SOOOO much better than Man of Steel!!!!!
Absolutely
You're from the future?Well that's brilliant!Do they still have sandwiches there?

I agree it is a wonderful movie. It is just too bad a sequel was never done. That is especially in conjunction with the "Superman'78" comic book just recently published. That would make a good film. "Superman Returns Part 2" would make a good film. I can hope that will be done one day.

I thought Man Of Steel as a stand alone movie was great, the primary beef of people who did not like it was the great amount of people who died in the fight between Superman and Zod. But it also shows in this movie at least that Zod wasn’t just an asshole for the sake of being one ,but he truly thought that he was doing the best thing for the survival of his race ,as misguided as it seems and it actually took an emotional toll on Kal to have to kill Zod.I don’t know why people were expecting a fun loving ,light hearted kids movie.
Ho Ho Ho

Absolutely. This movie is fantastic. Man of Steel sucks.
You're from the future?Well that's brilliant!Do they still have sandwiches there?

"UmSupes left Metropolis a smoldering crater in Superman 2, the series you are verbally fellatiating."
Uh, no he didn't, not on the scale of what was depicted in "MOS", plus there was actual concern for humanity. At least in 2 Superman tried to do something, even control some of the damage.

UmSupes left Metropolis a smoldering crater in Superman 2, the series you are verbally fellatiating.

"Both were awful versions of Superman."
"MOS" was far, faaar worse.

Both were awful versions of Superman.
When there's no more room in Hollywood, remakes shall walk the Earth.

at least i can watch this one again instead of Man of Bore.

Wow! Did you really tried to imply the Box office means anything more than money?

"no, Man Of Steel was far superior to Superman ReturnsSuperman Returns grossed $483 million but Man Of Steel grossed $693 millionboth figures are inflation adjusted, Worldwide Gross"
Being successful at the box office doesn't make a movie "good". "MOS" was a disjointed, derivative and generic mess - it was faaar from being "good". Not even superior to "Superman Returns".

no, Man Of Steel was far superior to Superman ReturnsSuperman Returns grossed $483 million but Man Of Steel grossed $693 millionboth figures are inflation adjusted, Worldwide Gross

"Oh, stop it. MoS blew this movie out the watererrrr, chunked it into space."
It hadn't.
"MoS had: better pacing, better action, a more realistic looking Superman, better villain, better plot, and greater sense of peril."
Better pacing, definitely not. A more realistic-looking Superman? Give me a break. Superman is inherently unrealistic, so you cannot make "realism" an argument. Better villain and plot - it's regurgitated material from "Superman 1" and "2" but dumbed down to such an extent that it's embarrassing, with bits and pieces from other and much better movies. Hell, not even Zod crashing into a satellite is unique, as that's from the much maligned "Green Lantern" movie. A greater sense of peril? A kryptonite island turning into a full-sized continent, threatening to kill millions of people is somehow kids' stuff?

Oh, stop it. MoS blew this movie out the watererrrr, chunked it into space.
MoS had: better pacing, better action, a more realistic looking Superman, better villain, better plot, and greater sense of peril.
When we're thinking about our own brain, would that be a mental paradox??

Actually Steel is considered a failure by critics and fans.
No heart. Nothing works.

Nobody will say it, so i say: beep the comics!

"but the actors were so, SO terrible"
What made them terrible?
"bad acting and effects
The effects weren't bad at all.
"awkward lack of dialogue."
Why is this even an issue? Sometimes in movies scenes are more effective, even powerful without dialogue.
"The "it had heart" argument is nothing more than the fact it was a love letter to the Donner films."
Not just the Donner movies, but also to the Superman character in general; recreating Superman's first appearance with him lifting a car over his head, cameos featuring people from other versions of the Superman legend, including Noel Neill who played Lois Lane in the 1950s George Reeves TV series and here is the aging dowager that Lex Luthor swindles, and Jack Larson who was Jimmy Olsen in the 1950s tv series and plays the barman that serves Clark and this films Jimmy when they go for a drink. Even the space shuttle was virtually recreated from the animated "Superman - Last Son of Krypton".

The scenes did not show anything other than Singer was in love with the original movies. As far as not just being a rip off of scenes, well I guess they could have intended to have scenes like the night flight show growth but the actors were so, SO terrible all it showed were some very cheesy costumes, bad acting and effects along with an awkward lack of dialogue. The movie was pretty and that was all it was. The "it had heart" argument is nothing more than the fact it was a love letter to the Donner films.

"You're a moron if you think it did. Try again, fool."
"Superman 1" and "2" had stories, you're just too lazy and stupid not to notice. Not the films' fault you're a fool.

You're a moron if you think it did. Try again, fool.
I don't care about a troll who doesn't pay for his opinion telling me how to review movies.

There was no story in Superman 1 and 2.
You're a moron if you think Superman 1 and 2 had 'no story'.
Aquaman: 15% Off, you say? By Poseidon, those savings are OUTRAGEOUS!

"I knowim just basing this off of a superman sequel idea i gotthe son would be a cocky prick and a smartass and when darkseid beats him and sends him to earth we are suppose to be like YEAHsupes clean him up so that darkseid can do it again"
Still problematic. For one, there are no guarantees that the son, being a hybrid, would be as strong or have the same kind of abilities as the father, let alone any abilities at all. Also, that still brings up the issue of getting Darkseid involved; having the son being a cocky arrogant prick going around planet to planet going "YEAH, SUCK MY #$%#! I'M A BAD-A##!" - that's just kicking a hornet's nest for the sake of it.

I knowim just basing this off of a superman sequel idea i gotthe son would be a cocky prick and a smartass and when darkseid beats him and sends him to earth we are suppose to be like YEAHsupes clean him up so that darkseid can do it again

"This would lead to Richards death(I feel that he is redundant and useless and superman must accept responsibility for HIS SON)"
Richard was far from redundant and useless. Plus, by the end of "Returns", Clark made it explicitly clear that he would indeed be there for his son when he needs him, so he was indeed accepting responsibility. I'd imagine the relationship between Lois and Clark to be more akin to a divorced couple.
"The sequel would than deal with the sonhaving learned his his powers and still having brainiacs concious(parts of brainiacs personality still lives) decides to go to space and fight some threat that brainiac was aware ofdarkseid
Thoughts on this trilogy idea?"
Personally, I'm not crazy about this idea, just because a) with the son being a hybrid of Kryptonian and human genes, I doubt he'd be as powerful as Clark, let alone is able to access his abilities (hell, it's even possible that the super strength was just a one-off fluke, brought on by stress/adrenaline), b) a person doesn't go out to antagonize a powerhouse like Darkseid, especially if they're aware of how dangerous he is. That's just picking a fight for the hell of it. In terms of characters that could work as an antagonist, I've always thought Lobo would have been perfect (80s Lobo, not 90s Lobo) just because he's like a darker take on the Man of Steel. I think it would be cool to have a movie featuring both Lobo and Darkseid.