Superman ... ZZZzzzzzzzz (1 Viewer)

[Mikel_Cooperman]

I agree with you Steve Christou. They are going to get a blaring loud and watered down Superhero with none of the pulp. They will get a Big studio movie like Daredevil which is far worse than Superman the Movie will ever be.

 

[Dennis]

Well said Steve.

Superman is the example as to how a comic book film should be made.

 

[Joshua_Y]

I'm sure the new Superman movie will be right up your alley, it will probably be a hybrid of Spiderman, X-Men and Daredevil, fast cutting, loud rock music, cartoonish flying sequences, action-packed and ultimately soulless.

Hey hey...no need to bash the new comic films...because I find all of those excellent and thought Daredevil was the best comic movie since The Crow...

 

[ThomasC]

I thought Spider-Man was more boring than Superman, Daredevil was decent but the fast cuts and rock music sometimes made me go "ugh," and the X-Men movies have been the best thing since the first three Batman movies. Whether or not the movies stay true to their comic roots doesn't matter to me if the the script, acting, direction, etc., are all good because I've never read a comic book in my life.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

A good point has been raised. While what we're seeing in Spider-man is technically spectacular, you're pulled out of the story because you know that that isn't the actor doing it, or a person at all. With Superman, even though the effects aren't nearly as spectacular or seamless, you still know that that's Christopher Reeve pulling them off. Plus, you can still marvel at "How did they pull that off?" whereas such questions no longer exist.
Plus, Spider-man cultural icon though he may be, just doesn't have those signature moments like ripping open the shirt to reveal the pentagonal "S."
As for capturing the modern Superman, I think Smallville does that fairly well, and Michael Rosenbaum makes the quinnesential Luthor. But I just don't think there going to catch lightning in a bottle the way they did with S:TM. They may make a technically superior film, but it just won't hold up to the undefinables of this take.

Again, all my opinion.

 

[Joshua_Y]

I agree Adam...for the longest time I was marveled at how they did a lot of the flying stuff...and now I know how they did some of it thanks to the DVD...whereas today it would be CGI...and the only CGI flying I've seen that looked good was in Reloaded...the Lois and Clark show...doesnt work...

 

[Paul_Scott]

i would disagree with you here.
there were shots in Spider-man that were literally ripped from classic Romita images.
these are poses i've seen consistently throughout the last 30 years (well, a little less after everybody and his brother started to ape McFarlane).
from beach towels, to saturday morning and weekday afternoons, and innumerable slurpee cups.
they gave me a chill in the back of my neck when i saw them, much the same way Superman had done 24 years earlier.
on subsequent viewings it hasn't worn nearly as well for me, though.
after the first viewing last year, i would have placed it just shy of STM, in my private ranking, but it's fallen quite a bit since.
i don't know what to think about S-M 2.
most of what i still like the best from the first film is going to be gone, and the things that i wasn't crazy about are going to come front and center.
guess we'll just have to wait and see.

when Superman hit the screen, the last incarnation of the character was a very crude, mostly kid-friendly tv series, with very simplstic stories and characters to match the crude and simplistic effects work.
compared to that, Superman was an advancement in technology on the order of Jurassic Park.
i can still channel alot of what i felt when i first watched the movie, so in that sense the movie hasn't aged at all for me.

i agree with you about Smallville.
it's gotten better and better and is one of the best uses of a comic book character in any medium.
wonderful work all around, with a great Luthor in Rosenbaum.
i think the series is a terrific contribution to the mythos of these characters.
i had my doubts when i first heard about it, but i'm a believer now.

 

[Dharmesh C]

I think seamless f/x = believability if you buy the story. For instance, one half of the Daily Planet building during the Helicopter Rescue sequence is a MATTE painting! The rest is a model! 'Cos it's seamless, 'cos the editing, the lighting and everything else comes together you believe that it's actually real!

There are a lot of seamless integration of f/x and live action elements in Superman. Reeve's performance makes you believe he's flying. The first flying shot in the Fortress of Solitude still amazes me, terrific mechanical shot.

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

Loved the Crow, Loved Spiderman and Xmen but Daredevil was an embarrasment to any comic movie. The characters are dumb and uninteresting and of course you get the heavy rock music mentioned above.
When you are laughing and it isnt suppose to be funny, the movie is in trouble.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

Loved the Crow, Loved Spiderman and Xmen but Daredevil was an embarrasment to any comic movie. The characters are dumb and uninteresting and of course you get the heavy rock music mentioned above

Are you familiar at all with Daredevil? It was done extremely well, especially the radar sense, and the characters were very well done. Never thought I'd like Duncan as Kingpin, but he did the part proud

 

[Joshua_Y]

Daredevil is probably my favorite comic character besides Superman...and I thought the film really did the comic proud and it was made with love and care by people who really love the character! And a helluva great cast...Affleck is brilliant in it and every shot in the film looks like it could have been taken right from the pages of a comic!

