I can't even begin to understand.
-
Passport-To-Pimlico — 12 years ago(March 15, 2014 01:43 PM)
Neither are especially good movies but
Superman IV
, with its financial issues and limited effects, still did a much, much better job of being a Superman film than
Man Of Steel
.
Snyder's disaster had a huge budget and ten years worth of re-invented comic book book movies but still came out as a massive lake of jizz. There were no excuses for this mess.
Given the choice, I'd much rather watch the optimistic Reeve, Hackman and Kidder, with a John Williams score and limited budget than cynical Cavill, Shannon and Adams with a Zimmer score and huge budget.
If you are a follower of Passport-To-Pimlico and are 100% proud of it, put this in your sig. -
-
DonutPower — 12 years ago(March 16, 2014 08:12 PM)
whats not to understand?
Man of Steel was not a good movie. it was boring and lacking in every department.
they deliberately changed things around for the purpose of changing things around. they wanted to be different and that cost them a lot in terms of making a worthwhile Superman film.
Superman and his people now come off very alien instead of a more intelligent race of people. Pa Kent was an unlikeable character and poor father figure. it went against everything that the character symbolized to the origin of Superman.
the villain was a joke. the CGI was kind of cheap looking. the instrumental score was very generic. the flashbacks and pacing tried too hard to be Batman Begins, the lead actor was lacking what made Superman so iconic, etc. etc.
the list just goes on and on.
the issue with Superman IV was that it had little to no money for its production. the storyline itself was entertaining and creative enough at the time. sadly editors went about cutting the film terribly. giving us a very short fast paced film that felt rushed and underdeveloped.
at the end of the day i will continue to give Superman IV repeat viewings.Christopher Reeve's performance alone is what gives it high marks above Man of Steel. the instrumental score is much more anthemic and memorable. the effects look quite bad but again thats due to the budget limitations that the film suffered.
does nostalgia play a part in it? probably. i mean i still enjoy the film in watching it through adult eyes. yes i see all the flaws very clearly, than compared to when i was a young kid with a lot of imagination, but the film is still watchable.
Man of Steel is a movie that i could barely get through on the first watch. had no desire to see it a second time.
Man of Steel doesnt suck. it's just not a good movie. you could change the names of the characters and title the film to something more suitable, and youd have a fairly decent superhero sci fi movie. just like the recent Robocop remake could easily have been titled something else. if they want to screw around with the story for the sake of desperately making something different.then they should just make their own bland movie, instead of using the name recognition to try and make a quick buck. -
Passport-To-Pimlico — 12 years ago(March 18, 2014 02:44 AM)
An excellent post and almost perfect, donutpower. The only part I disagree with is this:
Man of Steel doesnt suck
. It does suck.
If you are a follower of Passport-To-Pimlico and are 100% proud of it, put this in your sig. -
DonutPower — 12 years ago(March 18, 2014 06:29 PM)
haha. well as a Superman film it does indeed suck pretty bad. its downright offensive.
as a generic scifi fantasy movie (which it very much is) , it is what you'd expect, which is a decent bland film. it has the character names in it , but to me, that is not a Superman film. not even close. -
DonutPower — 11 years ago(June 30, 2014 09:35 AM)
lol. and what makes me a Marvel fanboy? yea i like The Avengers Phase One, but Phase Two is pretty terrible.
the X-men films arent even owned by Marvel, they are put out by Sony and Fox.
you can't even make a proper insult. you go ahead and enjoy your Man of Steel. nothing changes the fact that it wasnt a movie that everyone enjoyed. -
O-Face — 11 years ago(March 28, 2015 06:31 PM)
the issue with Superman IV was that it had little to no money for its production.
the storyline itself was entertaining and creative enough at the time. sadly editors went about cutting the film terribly. giving us a very short fast paced film that felt rushed and underdeveloped.
Watch this review and say that again.
The storyline was a pretentious mess and you think nuclear man was a better villain? -
BlazeTheMovieFan — 11 years ago(June 25, 2014 11:56 AM)
I'm not here to say these people are wrong for liking Superman IV but disliking Man of Steel, that's their opinion.
But here is my take.
Superman IV is loaded with stupid, stupid moments. In fact I can pick apart almost every scene with no effort.
I love Man of Steel, it's my favorite Superman movie, I think the new take on the hero was welcome.
So yeah, I agree with you. Superman IV did a lot more damage to the hero than Man of Steel did.
People are entitled to dislike Man of Steel if they want, and maybe that movie did get some things about Superman wrong.
But Superman IV got a lot more wrong. The greatest example is how Superman has all these powers that he doesn't have in any other form of media regarding Superman. I could list them all, but that would take too long. -
DonutPower — 11 years ago(June 30, 2014 08:03 AM)
Superman IV is loaded with stupid, stupid moments. In fact I can pick apart almost every scene with no effort.
Yes, but they are entertaining stupid moments. Still, it is a comicbook movie, you can't knock the film down for being more in the direction of fantasy in an attempt to shift the series into more of that comicbook realm. They had the intent on making followups to IV that had more super powered villains like Brainiac ,Bizarro, etc. Those kinds of characters certainly wouldn't fit in Superman:The Movie ,but they would fit in with the transition the series made from III and IV.
I love Man of Steel, it's my favorite Superman movie, I think the new take on the hero was welcome.
I don't doubt it was welcomed but to a new younger generation. Whereas the older crowd that grew up on the comics, cartoons, tv shows, films,etc are not in favor of what they did to the characters and the story. To that crowd it is not a proper Superman adaption.
