Kryptonian villian steel perhaps. :-)
Anyway, the second time as I was searching for that T2-
evoking part and finally found it at the end, I realized how
fraking great the trailer really was, because of the music
and the way it really enhanced the barrage of visuals. No
talkey, or very little with the guy you'd want to do the very
little talkey. :-) Then that great drumbeat part at the end.
So no, if Hans ever was The Flaw in any of his movies,
there's no way he was in this one. But I'll put your flaw
3rd on the list of Supposed Flaws. First was the one in
the original thread, and second to follow in a bit.
KalElFan
Jun 8, 2013, 10:12:58 PM6/8/13
to
Many more specific spoilers here, Supposed Flaw #2, and some Superhero
Movie Standards to Beat.
> "KalElFan" wrote in message news:b1f0eu...@mid.individual.net...
>
> ... let's be meticulous about more SPOILER space despite the warning
> of I and II were superb, but that combo had flaws...
>
> Superman personally kills [Zod]. Just snaps his neck...
>
> ... He gets appropriately choked up about having had to do it.
So that's Supposed Flaw #1, but to provide further context Zod and his
cohorts have already probably killed thousands at that point in their
early terraforming (krypto-forming really). It's not specifically shown
as thousands dying but from the destruction it can be inferred. Zod
is also, in the final battle, in the process of using heat vision to fry
a nearby family, as he tries to divert Superman away from him. So
Superman has to stop that heat vision attack, and Zod and the
Kryptonians generally. In doing so he ends up snapping Zod's neck
and killing him. Personally, I think this Supposed Flaw, while it's
likely to get buzz, won't hurt.
Since the last post I've seen much more confirming evidence of the
Superman Kills Zod spoiler and the other major spoilers. One site,
not AICN but in that league in the rankings, has a board that's into
its second 1,000-post block dedicated to spoilers for the movie and
again multiple reliable posters or attestations from regulars that
the spoilers are genuine. There've been early showings not just
for the press but in at least five cities I think it is, and it's all
getting leaked out. It started as far back as Tuesday last week,
maybe a bit earlier, and it's pretty much a complete spoil package
at this point. The effect of knowing all these spoilers, within
fandom, is on the whole I think extremely positive not negative.
The sense one gets is the movie is no worse than an 8/10 on the
lower side reviews, and most are now viewing it as potentially
great and can't wait to see it.
So 1 is "Superman Kills Zod" and the second Supposed Flaw I'm
going to label:
2. Non-Linear Pacing
This encompasses a lot of things, but for example that 8/10 review
was not 9/10 or 10/10 because the reviewer felt the pace was too
quick! The press conference in LA also got a questioner asking Zach
Snyder about his decision to take a "non-linear" approach, though
it wasn't clear if he was admiring the technique or skeptical of it.
Even the 8/10 poster acknowledged he could be wrong about how
it will be perceived and/or received, and even he seemed ambivalent
noting the aversion many have to long origin stories for example.
Well, this movie avoids that and gets right to it very early. Various
backstory elements are then interspersed with the main action or
A-plot, which is the arrival of Zod and his cohorts, then the battles
in Smallville and later Metropolis.
So for example Pa Kent dies in a twister, but by the time we see
it it's flashback. Cavill's Clark is the linear scene for that then it
flashes back. Clark Kent is in the movie, but the reason we never
see him in the glasses in any of the trailers is because he only
joins the Daily Planet in Metropolis, and puts on the glasses for
the first time, at the end of the movie. Lois has long since known
that Clark Kent from Smallville is Superman, from her earlier
investigative work tracking down Clark Kent of Smallville and
making the connection.
The dynamic is apparently Lois knows in the trailer investigation
scene, the one where Superman is in handcuffs in the room and
she's talking to him, that she's talking to the guy who's secretly
Clark Kent. :-) He's just started up his Superman persona, but
as Clark Kent of Smallville he'd left enough of a trail as this Guy
Who Does Impossible Things that she'd figured it out.
So it's a really neat twist in a way, that Lois doesn't learn Clark
Kent is Superman at some point in the sequel, or ever. Superman
goes public, and she knows he's secretly Clark Kent. :-) By the
end of the movie, she's playing along and I think she's the one
who has the apparently great line to him "Welcome to the Planet."
As in the Daily Planet, but by then "Superman", in defeating Zod,
has also been Welcomed to Our Planet. So it has the double
meaning, and again it's a great line when you think about it. It
may be the last line of the movie but if not it should be IMO, and
it's at least close to the last line based on the spoilers.
The movie could have been titled Superman Begins, the first in
the Nolan Superman trilogy perhaps. :-) The beauty and twists
in it are really all tied up in that Non-Linear Pacing aspect of the
movie. It's not a Flaw, it's Genius. It's a technique used in the
Batman/TDK trilogy, and in Arrow which is DC on The CW, and
in Person of Interest which is Nolan's brother, all to very good
effect. But I think the greatest effect may be Man of Steel.
For 75 years in pretty much every incarnation, it's been much
more a linear story. Krypton, Smallville, Superman shows up,
the villain, the battle, end of story. Superman Returns is the
one exception, but completely screwed up beyond belief because
of the huge, central flaw of Superman buggering off to Krypton,
or rather its former vicinity, in search of its debris. He did this
for seven years or whatever it was, abandoning Earth and Lois
and his kid. It led to a domino effect that encompasses pretty
much every other flaw in the movie. It could actually have all
been rectified pretty easily in a sequel with one simple fix, but
they chose to reboot instead.
Here, we have the exact opposite and the exactly correct premise.
Superman is Of Earth much more than Krypton, and his introduction
demonstrates that by defeating Zod and his cohorts. Only at the
very end does he join the Daily Planet in Metropolis, with the
glasses, the historically conventional starting point of the Superman
story (as opposed to backstory). Again, it's Superman Begins.
There are other reasons why it's Genius, but I think this Non-Linear
Pacing one -- that technique and what it allowed the movie to do --
is key and I think it'll be quickly perceived as that. But the 8/10
guy and others like him might not be sure at first. If you long for
half a movie of No Superman until he finally shows up as in the
1978 one, if you wanted that AGAIN, well you're completely out
of luck. I much prefer what they did, look forward to seeing it, and
believe it has the potential to do TDK business. Batman Begins
did not do TDK business, it only made about $6M more domestic
than Superman Returns did ($206M vs $200 million.)
In fact SR did more overseas than BB ($191M vs $167M), so SR
had more total box office. SR cost a lot more but mostly because
of sunk development costs going back more than a decade prior.
So it's ironic here that Man of Steel aka Superman Begins, is
supplanting a Superman movie that actually surpassed Batman
Begins in box office, while Man of Steel will massively surpass
Batman Begins which spawned two Top 10 All-Time sequels.
The Dark Knight is #4 all time, The Dark Knight Returns #7 all
time.
Yeah, this will be 175 lines or so but nobody's forced you to read
it, eh? It'll be interesting to see what the reviews are starting
Monday at 10 when the embargo lifts, but I think there's a good
chance the RT score will be over 90, maybe even 95+. Batman
Begins was 85% and 7.7/10, The Dark Knight 94% and 8.5/10,
and The Dark Knight Rises 87% and 8/10. Avengers was 92%
and 8/10, Spider-Man 2 was 93% and 8.3/10, and Iron Man 93%
and 7.7/10. Superman (1978) was a different time but also has
a score, 93% and 8/10. Superman Returns was 76% and 7/10.
