- 07-04-2006, 11:28 PM
- 07-04-2006, 11:46 PM
I thought it sucked, I am a huge superman fan, but a couple things in the movie were pretty cool concepts, (not spoling anything) but over all the movie was very slow and boring. I wanted to fall asleep many a time. The actor did a good job though, he totally reminded my of Chistopher Reeves, and IMO, CR is Superman.
- 07-05-2006, 12:18 AM
he played an excellent superman IMO. lex luthor was much better in this by kevin spacey. the christopher reeves version made lex look like a f'ing doofus. i was far from falling asleep at any point. huge superman fan as well and i couldn't wait for it to come out. didn't leave much room for a sequel though, but neither did the others.
07-05-2006, 01:25 AM
07-05-2006, 02:20 AM
I totally agree on Lex Luthor looking like a bumbling idiot when played by Marlon Brando. The new lex was just plain evil. You are right about the sequel bit too, with the older ones, each movie seemed like it had absolutely nothing to do with the movie preceded it.Originally Posted by Beelzebub
07-05-2006, 02:47 AM
I was thinging the samething, I hate when movies are like this. You ever watch a movie and it doesn't go with all the others before it?Originally Posted by PVSkyHigh
Great movie even tho it started off so slow...I liked the action in this one more so then the others. But superman is getting old all the same crap over and over at lest throw something new in the mix. Like him with a kid or something.
07-05-2006, 03:07 AM
There was one reason this movie completely dissapointed me, and that was how you were pummeled with the religous analogy of Superman being Jesus. The plotline, dialogue, even some of the cinematography absolutely beat me over the head with the fact Superman is supposed to be Jesus, by the end of the movie I actually felt exhausted with it.
07-05-2006, 03:30 AM
07-05-2006, 03:52 AM
07-05-2006, 03:53 AM
07-05-2006, 03:54 AM
07-05-2006, 03:58 AM
Cool - lets hijack
Training is going great thanks for asking.
Fighting much stronger than before and added a couple of pounds of muscle.
07-05-2006, 03:59 AM
07-05-2006, 04:02 AM
07-05-2006, 04:02 AM
07-05-2006, 04:25 AM
I knew it didni't feel right. It was on the tip of my tongue but I was short for time. