Rayman Pirate-Community

I really dislike the way Man of Steel rushed through its world- and character development. We see a little bit of Superman's super shitty childhood here and there, but it's over in no time, and the rest is basically a bunch of super expensive action scenes.

They could have saved tons of money on this movie if they had simply put time and effort into making the characters interesting. Then they wouldn't have had to fill it up with crazy GC fight scenes that start out exciting (they are well done), but end up lasting way too long, especially since I could never really get invested in the plot.

ikke471 wrote:I just went to go see it because.. Superman..

Oh dear. People are paying to watch warmed-over franchise rehashes because Superman. Meanwhile a beautifully crafted and boldly original science fiction adventure languishes. Our new cultural touchstones are mediocre and soulless and no one cares.

El Dango wrote:They could have saved tons of money on this movie if they had simply put time and effort into making the characters interesting. Then they wouldn't have had to fill it up with crazy GC fight scenes that start out exciting (they are well done), but end up lasting way too long, especially since I could never really get invested in the plot.

Fun fact: Zack Snyder was not Christopher Nolan's first choice to direct Man of Steel. He originally offered the film to Guillermo del Toro, who chose to make Pacific Rim instead. Two thoughts spring to mind. First, thank Christ he didn't allow himself to get sucked into the weird emptiness of this film. Second, what on earth must be going on inside Nolan's head? When the director of Pan's Labyrinth declines a project, how can the director of Sucker Punch be the next logical choice? Did Nolan have the faintest clue what he wanted this film to be? I don't think so.

He wanted it to be big and flashy, that's for sure! Sadly, it seems like he didn't consider what kind of take on the Superman story he wanted it to be. I thought this was going to be a darker and grittier vision than previous films, and it does have elements of that here and there, but then there is all the flashy sci-fi stuff, the over-the-top jokes that would be a better fit for a parody (such as the truck that gets impaled with several trees because Superman got super pissed at some guy), and the weird, goofy symbolism in certain scenes (Superman drowning in human skulls). To be honest, it's pretty difficult to describe the overall tone of the movie, as there doesn't seem to be one.

'Good action' is pretty much the only major thing it really has going for it, if you ask me.

I'm honestly not sure as to whether I liked this or Green Lantern more. Green Lantern was a complete mess with horrible writing, horrible acting , horrible CGI and a horrible level of coherency, but at the same time it was kind of fun and full of life; while Man of Steel merely had poor writing, mediocre acting, great CGI and a mediocre level of coherency, it was just depressing. When it tries to be dark it ends up being kind of sick (and mildly goofy at times), and when Henry Cavill smiles or tries to show off some cent of happiness, it looks more like the kind of smile someone would give right before they're about to burn down a preschool. This kind of atmosphere works in a movie like Sucker Punch where the atmosphere is supposed to be weird and unsettling, but in Man of Steel it's just morbid.

I just re-watched "Jeff Who Lives at Home" and still love it. It was actually funnier the 2nd time I watched it. Ed Helms and Jason Segal make a great sibling team. Also I have seen a large bundle of movies this summer I think like six.

spiraldoor wrote:Oh dear. People are paying to watch warmed-over franchise rehashes because Superman. Meanwhile a beautifully crafted and boldly original science fiction adventure languishes. Our new cultural touchstones are mediocre and soulless and no one cares.

What I find even worse is the fact that Grown Ups 2 seems to be topping Pacific Rim in terms of ticket sales. That's right, a loving homage to Japanese monster movies and anime with a great story and arguably the best action sequences of the year is beaten at the box office by a movie which involves a deer pissing on the main character. And we wonder why there's so little originality in Hollywood these days.

Adsolution wrote:When it tries to be dark it ends up being kind of sick (and mildly goofy at times), and when Henry Cavill smiles or tries to show off some cent of happiness, it looks more like the kind of smile someone would give right before they're about to burn down a preschool.

I actually liked Cavill's charisma and paternalistic warmth. He'd have made a very good Superman in a more straightforward, less creepy film. In Man of Steel he's one of the few elements that stops it slipping into complete genre deconstruction. Maybe it would've been more coherent in its bitter postmodernism if they'd cast someone like Michael Shannon in the lead role.

I watched Now You See Me on Monday and I watched Monsters University today.

Both are great films for different reasons. Like has been said before, Monsters U was a good prequel, and not one of those crappy slap-ons that you'd expect from a prequel. It's its own seperate story that works very well without the events of Monsters Inc.. However, there's of course a ton of references that are funny or nice if you spot them. It was a touching film, in the end, with lots of character development and a considerably noticable increase in animation technology. When Sully and Mike [enter the human's world, it all suddenly becomes so dark, gritty and basically realistic-like. I really like that in a film; realistic animation mixed in with the laws of physics and nature of its own contained story]. I like the character design, architecture and stories of several people you may or may not know from its 'sequel'. I definitely recommend watching it, especially but absolutely not necessarily if you already liked Monsters Inc..

Now You See Me has a cool storyline that kept me busy, all the while expecting one thing, but getting another. It's got a really neat cast and I loved the surprises it kept throwing at me. The visual effects are really pretty, but not in-your-face and the humour is great. There's fun little moments like the card trick in the beginning that seems to fool not only the characters in the film, but also - from what I could tell - the entire audience. I just have a lot of questions about its ending, like what it all means for the characters and whether or not this means that the film demands a sequel. I'd watch it again, definitely, so maybe you should go watch it too!