If we're looking for a standard among all that for Man of Steel,
anything less than the 85% and 7.7/10 for Batman Begins will
be a disappointment I think, and leave Superman (1978) ahead
with the 93% and 8/10. If Man of Steel manages 95%, or more
and at least 8.5/10, then it beats The Dark Knight and its
highest score above. That would be a huge, huge success.
Movie Standards to Beat.
> "KalElFan" wrote in message news:b1f0eu...@mid.individual.net...
>
> ... let's be meticulous about more SPOILER space despite the warning
>
> Man of Steel will have some controversy, though, and there will be
> people who disagree that [it] has no flaws...
> Man of Steel will have some controversy, though, and there will be
>
> Superman personally kills [Zod]. Just snaps his neck...
>
> ... He gets appropriately choked up about having had to do it.
So that's Supposed Flaw #1, but to provide further context Zod and his
cohorts have already probably killed thousands at that point in their
early terraforming (krypto-forming really). It's not specifically shown
as thousands dying but from the destruction it can be inferred. Zod
is also, in the final battle, in the process of using heat vision to fry
a nearby family, as he tries to divert Superman away from him. So
Superman has to stop that heat vision attack, and Zod and the
Kryptonians generally. In doing so he ends up snapping Zod's neck
and killing him. Personally, I think this Supposed Flaw, while it's
likely to get buzz, won't hurt.
Since the last post I've seen much more confirming evidence of the
Superman Kills Zod spoiler and the other major spoilers. One site,
not AICN but in that league in the rankings, has a board that's into
its second 1,000-post block dedicated to spoilers for the movie and
again multiple reliable posters or attestations from regulars that
the spoilers are genuine. There've been early showings not just
for the press but in at least five cities I think it is, and it's all
getting leaked out. It started as far back as Tuesday last week,
maybe a bit earlier, and it's pretty much a complete spoil package
at this point. The effect of knowing all these spoilers, within
fandom, is on the whole I think extremely positive not negative.
The sense one gets is the movie is no worse than an 8/10 on the
lower side reviews, and most are now viewing it as potentially
great and can't wait to see it.
So 1 is "Superman Kills Zod" and the second Supposed Flaw I'm
going to label:
2. Non-Linear Pacing
This encompasses a lot of things, but for example that 8/10 review
was not 9/10 or 10/10 because the reviewer felt the pace was too
quick! The press conference in LA also got a questioner asking Zach
Snyder about his decision to take a "non-linear" approach, though
it wasn't clear if he was admiring the technique or skeptical of it.
Even the 8/10 poster acknowledged he could be wrong about how
it will be perceived and/or received, and even he seemed ambivalent
noting the aversion many have to long origin stories for example.
Well, this movie avoids that and gets right to it very early. Various
backstory elements are then interspersed with the main action or
A-plot, which is the arrival of Zod and his cohorts, then the battles
in Smallville and later Metropolis.
So for example Pa Kent dies in a twister, but by the time we see
it it's flashback. Cavill's Clark is the linear scene for that then it
flashes back. Clark Kent is in the movie, but the reason we never
see him in the glasses in any of the trailers is because he only
joins the Daily Planet in Metropolis, and puts on the glasses for
the first time, at the end of the movie. Lois has long since known
that Clark Kent from Smallville is Superman, from her earlier
investigative work tracking down Clark Kent of Smallville and
making the connection.
The dynamic is apparently Lois knows in the trailer investigation
scene, the one where Superman is in handcuffs in the room and
she's talking to him, that she's talking to the guy who's secretly
Clark Kent. :-) He's just started up his Superman persona, but
as Clark Kent of Smallville he'd left enough of a trail as this Guy
Who Does Impossible Things that she'd figured it out.
So it's a really neat twist in a way, that Lois doesn't learn Clark
Kent is Superman at some point in the sequel, or ever. Superman
goes public, and she knows he's secretly Clark Kent. :-) By the
end of the movie, she's playing along and I think she's the one
who has the apparently great line to him "Welcome to the Planet."
As in the Daily Planet, but by then "Superman", in defeating Zod,
has also been Welcomed to Our Planet. So it has the double
meaning, and again it's a great line when you think about it. It
may be the last line of the movie but if not it should be IMO, and
it's at least close to the last line based on the spoilers.
The movie could have been titled Superman Begins, the first in
the Nolan Superman trilogy perhaps. :-) The beauty and twists
in it are really all tied up in that Non-Linear Pacing aspect of the
movie. It's not a Flaw, it's Genius. It's a technique used in the
Batman/TDK trilogy, and in Arrow which is DC on The CW, and
in Person of Interest which is Nolan's brother, all to very good
effect. But I think the greatest effect may be Man of Steel.
For 75 years in pretty much every incarnation, it's been much
more a linear story. Krypton, Smallville, Superman shows up,
the villain, the battle, end of story. Superman Returns is the
one exception, but completely screwed up beyond belief because
of the huge, central flaw of Superman buggering off to Krypton,
or rather its former vicinity, in search of its debris. He did this
for seven years or whatever it was, abandoning Earth and Lois
and his kid. It led to a domino effect that encompasses pretty
much every other flaw in the movie. It could actually have all
been rectified pretty easily in a sequel with one simple fix, but
they chose to reboot instead.
Here, we have the exact opposite and the exactly correct premise.
Superman is Of Earth much more than Krypton, and his introduction
demonstrates that by defeating Zod and his cohorts. Only at the
very end does he join the Daily Planet in Metropolis, with the
glasses, the historically conventional starting point of the Superman
story (as opposed to backstory). Again, it's Superman Begins.
There are other reasons why it's Genius, but I think this Non-Linear
Pacing one -- that technique and what it allowed the movie to do --
is key and I think it'll be quickly perceived as that. But the 8/10
guy and others like him might not be sure at first. If you long for
half a movie of No Superman until he finally shows up as in the
1978 one, if you wanted that AGAIN, well you're completely out
of luck. I much prefer what they did, look forward to seeing it, and
believe it has the potential to do TDK business. Batman Begins
did not do TDK business, it only made about $6M more domestic
than Superman Returns did ($206M vs $200 million.)
In fact SR did more overseas than BB ($191M vs $167M), so SR
had more total box office. SR cost a lot more but mostly because
of sunk development costs going back more than a decade prior.
So it's ironic here that Man of Steel aka Superman Begins, is
supplanting a Superman movie that actually surpassed Batman
Begins in box office, while Man of Steel will massively surpass
Batman Begins which spawned two Top 10 All-Time sequels.
The Dark Knight is #4 all time, The Dark Knight Returns #7 all
time.
Yeah, this will be 175 lines or so but nobody's forced you to read
it, eh? It'll be interesting to see what the reviews are starting
Monday at 10 when the embargo lifts, but I think there's a good
chance the RT score will be over 90, maybe even 95+. Batman
Begins was 85% and 7.7/10, The Dark Knight 94% and 8.5/10,
and The Dark Knight Rises 87% and 8/10. Avengers was 92%
and 8/10, Spider-Man 2 was 93% and 8.3/10, and Iron Man 93%
and 7.7/10. Superman (1978) was a different time but also has
a score, 93% and 8/10. Superman Returns was 76% and 7/10.
If we're looking for a standard among all that for Man of Steel,
anything less than the 85% and 7.7/10 for Batman Begins will
be a disappointment I think, and leave Superman (1978) ahead
with the 93% and 8/10. If Man of Steel manages 95%, or more
and at least 8.5/10, then it beats The Dark Knight and its
highest score above. That would be a huge, huge success.