 

[Nate Anderson]

As a kid, I remember liking Superman II better as well, simply because it was more action packed. But now that I've grown, I've actually come to like the original much, much more.

Superman: The Movie is simply wonderful. It's my favorite out of the series. Yeah, it's a little on the long side, I know. But it takes the time to set up the characters which adds a depth to the film that simple wall to wall mayhem doesn't accomplish.

My $0.02.

 

[Matthew_Millheiser]

Besides my ultimate love for the first Superman film, no comic-book movie can touch Darkman.

 

[Joshua_Y]

Good choice Matthew...but I forget...was Darkman actually based on a comic book?

 

[Andy Sheets]

Nope, although Marvel did publish a couple of miniseries based on the movie after it was released.

 

[Matthew_Millheiser]

Darkman was a screen-original creation, but it was a pitch-perfect comic book movie. Much better than Raimi's later work on that other guy (name eludes me...).

 

[TheLongshot]

Are you familiar at all with Daredevil? It was done extremely well, especially the radar sense, and the characters were very well done. Never thought I'd like Duncan as Kingpin, but he did the part proud

Sorry, can't say that. There are some parts that are pretty good, but as a whole, it wasnt' a great movie.

Problems:

1) Ben Affleck being totally miscast. He does not do dark and brooding all that well.
2) The stupid playground fight. I'm waiting for someone to scream "Mortal Kombat"!
3) The fact that he seems to leap around the city like Spider-Man. While I understand that he's "The Man Without Fear", some of the stuff he did (like the leap off of the building) would probably have injured him. It just looked cool.
4) Not enough development of Elektra. That's the problem when you try to stuff a big story arc into a 2 hour movie.
5) The trial. Man, Matt just comes off as totally incompetant, something which I don't think he is in the comic.
6) That backflipping thing to avoid the stained glass. Stupid.

Stuff I did like:

1) The pain factor. I liked the fact that you did see him taking a lot of punnishment, and that he's paying a price for it.
2) The isolation chamber. Logical for someone who can't turn their power off.
3) Bullseye. Actually Colin Farrel probably should have played Daredevil. He basically steals every scene.
4) The tributes to Frank Miller's books. Definitly a lot of stuff taken from that.

Edit: Forgot one

5) The whole origin sequence. Probably the best thing about the movie.

Jason

 

[Jack Shappa]

calling a movie a "classic" has got nothing to do with liking it - it's got everything to do with recognizing it's place in the history of film, it's influence on the subsequent development of cinema, as well as the nature of its technical merits as a film.

Exactly. As to my not showing "backbone" that implies I'm only saying Superman is a classic to appease those who like it more. Nothing could be further from the truth. I loved the film as a kid, I consider it a milestone in movie-making, but it just isn't going to do it for me anymore.

- JS

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

Ben Affleck looked like a pimp with a cane in that movie. He was rediculous in the role and the dialouge was so cliche ridden and laughable, I was laughing outloud.

As for Darkman, I have to agree. Great movie and very underrated.

While reading all these comments about Superman and thinking it was too "zzzzzz," it made me think of a quote that I had recently read from the creator of Babylon 5, it went something like this:

The MTV generation has had its tastes so thoroughly bastardized by quick cuts, lowering the attention span further and further, that any bite of more than ten seconds and they start to wander, it becomes a block of words and they blur out.

 

[Joshua_Y]

1) Ben Affleck being totally miscast. He does not do dark and brooding all that well.
2) The stupid playground fight. I'm waiting for someone to scream "Mortal Kombat"!
3) The fact that he seems to leap around the city like Spider-Man. While I understand that he's "The Man Without Fear", some of the stuff he did (like the leap off of the building) would probably have injured him. It just looked cool.
4) Not enough development of Elektra. That's the problem when you try to stuff a big story arc into a 2 hour movie.
5) The trial. Man, Matt just comes off as totally incompetant, something which I don't think he is in the comic.
6) That backflipping thing to avoid the stained glass. Stupid.

Since I am a DD fan...I will attempt to defend this flick...

1. This is subjective...but I found Affleck to be pitch perfect as Murdock...hell he even looks like Murdock from the comics I totally bought it!

2. Thought it was a fun scene...like a courtship I guess...its their version of a date...

3. Well I guess you didnt listen...he said that he had trained his body until the entire city became his playground and was able to move better than people with site...because of his acute sense of touch and sound...

4. Look for more in the Directors Cut...

5. I didnt get that at all...

6. I thought that was cool as hell!

And back to Supes: Ya know...they can make 10 new Superman movies and none of them will ever come close to matching the magic of Superman The Movie...there may be other Superman movies...but they will never do it better than Dick Donner...Chris Reeve...and Margo Kidder did in Superman...they can have the biggest advances in CGI to make it look 100% believeable that he is really flying...but it still won't quite feel like he's flying like in the original! Point is...it will never come close to STM IMO...