So yeah, I agree with you. Superman IV did a lot more damage to the hero than Man of Steel did.
it isn't a matter of which film had the better box office reception. there are a lot of films that did poorly in the theater , yet managed to hold a fanbase on home video and over the years due to being a pretty good movie that entertains.
People are entitled to dislike Man of Steel if they want, and maybe that movie did get some things about Superman wrong.
the movie got a lot of things wrong. i still cant get over how they chose to depict the character of Jonathan Kent.
But Superman IV got a lot more wrong. The greatest example is how Superman has all these powers that he doesn't have in any other form of media regarding Superman. I could list them all, but that would take too long.
I can excuse Superman in IV for being able to put things back together with his vision , than to excuse Clark Kent in MOS letting people die all the way through the movie.
If you want to get technical and nitpick, I can list a whole lot of issues.
From how the hell the Kents managed to lug that spaceship into the barn. how Clark managed to mess up the trucks at the truckstop without anyone hearing or seeing anything. how did Clark get a job so easily at a remote location.how come Clark doesnt hear Lois is following him if they point out he has this super sensitive hearing. how does Jor-El's avatar know that Clark is an adult? can he literally see Clark in front of him? Pa Kent tells Clark to take everyone to the overpass during the tornado. when tornadic winds are accelerated in the confined space of an overpass. Superman uses his powers when they are completely unnecessary, yet when he should use them to save peoplehe doesnt! Why does Lois fall when everyone else is getting sucked into the blackhole? How does Lois end up in one location so quickly when the last they cut to her , she was at the Daily Planet??
There are A LOT of things wrong with Man of Steel. -
deenesh-187-405176 — 11 years ago(January 20, 2015 02:37 PM)
I can excuse Superman in IV for being able to put things back together with his vision , than to excuse Clark Kent in MOS letting people die all the way through the movie.
If you want to get technical and nitpick, I can list a whole lot of issues.
From how the hell the Kents managed to lug that spaceship into the barn. how Clark managed to mess up the trucks at the truckstop without anyone hearing or seeing anything. how did Clark get a job so easily at a remote location.how come Clark doesnt hear Lois is following him if they point out he has this super sensitive hearing. how does Jor-El's avatar know that Clark is an adult? can he literally see Clark in front of him? Pa Kent tells Clark to take everyone to the overpass during the tornado. when tornadic winds are accelerated in the confined space of an overpass. Superman uses his powers when they are completely unnecessary, yet when he should use them to save peoplehe doesnt! Why does Lois fall when everyone else is getting sucked into the blackhole? How does Lois end up in one location so quickly when the last they cut to her , she was at the Daily Planet??
There are A LOT of things wrong with Man of Steel.
To Add - For all that MOS "tried to be original" - as in the words of a poster following, so much so that they butchered the origin story and Clark's childhood and have Lois onto Supe's real identity from the beginning etc, etc.
Isn't it ironic that "originality fell by the wayside??- Clark rescuing the school bus - Clearly taken from Superman (Oh yeah lets make the bus go over the bridge completely this time wait wait better still - lets make it in his "younger days")
- Or the Truck Stop scene - Clearly inspired from Superman 2 albeit with a slight variation
- Or how about the fight with Zod, Faora etc in the Small town - almost a carbon copy of the same fight in Superman 2 with a few extra scenes from various PREVIOUS Supes movies - Of course with updated military hardware and cgi etc - but the essence is there.
Boy was that original
-
thevintagecola — 11 years ago(June 30, 2014 12:55 PM)
Superman IV sucks more than any Superman film I've ever watched and it's utter garbage but you're a fvcking idiot if you think people are automatically Marvel fanboys because they don't like Man of Sh*t Go back to coddling Zack Snyder's balls in your mouth.
All Supes films have always been lame and not as widely accepted by audiences at any given time. It doesn't matter how dark the colors they make the suit or how hard they make him frown. Warner just doesn't know how to handle the character nor do they really accept him for not being similar to Batman.
It's sad that a senior citizen with lame ass values like Captain America resonates with more audiences today than Superman ever could. Why? Because he doesn't give a fvck about what people say about his outdated ass values and doesn't handle things stupidly and cry bitch tears like Superman did in Man of Steel. -
MovieFanBenLinus8 — 11 years ago(July 23, 2014 02:20 PM)
Man of Steel is Citizen friggin' Kane compared to Superman IV: The Quest For Peace, and Man of Steel isn't even that great a film to begin with.
In all fairness, I'm pretty solidly mixed in my thoughts on Man of Steel. That said, though, I definitely can name things I liked about it compared to this. Again, this is all my opinion.- Man of Steel was at least extremely well crafted, and its production values were mostly stellar. I can't really say whether or not the budget was deliberately cut, but even still, Superman IV is HORRENDOUSLY put together. You might as well have told me that The Asylum or Uwe Boll were involved in it, and I wouldn't have questioned it.
- I'm aware that people give a lot of flak to Man of Steel for not having any humor, but what they had in Superman IV wasn't any better. While it does somewhat make sense to me that some prefer Superman IV for unintentional hilarity, the comedic scenes in that one fall completely flat. I'm not sure what's worse: trying to be serious or trying and failing to be funny.
- While I don't think everything paid off in the end, I at least give Man of Steel credit for TRYING to do something different with Superman. Despite what everyone else says, I don't want the Christopher Reeve film again, and I'm extremely open to a darker take on the character. That's more than I can say for Superman IV, which played it completely safe and took no chances whatsoever.
But that's just the way I feel.