KalElFan
Jun 9, 2013, 4:51:15 PM6/9/13
to
On rec.arts.movies.current-films, "Inkan1969" wrote in message
news:9c1adc3a-7a30-4431...@googlegroups.com...
> Having Zach Snyder as the director for a start. :-P
Just realized it's Zack not Zach everywhere I look. :-)
It was definitely a concern. He has three Fresh movies on RT and
all of them (Dawn of the Dead, Watchmen, 300) are below what
Superman Returns had. DotD 75% 6.7/10, Watchmen 64% 6.2/10
and 300 60% 6.1/10. He has a few others in the Rotten range, i.e.
< 60%. Hopefully more experience and Nolan's and everyone
else's involvement will make this his best. SPOILER SPACE...
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
A
R
E
B
E
L
O
W
One of the producers I believe said that everyone was on the same
page going into this movie. I took this as a polite way of saying that
there really wasn't any room for "Snyder's Vision" to apply here. He
was hired to execute the plan as approved by Warners and Nolan
primarily, and they thought he'd be good at doing that. That his
"vision" would be able to fit well enough with theirs.
For example Nolan is arguably the Original Non-Linear Guy with
Memento. :-) His brother uses it in Person of Interest and Warners
and DC via The CW with Arrow, both very effectively, and there
was some of it in TDK. Zack Snyder couldn't have had much of an
impact on that decision. Goyer or any other writers involved may
have written it all linear, but Warners and Nolan, correctly I think,
may have made the call that they didn't want to take the 1978
movie's linear approach. They wanted to do something different,
and they all seem to like Non Linear Different and it's worked
very well even on TV. I'd argue that on TV it's more likely to get
tiresome, yet it can work well even there so why not go with it in
the movie? Again, I like the decision, a lot.
Somebody complaining that makes the pace too fast is kinda
tough to take seriously these days. Most moviegoers, I think,
like a fast-paced movie. It's when it's not that that we hear
more "slow, boring" and the like criticisms, or in this Superman
case "been there, seen that" because so many have seen the
first Reeve movie especially.
A related nitpick may be a too-fast pace doesn't leave enough
time for character development, interaction, etc., and I'd have
agreed that's possible until I knew the near-100% story spoilers.
In particular I think the romance element, that dynamic, has
the potential to be far and away the best of any incarnation.
It's almost idiot-proof by the end of the movie, and it makes
Lois Lane a stronger character than she's ever been I think.
She made the Clark-Superman connection before anyone else,
she's in on the secret from the get-go at the Daily Planet and
part of starting that, the story has her active in delivering the
light drive / weapon that destroyed the Kryptonian ship, and
the Superman/Lois visuals in the trailers look great and
suggest that there's chemistry there. That's probably the
most important character development, interaction, etc. that
they needed to set up here, especially for sequels.
So even though it's still a concern that Snyder's never had a
better-received movie, the kind that I think this one needs to
be to get into that same league as the other 7 that I listed,
I think based on the spoilers, and certainly hope, that he aced
this along with everyone else.
news:9c1adc3a-7a30-4431...@googlegroups.com...
> Having Zach Snyder as the director for a start. :-P
Just realized it's Zack not Zach everywhere I look. :-)
It was definitely a concern. He has three Fresh movies on RT and
all of them (Dawn of the Dead, Watchmen, 300) are below what
Superman Returns had. DotD 75% 6.7/10, Watchmen 64% 6.2/10
and 300 60% 6.1/10. He has a few others in the Rotten range, i.e.
< 60%. Hopefully more experience and Nolan's and everyone
else's involvement will make this his best. SPOILER SPACE...
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
A
R
E
B
E
L
O
W
page going into this movie. I took this as a polite way of saying that
there really wasn't any room for "Snyder's Vision" to apply here. He
was hired to execute the plan as approved by Warners and Nolan
primarily, and they thought he'd be good at doing that. That his
"vision" would be able to fit well enough with theirs.
For example Nolan is arguably the Original Non-Linear Guy with
Memento. :-) His brother uses it in Person of Interest and Warners
and DC via The CW with Arrow, both very effectively, and there
was some of it in TDK. Zack Snyder couldn't have had much of an
impact on that decision. Goyer or any other writers involved may
have written it all linear, but Warners and Nolan, correctly I think,
may have made the call that they didn't want to take the 1978
movie's linear approach. They wanted to do something different,
and they all seem to like Non Linear Different and it's worked
very well even on TV. I'd argue that on TV it's more likely to get
tiresome, yet it can work well even there so why not go with it in
the movie? Again, I like the decision, a lot.
Somebody complaining that makes the pace too fast is kinda
tough to take seriously these days. Most moviegoers, I think,
like a fast-paced movie. It's when it's not that that we hear
more "slow, boring" and the like criticisms, or in this Superman
case "been there, seen that" because so many have seen the
first Reeve movie especially.
A related nitpick may be a too-fast pace doesn't leave enough
time for character development, interaction, etc., and I'd have
agreed that's possible until I knew the near-100% story spoilers.
In particular I think the romance element, that dynamic, has
the potential to be far and away the best of any incarnation.
It's almost idiot-proof by the end of the movie, and it makes
Lois Lane a stronger character than she's ever been I think.
She made the Clark-Superman connection before anyone else,
she's in on the secret from the get-go at the Daily Planet and
part of starting that, the story has her active in delivering the
light drive / weapon that destroyed the Kryptonian ship, and
the Superman/Lois visuals in the trailers look great and
suggest that there's chemistry there. That's probably the
most important character development, interaction, etc. that
they needed to set up here, especially for sequels.
So even though it's still a concern that Snyder's never had a
better-received movie, the kind that I think this one needs to
be to get into that same league as the other 7 that I listed,
I think based on the spoilers, and certainly hope, that he aced
this along with everyone else.
BTR1701
Jun 9, 2013, 5:03:07 PM6/9/13
to
In article <b1h9nq...@mid.individual.net>,
I mean, honestly, go listen to the samples of the thing at Amazon:
http://tinyurl.com/n2zlkqz
Try the "Oil Rig" cue. It's just measure after measure of monotonous
electronic drum beats. That's not music. That's a sound effect.
Now let's compare it to the previous SUPERMAN score by John Williams (48
Oscar nominations, with five wins, four Golden Globe Awards, seven
British Academy Film Awards and twenty-one Grammy Awards-- as long as
we're comparing such things):
http://tinyurl.com/ldubol8
Now try a comparable action cue-- "Superfeats" and honestly tell me that
Zimmer's score is even in the same league.
The MAN OF STEEL score is just another disappointing entry in what's
become standard synthesized, computerized noise masquerading as music.
It's sad that this is what most modern film music has become. Yet
another score consisting of nothing but long, sustained synth chords and
electronic background rhythms. And for the action cues-- endless
arpeggiated strings or booming electronic drum ostinatos over more long,
sustained chords in the brass, which is apparently what counts for theme
and melody these days. And that's even if they're using a real
orchestra. It's even odds that on any given film, the instruments you
hear are computer-generated, not real people playing music.
I'm sure it's a financial bargain for the studio. Computers don't
require union-mandated breaks or big paychecks, the way a symphony
orchestra does, but a lot of culture is lost in the process.
When was the last time a film came out with music that became an instant
cultural icon, to the point where even people who haven't seen the film
can instantly identify the music, as they can with JAWS or PSYCHO? And
is anyone going to leave the theater humming anything from MAN OF STEEL
the way they did with RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK or Donner's SUPERMAN? Here
we are 35 years later, and if you play Williams' Main Title, a
significant number of people still instantly identify it (and cheer). In
another 35 years, who's going to recognize or remember anything from the
Zimmer score?