I saw Now You See Me too. Mostly on par with what you wrote about it.

Also saw Bowfiner. I was expecting it to be your everyday generic 90's comedy like Rat Race or something, but it turned out to be a pleasant surprise. Starts a bit slow but once you get into it it becomes a great experience.

spiraldoor wrote:Oh dear. People are paying to watch warmed-over franchise rehashes because Superman. Meanwhile a beautifully crafted and boldly original science fiction adventure languishes. Our new cultural touchstones are mediocre and soulless and no one cares.

The thing is I love the superman comics so I HAD to go see the movie.
I do agree with you though, Pacific Rim seems like it's a better movie then most movies in theater right now.

ikke471 wrote:

spiraldoor wrote:Oh dear. People are paying to watch warmed-over franchise rehashes because Superman. Meanwhile a beautifully crafted and boldly original science fiction adventure languishes. Our new cultural touchstones are mediocre and soulless and no one cares.

The thing is I love the superman comics so I HAD to go see the movie.
I do agree with you though, Pacific Rim seems like it's a better movie then most movies in theater right now.

The comics are not at all what you should expect from the Marvel and DC movies. Although I may eventually watch The Dark Knight, I can't really find too much joy in all these over dramatic stories that, really, are about men in silly outfits. I just can't take it serious when I see the US army having these serious, realistic conversations on how to handle a thread to the country and then deciding that a... flying man with magical powers will solve the issue. I won't judge any of them because I've never seen them (Well, did see Thor which was a bit underwhelming) but considering how many of these movies they shit out right now I'm starting to doubt their quality. Dark Knight seems promising, but Man of Steel sounds to me like a cheap attempt to copy it. I mean, fuck, Wolverine, Thor, Superman, Batman, Iron Man, Avengers. I know they are all different characters with different personalities but to me all these movies look like they realised this is a popular concept and now they're gonna milk it to death. Do people really still get excited when they see a generic trailer of an American city getting destroyed?

Well, that's what super heros are, people with suits who save the world, it is kind of the same story I guess, over and over again, just with different characters, worlds, and differences in plot

I personally find Superman to be an extremely bland superhero, I don't care for DC in general.
Marvel all the way for me.

Keane wrote: Do people really still get excited when they see a generic trailer of an American city getting destroyed?

it seems that for the next Wolverine it won't be like this (hopefully).

Considering Superman...well, it's Superman. With his powers he needs to face a villain who can at least destroy some cities. If I remember well, in the comics only Batman did manage to beat him, and he wasn't using a giant robot or whatever.

The thing is, with The Nolan trilogy of Batman, Marvel and DC tried to develop the story of their characters to make them more understandable, but with some of them it's not working very well.

I watched Superman three weeks ago : a good one but many fighting sequences were too fast in terms of movement, and it kinda reminds me of Green Lantern, which wasn't exceptional at all too. However you can't deny that Zac Snyder tried his best

Watched Real Steel this afternoon. I liked, it was very entertaining. Lets say it is the boxing of future.

saerleiya wrote:

Keane wrote: Do people really still get excited when they see a generic trailer of an American city getting destroyed?

Considering Superman...well, it's Superman. With his powers he needs to face a villain who can at least destroy some cities. If I remember well, in the comics only Batman did manage to beat him, and he wasn't using a giant robot or whatever.

I don't find these new movies charming. I don't associate superheroes, let alone Superman with drama and darkness. I'm not against wanting do something different with your characters, and I certainly don't think most of them are bad, but Man of Steel is not at all how I enjoy seeing Superman. But hey, it doesn't matter. They'll make a Man of Steel 2, and let's say it is a terrible movie. It's lame, confusing, rushed, and full of horrible actors. What would happen? They'd make a Man of Steel 3 and people will be waiting in line because, well, it's Superman! People today often choose what they want based upon names or brands, not what's actual quality. Thirty years from now they'll still make reboots for series like Die Hard. Hell, they'll surely make another one in a few years despite the fact that the latest one may have been one of the most generic and disappointing action movies of the year.

Why do people act like Sony is the Jesus Christ of video gaming and believe they care dearly for each of their customers and will continue to put real effort into their work? Because they have a brand name that people want. PlayStation All-Stars was an underwhelming copy of Smash Bros. but is getting defended by fans who claim it to be this amazing fighter. Now imagine if Microsoft had done that. They'd be made fun of, people would be making shitty jokes on memegenerator and everyone would have called it a direct rip-off.

Haruka wrote:Watched Real Steel this afternoon. I liked, it was very entertaining. Lets say it is the boxing of future.

I enjoyed that movie a lot too. How moving, that robot can be. :')

I saw The World's End, and while I won't say I liked it quite as much as Hot Fuzz and Shaun Of The Dead (maybe it still needs time to grow on me), I still really liked it nevertheless and it certainly stands tall above most of the competition, being hilarious and also containing the best use of the word 'fuck' since Argo.

Keane wrote:They'll make a Man of Steel 2, and let's say it is a terrible movie. It's lame, confusing, rushed, and full of horrible actors.

Batman will also be in it.