Commander
Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:12 PM
Deal with it - it´s the times we´re living in right now.
When even the Transformers franchise has started cribbing from real-life disasters to add "depth" I'd say it's fair to say it's become old-hat. And the last Superman film did much the same thing, seven bloody years ago
Don't get me wrong, it looks good, but it also looks 100% exactly like I expected when this project was announced.
Commander
Posted 12 December 2012 - 02:13 PM
True. I just meant to say: it´s no wonder movies are picking up on these themes because this is what our current zeitgeist is all about.
The Bond films, however, are marvelous examples for the way attitudes and perspectives are changing.
Personally, I believe that we´re about to leave the age of cyncism behind, very slowly, of course. People are beginning to crave for pure escapism again. The bleak seriousness is getting old, as you said.
I even think that Superman as a character is a step into this direction: accepting a magical saviour figure in our midst and trying to find a way how to deal with it. SUPERMAN RETURNS, you´re right, already tried to tackle those themes but only touched the surface of them. It was more about Clark Kent figuring out whether he wanted to be Superman again.
This time, it seems to be about Clark Kent trying to figure out what he can be in our world and what his superiority can do for humanity - or to it.
Edited by SecretAgentFan, 12 December 2012 - 02:14 PM.
Commander
Posted 12 December 2012 - 02:29 PM
I'm just glad to see a REAL superhero blasting back onto the screen in this darker world - Superman is a brilliant icon, and I can't wait to see him fly!
Commander
Posted 13 December 2012 - 08:56 PM
True. I just meant to say: it´s no wonder movies are picking up on these themes because this is what our current zeitgeist is all about.
The Bond films, however, are marvelous examples for the way attitudes and perspectives are changing.
Personally, I believe that we´re about to leave the age of cyncism behind, very slowly, of course. People are beginning to crave for pure escapism again. The bleak seriousness is getting old, as you said.
I even think that Superman as a character is a step into this direction: accepting a magical saviour figure in our midst and trying to find a way how to deal with it. SUPERMAN RETURNS, you´re right, already tried to tackle those themes but only touched the surface of them. It was more about Clark Kent figuring out whether he wanted to be Superman again.
This time, it seems to be about Clark Kent trying to figure out what he can be in our world and what his superiority can do for humanity - or to it.
I think a perfect example of your point is the lukewarm reception to The Amazing Spider-man. It was too dark, especially for Spiderman, I think we need more light hearted adventures like we get with the other marvel films.
Commander
Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:45 AM
Um, lukewarm? It made tons of money! And I don´t think it was too dark at all. I really loved that movie.
I think it did not get too much fanboy attention because it was sandwiched between the AVENGERS behemoth and THE DARK KNIGHT RISES. In any other year, it would have fared better. IMO it was the best Spiderman movie yet. The Raimi trilogy has not aged well at all. Only the second is good, IMO. The first one is mediocre, the third one unwatchable.
Lt. Commander
Posted 14 December 2012 - 10:44 PM
^ Um dark? How? And yeah it made 700 million dollars, so please lukewarm?
Lieutenant
Posted 15 December 2012 - 04:02 AM
^ Um dark? How? And yeah it made 700 million dollars, so please lukewarm?
Edited by EyesOnly, 15 December 2012 - 06:11 AM.
Commander
Posted 15 December 2012 - 09:45 AM
Darker than Raimi´s first one, yep. But Raimi´s other Spidey movies were pretty dark - and I´d say much darker than the re-boot.
Lt. Commander
Posted 15 December 2012 - 04:55 PM
^ Um dark? How? And yeah it made 700 million dollars, so please lukewarm?
I thought it was obvious that it was a darker film than the other three.
I mean yeah it's dark but I think you could argue Raimi's trilogy was dark too..
Commander
Posted 18 December 2012 - 03:39 AM
Raimi's trilogy wasn't dark. Spiderman 3 sucked, but when stupid dance moves and black clothes are the darkest thing about it, it's not very dark. By lukewarm, I meant the opinions of the film, not the box office. If it was only box office taken into account, we would've gotten Spiderman 4 and not another reboot. And don't get me wrong, I think the cast and acting were great (love Emma Stone), the film just is too dark and the story is too similar to the 2002 (and vastly superior) film.
Edited by seawolfnyy, 18 December 2012 - 03:40 AM.
Commander
Posted 18 December 2012 - 05:23 AM
Interesting. I would say even one minute of THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN is more interesting than the whole first 2002 Raimi SPIDERMAN.
Commander
Posted 20 December 2012 - 01:28 PM
Were we watching the same movie?
Lt. Commander
Posted 20 December 2012 - 04:41 PM
Interesting. I would say even one minute of THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN is more interesting than the whole first 2002 Raimi SPIDERMAN.