The closest any film has come in the last 10 years is possibly the LORD
OF THE RINGS scores, but even those aren't really recognizable on their
own to anyone who isn't a fan of the films.
No one has done more to single-handedly turn the film music genre into
the background noise that it has become today than Hans Zimmer. Scores
like this one are just musical wallpaper, closer to sound effects, like
post-production bullet sounds and explosion effects, than real music.
And I don't mean to bag just on this movie's score. It's the same with
just about every film out there these days.
Goldsmith, Williams, Herrmann, Steiner, Rozsa... Today's computer-
assisted composers aren't even in the same universe as those greats.
> Out of 4.5 million views in barely 2 days, 803 or 1 in 5,620 have
> currently voted it thumbs down. It's been extremely well received
> and consistently had higher % thumbs up than even the best movie
> trailers, at every level of views since it was put up on Thursday.
The fact that a lot of people liked the trailer has nothing to do with
whether it's a decent score or a perfect film.
Try perusing some of the film score forums and see what's being said
about MAN OF STEEL or Zimmer in general.
> One poster mentioned that the score had evoked Terminator 2
> and I had no idea what he was talking about.
I do. T2 was another electronically-generated mood-music type score.
Brad Fiedel at least did a better job with it than Zimmer does, and the
subject matter was more relevant. Cold, emotionless, electronic music
isn't as out of place in a film about cold, emotionless, cybernetic
killing machines.
> So no, if Hans ever was The Flaw in any of his movies,
> there's no way he was in this one.
The only thing Zimmer has ever done that I liked was his score to THE
ROCK. It was synthesized, but that was back when he was still using
actual themes and melody in his scores. Now it's just endless ostinatos
and drum beats or long sustained synth chords for the softer cues. The
sort of thing that could be copy-pasted from one film to another and no
one would ever notice.
"KalElFan" <kale...@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> "BTR1701" wrote in message
> news:1252701642392350345.456294...@news.giganews.com...
>
> > "KalElFan" <kale...@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> What I'm hoping, and what I think is possible, is that the movie has
> >> no flaws. Yes, a Flawless Superman Movie is what I'm rooting for.
> >>
> > Well, that ship has already sailed. With a score by Hans Zimmer, it's
> > anything but flawless.
>
> Well, with 8 Oscar nominations and a win, and maybe 9 and 2 after
> Man of Steel, I doubt many will be citing the score as a flaw.
On that you would be wrong. Many already have.
> "BTR1701" wrote in message
> news:1252701642392350345.456294...@news.giganews.com...
>
> > "KalElFan" <kale...@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> What I'm hoping, and what I think is possible, is that the movie has
> >> no flaws. Yes, a Flawless Superman Movie is what I'm rooting for.
> >>
> > Well, that ship has already sailed. With a score by Hans Zimmer, it's
> > anything but flawless.
>
> Well, with 8 Oscar nominations and a win, and maybe 9 and 2 after
> Man of Steel, I doubt many will be citing the score as a flaw.
I mean, honestly, go listen to the samples of the thing at Amazon:
http://tinyurl.com/n2zlkqz
Try the "Oil Rig" cue. It's just measure after measure of monotonous
electronic drum beats. That's not music. That's a sound effect.
Now let's compare it to the previous SUPERMAN score by John Williams (48
Oscar nominations, with five wins, four Golden Globe Awards, seven
British Academy Film Awards and twenty-one Grammy Awards-- as long as
we're comparing such things):
http://tinyurl.com/ldubol8
Now try a comparable action cue-- "Superfeats" and honestly tell me that
Zimmer's score is even in the same league.
The MAN OF STEEL score is just another disappointing entry in what's
become standard synthesized, computerized noise masquerading as music.
It's sad that this is what most modern film music has become. Yet
another score consisting of nothing but long, sustained synth chords and
electronic background rhythms. And for the action cues-- endless
arpeggiated strings or booming electronic drum ostinatos over more long,
sustained chords in the brass, which is apparently what counts for theme
and melody these days. And that's even if they're using a real
orchestra. It's even odds that on any given film, the instruments you
hear are computer-generated, not real people playing music.
I'm sure it's a financial bargain for the studio. Computers don't
require union-mandated breaks or big paychecks, the way a symphony
orchestra does, but a lot of culture is lost in the process.
When was the last time a film came out with music that became an instant
cultural icon, to the point where even people who haven't seen the film
can instantly identify the music, as they can with JAWS or PSYCHO? And
is anyone going to leave the theater humming anything from MAN OF STEEL
the way they did with RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK or Donner's SUPERMAN? Here
we are 35 years later, and if you play Williams' Main Title, a
significant number of people still instantly identify it (and cheer). In
another 35 years, who's going to recognize or remember anything from the
Zimmer score?
The closest any film has come in the last 10 years is possibly the LORD
OF THE RINGS scores, but even those aren't really recognizable on their
own to anyone who isn't a fan of the films.
No one has done more to single-handedly turn the film music genre into
the background noise that it has become today than Hans Zimmer. Scores
like this one are just musical wallpaper, closer to sound effects, like
post-production bullet sounds and explosion effects, than real music.
And I don't mean to bag just on this movie's score. It's the same with
just about every film out there these days.
Goldsmith, Williams, Herrmann, Steiner, Rozsa... Today's computer-
assisted composers aren't even in the same universe as those greats.
> Out of 4.5 million views in barely 2 days, 803 or 1 in 5,620 have
> currently voted it thumbs down. It's been extremely well received
> and consistently had higher % thumbs up than even the best movie
> trailers, at every level of views since it was put up on Thursday.
whether it's a decent score or a perfect film.
Try perusing some of the film score forums and see what's being said
about MAN OF STEEL or Zimmer in general.
> One poster mentioned that the score had evoked Terminator 2
> and I had no idea what he was talking about.
Brad Fiedel at least did a better job with it than Zimmer does, and the
subject matter was more relevant. Cold, emotionless, electronic music
isn't as out of place in a film about cold, emotionless, cybernetic
killing machines.
> So no, if Hans ever was The Flaw in any of his movies,
> there's no way he was in this one.
ROCK. It was synthesized, but that was back when he was still using
actual themes and melody in his scores. Now it's just endless ostinatos
and drum beats or long sustained synth chords for the softer cues. The
sort of thing that could be copy-pasted from one film to another and no
one would ever notice.
KalElFan
Jun 9, 2013, 7:35:46 PM6/9/13
to
"BTR1701" wrote in message
news:atropos-0E9CA6...@news-europe.giganews.com...
> ... let's compare it to the previous SUPERMAN score by John Williams
Williams is great but we've heard his music for Superman many times
now. I think it was reasonable to go in a different direction with this
one. Part of it may be how the movies with those great themes all
seemed to be slower-paced back in those days. Even Star Wars, many
described the first half of it as slow moving even then. By T2, right up
there with the greatest action movies ever made, the 70s-style music
perhaps just didn't fit. No music could rise above the din and get
noticed, unless it was that T2-style drumbeat or whatever else that
was noisy enough. So maybe blame the movies as much or more as
composers.
> ... It's sad that this is what most modern film music has become.
>
> ... When was the last time a film came out with music that became
I agree with your point about an overall decline in iconic music, I'd
even cite The Sting because you may not have. There isn't much like
that, but it's been true of Williams as well. I'd probably rank Jaws
and Star Wars as his most iconic, maybe Indy next (which was after
Superman). I don't think his Superman music is quite as instantly
recognized as the other three, and then there's E.T. which I also
don't think has that same quality. Big fans of Superman or E.T.
will more immediately recognize it, but Jaws and Star Wars and
Indy have a better shot at being recognized by anyone.
Those were all in about a 5-7 year period more than 30 years ago
now. His music's been good and he's been prolific since, but on
that iconic quality that you're talking about I don't think it's been
there to anywhere near the same degree even for him.
> The fact that a lot of people liked the trailer has nothing to do with
> whether it's a decent score or a perfect film.
To me though, it's so good and fits so perfectly that the idea the
rest of it sucks I find dubious. I plan to get the soundtrack and it
wouldn't surprise me if Nokia got the best piece but we'll see.
> Try perusing some of the film score forums and see what's being
> said about MAN OF STEEL or Zimmer in general.
No, I just listen and like it or not, which is how I think most who
go to movies look at it as well. The last Transformers was noise
to me, but this Nokia trailer was great though I didn't realize how
good it was on the first viewing. For those more knowlegeable
about music and how the sausage is made so to speak, maybe
Zimmer hasn't impressed but you concede you think of all music
that way for at least a few decades now it seems. I couldn't cite
other Zimmer music that I thought was great, though if I went
through his extensive IMDb page I might.
news:atropos-0E9CA6...@news-europe.giganews.com...
> ... let's compare it to the previous SUPERMAN score by John Williams
Williams is great but we've heard his music for Superman many times
now. I think it was reasonable to go in a different direction with this
one. Part of it may be how the movies with those great themes all
seemed to be slower-paced back in those days. Even Star Wars, many
described the first half of it as slow moving even then. By T2, right up
there with the greatest action movies ever made, the 70s-style music
perhaps just didn't fit. No music could rise above the din and get
noticed, unless it was that T2-style drumbeat or whatever else that
was noisy enough. So maybe blame the movies as much or more as
composers.
> ... It's sad that this is what most modern film music has become.
>
> ... When was the last time a film came out with music that became
> an instant cultural icon, to the point where even people who haven't
> seen the film can instantly identify the music...
I agree with your point about an overall decline in iconic music, I'd
even cite The Sting because you may not have. There isn't much like
that, but it's been true of Williams as well. I'd probably rank Jaws
and Star Wars as his most iconic, maybe Indy next (which was after
Superman). I don't think his Superman music is quite as instantly
recognized as the other three, and then there's E.T. which I also
don't think has that same quality. Big fans of Superman or E.T.
will more immediately recognize it, but Jaws and Star Wars and
Indy have a better shot at being recognized by anyone.
Those were all in about a 5-7 year period more than 30 years ago
now. His music's been good and he's been prolific since, but on
that iconic quality that you're talking about I don't think it's been
there to anywhere near the same degree even for him.
> The fact that a lot of people liked the trailer has nothing to do with
> whether it's a decent score or a perfect film.
rest of it sucks I find dubious. I plan to get the soundtrack and it
wouldn't surprise me if Nokia got the best piece but we'll see.
> Try perusing some of the film score forums and see what's being
> said about MAN OF STEEL or Zimmer in general.
go to movies look at it as well. The last Transformers was noise
to me, but this Nokia trailer was great though I didn't realize how
good it was on the first viewing. For those more knowlegeable
about music and how the sausage is made so to speak, maybe
Zimmer hasn't impressed but you concede you think of all music
that way for at least a few decades now it seems. I couldn't cite
other Zimmer music that I thought was great, though if I went
through his extensive IMDb page I might.
BTR1701
Jun 9, 2013, 8:14:42 PM6/9/13
to
In article <b1ki24...@mid.individual.net>,
a composer to turn out a fantastic symphonic score. The action provided
boundless opportunity for virtuoso orchestration and the ensemble nature
of the superhero team served up a ready-made leitmotif approach where
each character could be distinctly identified in the music.
Instead we got two hours of crashing drums and endless flutterings in
the string section-- if it even *was* an actual string section, that is.
Remember that before STAR WARS came along, film music as a genre had
mostly degenerated to diagetic disco backbeats, which was why that
brilliant major chord and fanfare from the London Symphony as the text
crawled through space was so jarring and memorable to the audiences of
the time, and it sent the soundtrack album rocketing into the record
books in terms of sales.
> > ... It's sad that this is what most modern film music has become.
> >
> > ... When was the last time a film came out with music that became
> > an instant cultural icon, to the point where even people who haven't
> > seen the film can instantly identify the music...
>
> I agree with your point about an overall decline in iconic music, I'd
> even cite The Sting because you may not have. There isn't much like
> that, but it's been true of Williams as well. I'd probably rank Jaws
> and Star Wars as his most iconic, maybe Indy next (which was after
> Superman). I don't think his Superman music is quite as instantly
> recognized as the other three, and then there's E.T. which I also
> don't think has that same quality. Big fans of Superman or E.T.
> will more immediately recognize it, but Jaws and Star Wars and
> Indy have a better shot at being recognized by anyone.
I'd add CLOSE ENCOUNTERS in there. Who doesn't recognize that A-B-G-G-D
tone series, even today?
> Those were all in about a 5-7 year period more than 30 years ago
> now. His music's been good and he's been prolific since, but on
> that iconic quality that you're talking about I don't think it's been
> there to anywhere near the same degree even for him.
I don't necessarily expect Williams to produce it again. He wasn't the
only one who was able to do it in the first place. I mentioned
Herrmann's PSYCHO earlier, which is another good example. Williams is in
his 80s, for goodness sake, but surely there's someone out there with
the talent to pick up the baton and run with it.
Problem is, the studios don't want that any more. Zimmer and his ilk are
cheap, and they can churn out a score in half the time it takes a real
composer, because its electronic format and repetitive nature allow it
to be easily tweaked and just copied over from one film to the next.
> > Try perusing some of the film score forums and see what's being
> > said about MAN OF STEEL or Zimmer in general.
>
> No, I just listen and like it or not, which is how I think most who
> go to movies look at it as well.
Sure, but your initial comment was that you "doubt many will cite the
score as a flaw". Not that you personally will or won't like it. In
response to that, a perusal of the general consensus of those who have
immersed themselves in the genre is perfectly appropriate, and if you do
that, Zimmer doesn't fare very well.
"KalElFan" <kale...@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> "BTR1701" wrote in message
> news:atropos-0E9CA6...@news-europe.giganews.com...
>
> > ... let's compare it to the previous SUPERMAN score by John Williams
>
> Williams is great but we've heard his music for Superman many times
> now. I think it was reasonable to go in a different direction with this
> one. Part of it may be how the movies with those great themes all
> seemed to be slower-paced back in those days. Even Star Wars, many
> described the first half of it as slow moving even then. By T2, right up
> there with the greatest action movies ever made, the 70s-style music
> perhaps just didn't fit. No music could rise above the din and get
> noticed, unless it was that T2-style drumbeat or whatever else that
> was noisy enough. So maybe blame the movies as much or more as
> composers.
I don't agree. I think a movie like AVENGERS was a ripe opportunity for
> "BTR1701" wrote in message
> news:atropos-0E9CA6...@news-europe.giganews.com...