I mean personally I liked both Raimi's Spiderman and the Amazing Spiderman. I mean I think they are both different takes but that they were really good. I just feel that the Amazing Spiderman was good because it was more devoted to the comics (so I have heard) and Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone had really good chemistry in the film, which is definitely enjoyable to watch.
Commander
Posted 20 December 2012 - 05:08 PM
True. For me, Garfield was the main reason this Spider-Man worked so much better. I like Maguire - but IMO he is too laid back for the role.
Lt. Commander
Posted 20 December 2012 - 08:31 PM
Yeah Garfield was so nerdy! He was adorable, it's what you expect Peter Parker to be.
Commander
Posted 20 December 2012 - 09:04 PM
I did think the cast and acting were excellent in Webb's film. Definitely far above anything in Spiderman 3 (minus Thomas Haden Church who was the only good think about Spidey 3). I just don't think the film was different enough. It was not as much of a reboot as a straight remake of a 10 year old movie. On top of that, the whole "untold story" that was touted before the film was released, was never even touched on. By the end, it felt more like a part 1 than a self-contained story.
Edited by seawolfnyy, 20 December 2012 - 09:05 PM.
Commander
Posted 21 December 2012 - 06:11 AM
I'd agree with the new film being better then the original Spider - Man film.
Lt. Commander
Posted 23 December 2012 - 02:02 AM
I did think the cast and acting were excellent in Webb's film. Definitely far above anything in Spiderman 3 (minus Thomas Haden Church who was the only good think about Spidey 3). I just don't think the film was different enough. It was not as much of a reboot as a straight remake of a 10 year old movie. On top of that, the whole "untold story" that was touted before the film was released, was never even touched on. By the end, it felt more like a part 1 than a self-contained story.
That's one thing that I didn't like the whole mystery wasn't told. I wish it was, but they are going to make a sequel so that's why.
Commander
Posted 24 December 2012 - 05:49 AM
That's one thing that I didn't like the whole mystery wasn't told. I wish it was, but they are going to make a sequel so that's why.
True, it just makes it more annoying because I see The Amazing Spiderman as less of it's own story and more of a setup.
Commander
Posted 24 December 2012 - 08:46 AM
But Raimi´s first one also only setup the conflict with the James Franco-character...
Commander
Posted 24 December 2012 - 06:23 PM
True, but it wasn't touted the way "the untold story" was for Amazing and then left untold. But either way it seems we have gotten way off topic as this thread is meant to be for discussing superman. So I created a different thread for all of us to continue our discussion over which Spiderman film is better.
http://debrief.comma...zing-spiderman/
Commander
Posted 08 January 2013 - 08:44 AM
We have a new mean and moody, yet reflective, image of Superman and a new synopsis...sounds dangerous...!
http://movies.cosmic...-earth-imminent
Lt. Commander
Posted 08 January 2013 - 04:52 PM
I don't like Superman but I want to see this. Henry Cavill is selling this movie to me.
Commander
Posted 09 January 2013 - 08:11 AM
He's certainly looking better than I thought. Almost a god-like look to his strong appearence as Superman...
Commander
Posted 09 January 2013 - 05:20 PM
I don't like Superman but I want to see this. Henry Cavill is selling this movie to me.
You don´t like the greatest superhero of them all? Why not?
Lt. Commander
Posted 09 January 2013 - 08:03 PM
He's overrated in my opinion. I mean he is almost too powerful, he only has one weakness.. I don't know i just have never favored him.
Commander
Posted 10 January 2013 - 08:23 AM
He's the daddy of all superheroes - and actually not afraid to BE super, as a hero should. I don't think he's overrated at the moment, he may get there one day, but after the 'Superman Returns' affair of 2006, I think people are now luke warm to what Superman represents on film and this 'Man Of Steel' needs to remind the world how defining Superman is as a hero in modern society.
It's a big gamble for the big blue boy scout but I hope it pays off.
Lt. Commander
Posted 10 January 2013 - 04:51 PM
I feel like it has to pay off. If it doesn't, I don't know who else would want to tackle Superman.
Commander
Posted 10 January 2013 - 05:06 PM
I agree. If MAN OF STEEL flops, there won´t be another Superman movie in a long time. It would even affect the planned JUSTICE LEAGUE movie.
Lt. Commander
Posted 10 January 2013 - 05:18 PM
Yeah and not only just the Justice League movie, but all of the other solo DC heroes movies. I heard that they were planning on a Wonder Women movie after Justice League. I think that's a rumor though. What's interesting is Joss Whedon wanted to do a Wonder Women movie, but he was rejected and then he switched to Marvel and look how successful that was.