>
> > ... let's compare it to the previous SUPERMAN score by John Williams
>
> Williams is great but we've heard his music for Superman many times
> now. I think it was reasonable to go in a different direction with this
> one. Part of it may be how the movies with those great themes all
> seemed to be slower-paced back in those days. Even Star Wars, many
> described the first half of it as slow moving even then. By T2, right up
> there with the greatest action movies ever made, the 70s-style music
> perhaps just didn't fit. No music could rise above the din and get
> noticed, unless it was that T2-style drumbeat or whatever else that
> was noisy enough. So maybe blame the movies as much or more as
> composers.
a composer to turn out a fantastic symphonic score. The action provided
boundless opportunity for virtuoso orchestration and the ensemble nature
of the superhero team served up a ready-made leitmotif approach where
each character could be distinctly identified in the music.
Instead we got two hours of crashing drums and endless flutterings in
the string section-- if it even *was* an actual string section, that is.
Remember that before STAR WARS came along, film music as a genre had
mostly degenerated to diagetic disco backbeats, which was why that
brilliant major chord and fanfare from the London Symphony as the text
crawled through space was so jarring and memorable to the audiences of
the time, and it sent the soundtrack album rocketing into the record
books in terms of sales.
> > ... It's sad that this is what most modern film music has become.
> >
> > ... When was the last time a film came out with music that became
> > an instant cultural icon, to the point where even people who haven't
> > seen the film can instantly identify the music...
>
> I agree with your point about an overall decline in iconic music, I'd
> even cite The Sting because you may not have. There isn't much like
> that, but it's been true of Williams as well. I'd probably rank Jaws
> and Star Wars as his most iconic, maybe Indy next (which was after
> Superman). I don't think his Superman music is quite as instantly
> recognized as the other three, and then there's E.T. which I also
> don't think has that same quality. Big fans of Superman or E.T.
> will more immediately recognize it, but Jaws and Star Wars and
> Indy have a better shot at being recognized by anyone.
tone series, even today?
> Those were all in about a 5-7 year period more than 30 years ago
> now. His music's been good and he's been prolific since, but on
> that iconic quality that you're talking about I don't think it's been
> there to anywhere near the same degree even for him.
only one who was able to do it in the first place. I mentioned
Herrmann's PSYCHO earlier, which is another good example. Williams is in
his 80s, for goodness sake, but surely there's someone out there with
the talent to pick up the baton and run with it.
Problem is, the studios don't want that any more. Zimmer and his ilk are
cheap, and they can churn out a score in half the time it takes a real
composer, because its electronic format and repetitive nature allow it
to be easily tweaked and just copied over from one film to the next.
> > Try perusing some of the film score forums and see what's being
> > said about MAN OF STEEL or Zimmer in general.
>
> No, I just listen and like it or not, which is how I think most who
> go to movies look at it as well.
score as a flaw". Not that you personally will or won't like it. In
response to that, a perusal of the general consensus of those who have
immersed themselves in the genre is perfectly appropriate, and if you do
that, Zimmer doesn't fare very well.
KalElFan
Jun 10, 2013, 6:01:29 AM6/10/13
to
THERE WILL BE THOSE SPOILER THINGIES AGAIN WAY DOWN BELOW
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
"BTR1701" wrote in message
news:atropos-3740FD...@news-europe.giganews.com...
> Remember that before STAR WARS came along, film music
> as a genre had mostly degenerated to diagetic disco backbeats,
> which was why that brilliant major chord and fanfare from the
> London Symphony as the text crawled through space was so
> jarring and memorable to the audiences of the time, and it
> sent the soundtrack album rocketing into the record books
> in terms of sales.
And it had that actual black album cover with the Star Wars
logo, evoking what we also saw on screen during that opening
in the theater.
The Avengers being an opportunity to have something more
memorable... I'm not so sure. All the scores we're talking about
became iconic as part of Original Films that were also iconic.
Is Avengers really *that* iconic, or can it ever be just because
it built on Iron Man and so on? Will it ever be Jaws or Star
Wars, the originals, iconic?
See, part of the problem today, beyond the demands for the
fast-paced, loud blockbuster movies, is that we're so inundated
with sequels. Avengers was a sequel to several different movies
in a sense. We'd seen Iron Man twice, two different Hulks, a
Thor and a Captain America all within less than a decade. One
could think of it as Marvel 5 or Marvel 7 in a way, depending
whether you count the Hulk ones. If they're perceived as part
of the X-Men and Wolverine and Spider-Man sub-universes
despite corporate ownership firewalls many are unaware of,
it can be viewed as Marvel double-digits perhaps, Marvel 14
or some such.
Like Star Trek TV series, it becomes more like "man, there are
a lot of those Marvel things..."
With so much of this stuff, is it realistic to expect any great
new music for movies with an unspoken double-digit next to
their title? Would enough notice or care, and if not than why
try? Just have music that services or showcases the movie
in a way that supports but doesn't even try to outshine it.
By that more realistic applicable standard, I think the Nokia
trailer alone demonstrates that Zimmer has already done
very well on Man of Steel.
The other thing is that Star Wars basically had "just" the one
piece you mention plus Darth Vader's theme as the truly most
iconic parts. Jaws arguably only had the one. You mentioned
Close Encounters, that's more a brief flourish than anything
as I recall it.
We're talking about varying degrees of flourishes that people
really latched on to in iconic movies, and remember enough
that they can carry the tune further as they listen to it in
their head. The Greatness of these, in terms of how iconic
they became, is based on relatively SHORT bursts of genius
music, that HAPPENED to be in INCREDIBLY iconic and/or in
some cases groundbreaking movies.
> Sure, but your initial comment was that you "doubt many will
> cite the score as a flaw". Not that you personally will or won't
> like it.
Right, but there were two different points there that aren't at all
mutually exclusive. Your perspective became apparent the post
before last I guess it was, and on a lot of it I was right there with
you. The iconic stuff just isn't there any more like it was in the
70s, in part because it's like they aren't even trying anymore. It
just doesn't matter much to them, it seems. So we're on the same
page on that discussion, but then this:
> In response to that, a perusal of the general consensus of
> those who have immersed themselves in the genre is perfectly
> appropriate, and if you do that, Zimmer doesn't fare very well.
The "general consensus of those who have immersed themselves
in the genre" gets to the lack of objectivity that's so prevalent in
any population. Maybe you'll concede the point by the end of
this post, maybe you'll even phrase it as "well, sure when you
put it that way, of course I realize that." But too often on Usenet
and discussion boards and the like, they never do. Try this and
again MAJOR SPOILERS here:
1. Superman Kills Zod
2. Non-Linear Pacing
And, if you think through the Vulnerability here, for this movie
about our Iconic and Invulnerable Superman, the above can easily
be adapted to the masses as:
1. They've Made Superman a Killer!
2. The Movie's a Mess! It Flips Back and Forth, All Mixed Up...
And yada yada yada as 2 goes on and on. Clark with the glasses
comes in at the end when he should be at the beginning. Lois
knows he was Superman without the suit in Smallville? Geez,
can't these guys get anything right?
Compare that to.... Breaking News....
947. A Posse of Irate Protesters From Three Internet Chat Boards,
describing themselves as the Occupy Hollywood Movement,
descended upon Warner Bros. today in their ongoing protest
against Bad Movie Music and in particular Hans Zimmer...
I'm trying to be as funny as possible in wrenching it all back
to reality here, but you ought to be able to see how utterly
marginal such views are, in terms of anyone really caring to
raise it as a flaw. In absolute numbers, I'm sure you can find
a dozen of them in a 24-hour posting barrage, but it's just
uber-marginal in terms of the overall issue.
Unless the movie has just atrocious, incessant chalk-squeaking
on a board, and/or get my lawyer because it's destroying my
ears noise, it just is not and will not be on anyone's radar in
a negative way. There's very little if any downside, but some
supportive upside if they think yeah, that theme, music, or
whatever they view it as was catchy.
I also don't concede that the music afficionados on these
boards are statistically important even in that subset of music
afficionados and experts. Again, Zimmer has 8 nominations
and a win. Yes, that can be smacked down with John Williams,
but so what? Zimmer's still been recognized by his peers and
he was at the LA Press Conference (on the far left) praising
Williams' music. It's like he conceded it was an impossible
task to compete with that, which it is really.
Your general point seems to be "it all sucks compared to the
old days (70s primarily)". I'd agree with that music-wise, but
virtually no one who sees Man of Steel is coming out and
dissing this 1,964th instance of Still No Good movie music
even if they think it is that. The danger is this kind of thing:
"They made Superman a killer. It's a disgrace. I brought
my son here for what I figured was a safe movie. Instead
he saw Superman snap Zod's neck and kill him. My son,
he's only 5 and he was crying for five minutes. We had to
leave the theater after two. Just a disgrace. And before
that the whole thing was all mixed up. The beginning's at
the end, it was flopping back and forth like a Kryptonian
Seal or somethin' How do movies like this get made? And
couldn't they have called it SuperDarkman or had some
other character used for this dreck? For shame."
I'm playing Devil's Advocate there, because I don't think that
would be justified. But it's where the vulnerabilities are. It's
exactly the kind of thing that could get really trumped up and
demagogued. Man of Steel Marks Fourth Decade of Sucky
Hans Zimmer Movie Music, not so much.
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
news:atropos-3740FD...@news-europe.giganews.com...
> Remember that before STAR WARS came along, film music
> as a genre had mostly degenerated to diagetic disco backbeats,
> which was why that brilliant major chord and fanfare from the
> London Symphony as the text crawled through space was so
> jarring and memorable to the audiences of the time, and it
> sent the soundtrack album rocketing into the record books
> in terms of sales.
logo, evoking what we also saw on screen during that opening
in the theater.
The Avengers being an opportunity to have something more
memorable... I'm not so sure. All the scores we're talking about
became iconic as part of Original Films that were also iconic.
Is Avengers really *that* iconic, or can it ever be just because
it built on Iron Man and so on? Will it ever be Jaws or Star
Wars, the originals, iconic?
See, part of the problem today, beyond the demands for the
fast-paced, loud blockbuster movies, is that we're so inundated
with sequels. Avengers was a sequel to several different movies
in a sense. We'd seen Iron Man twice, two different Hulks, a
Thor and a Captain America all within less than a decade. One
could think of it as Marvel 5 or Marvel 7 in a way, depending
whether you count the Hulk ones. If they're perceived as part
of the X-Men and Wolverine and Spider-Man sub-universes
despite corporate ownership firewalls many are unaware of,
it can be viewed as Marvel double-digits perhaps, Marvel 14
or some such.
Like Star Trek TV series, it becomes more like "man, there are
a lot of those Marvel things..."
With so much of this stuff, is it realistic to expect any great
new music for movies with an unspoken double-digit next to
their title? Would enough notice or care, and if not than why
try? Just have music that services or showcases the movie
in a way that supports but doesn't even try to outshine it.
By that more realistic applicable standard, I think the Nokia
trailer alone demonstrates that Zimmer has already done
very well on Man of Steel.
The other thing is that Star Wars basically had "just" the one
piece you mention plus Darth Vader's theme as the truly most
iconic parts. Jaws arguably only had the one. You mentioned
Close Encounters, that's more a brief flourish than anything
as I recall it.
We're talking about varying degrees of flourishes that people
really latched on to in iconic movies, and remember enough
that they can carry the tune further as they listen to it in
their head. The Greatness of these, in terms of how iconic
they became, is based on relatively SHORT bursts of genius
music, that HAPPENED to be in INCREDIBLY iconic and/or in
some cases groundbreaking movies.
> Sure, but your initial comment was that you "doubt many will
> cite the score as a flaw". Not that you personally will or won't
> like it.
mutually exclusive. Your perspective became apparent the post
before last I guess it was, and on a lot of it I was right there with
you. The iconic stuff just isn't there any more like it was in the
70s, in part because it's like they aren't even trying anymore. It
just doesn't matter much to them, it seems. So we're on the same
page on that discussion, but then this:
> In response to that, a perusal of the general consensus of
> those who have immersed themselves in the genre is perfectly
> appropriate, and if you do that, Zimmer doesn't fare very well.
in the genre" gets to the lack of objectivity that's so prevalent in
any population. Maybe you'll concede the point by the end of
this post, maybe you'll even phrase it as "well, sure when you
put it that way, of course I realize that." But too often on Usenet
and discussion boards and the like, they never do. Try this and
again MAJOR SPOILERS here:
1. Superman Kills Zod
2. Non-Linear Pacing
And, if you think through the Vulnerability here, for this movie
about our Iconic and Invulnerable Superman, the above can easily
be adapted to the masses as:
1. They've Made Superman a Killer!
2. The Movie's a Mess! It Flips Back and Forth, All Mixed Up...
And yada yada yada as 2 goes on and on. Clark with the glasses
comes in at the end when he should be at the beginning. Lois
knows he was Superman without the suit in Smallville? Geez,
can't these guys get anything right?
Compare that to.... Breaking News....
947. A Posse of Irate Protesters From Three Internet Chat Boards,
describing themselves as the Occupy Hollywood Movement,
descended upon Warner Bros. today in their ongoing protest
against Bad Movie Music and in particular Hans Zimmer...
I'm trying to be as funny as possible in wrenching it all back
to reality here, but you ought to be able to see how utterly
marginal such views are, in terms of anyone really caring to
raise it as a flaw. In absolute numbers, I'm sure you can find
a dozen of them in a 24-hour posting barrage, but it's just
uber-marginal in terms of the overall issue.
Unless the movie has just atrocious, incessant chalk-squeaking
on a board, and/or get my lawyer because it's destroying my
ears noise, it just is not and will not be on anyone's radar in
a negative way. There's very little if any downside, but some
supportive upside if they think yeah, that theme, music, or
whatever they view it as was catchy.
I also don't concede that the music afficionados on these
boards are statistically important even in that subset of music
afficionados and experts. Again, Zimmer has 8 nominations
and a win. Yes, that can be smacked down with John Williams,
but so what? Zimmer's still been recognized by his peers and
he was at the LA Press Conference (on the far left) praising
Williams' music. It's like he conceded it was an impossible
task to compete with that, which it is really.
Your general point seems to be "it all sucks compared to the
old days (70s primarily)". I'd agree with that music-wise, but
virtually no one who sees Man of Steel is coming out and
dissing this 1,964th instance of Still No Good movie music
even if they think it is that. The danger is this kind of thing:
"They made Superman a killer. It's a disgrace. I brought
my son here for what I figured was a safe movie. Instead
he saw Superman snap Zod's neck and kill him. My son,
he's only 5 and he was crying for five minutes. We had to
leave the theater after two. Just a disgrace. And before
that the whole thing was all mixed up. The beginning's at
the end, it was flopping back and forth like a Kryptonian
Seal or somethin' How do movies like this get made? And
couldn't they have called it SuperDarkman or had some
other character used for this dreck? For shame."
I'm playing Devil's Advocate there, because I don't think that
would be justified. But it's where the vulnerabilities are. It's
exactly the kind of thing that could get really trumped up and
demagogued. Man of Steel Marks Fourth Decade of Sucky
Hans Zimmer Movie Music, not so much.
Bill Steele
Jun 10, 2013, 4:08:51 PM6/10/13
to
In article <b1f0eu...@mid.individual.net>,
"KalElFan" <kale...@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> He can power
> up much more, like a super solar battery,
well, if Dragonball can steal from Superman, why not vice-versa?
> He can power
> up much more, like a super solar battery,
KalElFan
Jun 10, 2013, 5:37:52 PM6/10/13
to
"Bill Steele" wrote in message
news:ws21-1970CD.1...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net...
Hey, there's a vice in your versa there, pal.
Dragonball, or Dragonball Z or whatever variations there are if that's
the same kind of thing, seems to be the new Buffy. For years, the
Whedonites who were passionate enough AND had enough Super
Tunnel Vision, :-), would find a way to cite Buffy as the source of
anything and everything. It was so ironic, given that Buffy Meets
Vampire Slayer is about as uber-derivative as it gets.
Several years ago somebody mentioned Dragonball Z in connection
with Superman, its Multiverse perhaps but I'm not sure it was a
while ago. On that major Man of Steel board last week I think it
was, again Dragonball. And now the above, the final straw. :-)
So I Googled it just out of curiosity, and it looks like an 80s creation.
(I knew it was Japanese and Manga). So almost 50 years after
Superman, and maybe 20-25 years after Superman's Silver age
and Weisinger had introduced into the Superman lore everything
from Streaky the Supercat to Red Sun vs Yellow Sun and the latter
being the source of Superman's powers. For Superman to copy
Dragonball on *anything* would have to defy the laws of physics
and involve some kind of time loop, eh? :-)
news:ws21-1970CD.1...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net...
Dragonball, or Dragonball Z or whatever variations there are if that's
the same kind of thing, seems to be the new Buffy. For years, the
Whedonites who were passionate enough AND had enough Super
Tunnel Vision, :-), would find a way to cite Buffy as the source of
anything and everything. It was so ironic, given that Buffy Meets
Vampire Slayer is about as uber-derivative as it gets.
Several years ago somebody mentioned Dragonball Z in connection
with Superman, its Multiverse perhaps but I'm not sure it was a
while ago. On that major Man of Steel board last week I think it
was, again Dragonball. And now the above, the final straw. :-)
So I Googled it just out of curiosity, and it looks like an 80s creation.
(I knew it was Japanese and Manga). So almost 50 years after
Superman, and maybe 20-25 years after Superman's Silver age
and Weisinger had introduced into the Superman lore everything
from Streaky the Supercat to Red Sun vs Yellow Sun and the latter
being the source of Superman's powers. For Superman to copy
Dragonball on *anything* would have to defy the laws of physics
and involve some kind of time loop, eh? :-)
Bill Steele
Jun 11, 2013, 2:59:04 PM6/11/13
to
In article <b1mv9o...@mid.individual.net>,
that seem to be derived from the anime Sailor Moon.
forever "powering up," which involved a lot of grunting and grimacing
ands dust swirling around. Something about focusing one's chi, I guess.
They actually had meters that would read someone's power level, so you
could decide whether or not it would be a good idea to get into a fight
with them. Kind of like rankings in tennis. Or cats squaring off and
swearing at each other.
Early Dragonball had nothing to do with Superman, and was about this
character called Son Goku, who was based on the Chinese legend of the
Monkey King. (Son Goku is written with Japanese characters that are the
same as the Monkey King in Chinese.) But eventually they got into a
storyline where superpowered guys from another planet arrive on Earth
and set out to take over, and it turns out that our hero Goku -- whose
origins had always been a bit mysterious -- is from that same planet.
Sound familiar?
It should be noted that the creator of Dragonball has been quoted as
saying that he was a big fan of Superman.
"KalElFan" <kale...@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> "Bill Steele" wrote in message
> news:ws21-1970CD.1...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net...
>
> > In article <b1f0eu...@mid.individual.net>,
> > "KalElFan" <kale...@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> He can power
> >> up much more, like a super solar battery,
> >
> > well, if Dragonball can steal from Superman, why not vice-versa?
>
> Hey, there's a vice in your versa there, pal.
>
> Dragonball, or Dragonball Z or whatever variations there are if that's
> the same kind of thing, seems to be the new Buffy. For years, the
> Whedonites who were passionate enough AND had enough Super
> Tunnel Vision, :-), would find a way to cite Buffy as the source of
> anything and everything. It was so ironic, given that Buffy Meets
> Vampire Slayer is about as uber-derivative as it gets.
Interesting you should mention that, since there are storylines on Buffy
> "Bill Steele" wrote in message
> news:ws21-1970CD.1...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net...
>
> > In article <b1f0eu...@mid.individual.net>,
> > "KalElFan" <kale...@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> He can power
> >> up much more, like a super solar battery,
> >
> > well, if Dragonball can steal from Superman, why not vice-versa?
>
> Hey, there's a vice in your versa there, pal.
>
> Dragonball, or Dragonball Z or whatever variations there are if that's
> the same kind of thing, seems to be the new Buffy. For years, the
> Whedonites who were passionate enough AND had enough Super
> Tunnel Vision, :-), would find a way to cite Buffy as the source of
> anything and everything. It was so ironic, given that Buffy Meets
> Vampire Slayer is about as uber-derivative as it gets.
that seem to be derived from the anime Sailor Moon.
>
> Several years ago somebody mentioned Dragonball Z in connection
> with Superman, its Multiverse perhaps but I'm not sure it was a
> while ago. On that major Man of Steel board last week I think it
> was, again Dragonball. And now the above, the final straw. :-)
>
> So I Googled it just out of curiosity, and it looks like an 80s creation.
> (I knew it was Japanese and Manga). So almost 50 years after
> Superman, and maybe 20-25 years after Superman's Silver age
> and Weisinger had introduced into the Superman lore everything
> from Streaky the Supercat to Red Sun vs Yellow Sun and the latter
> being the source of Superman's powers. For Superman to copy
> Dragonball on *anything* would have to defy the laws of physics
> and involve some kind of time loop, eh? :-)
I was basically joking, because the characters in Dragonball were
> Several years ago somebody mentioned Dragonball Z in connection
> with Superman, its Multiverse perhaps but I'm not sure it was a
> while ago. On that major Man of Steel board last week I think it
> was, again Dragonball. And now the above, the final straw. :-)
>
> So I Googled it just out of curiosity, and it looks like an 80s creation.
> (I knew it was Japanese and Manga). So almost 50 years after
> Superman, and maybe 20-25 years after Superman's Silver age
> and Weisinger had introduced into the Superman lore everything
> from Streaky the Supercat to Red Sun vs Yellow Sun and the latter
> being the source of Superman's powers. For Superman to copy
> Dragonball on *anything* would have to defy the laws of physics
> and involve some kind of time loop, eh? :-)
forever "powering up," which involved a lot of grunting and grimacing
ands dust swirling around. Something about focusing one's chi, I guess.
They actually had meters that would read someone's power level, so you
could decide whether or not it would be a good idea to get into a fight
with them. Kind of like rankings in tennis. Or cats squaring off and
swearing at each other.
Early Dragonball had nothing to do with Superman, and was about this
character called Son Goku, who was based on the Chinese legend of the
Monkey King. (Son Goku is written with Japanese characters that are the
same as the Monkey King in Chinese.) But eventually they got into a
storyline where superpowered guys from another planet arrive on Earth
and set out to take over, and it turns out that our hero Goku -- whose
origins had always been a bit mysterious -- is from that same planet.
Sound familiar?
It should be noted that the creator of Dragonball has been quoted as
saying that he was a big fan of Superman.
0 new messages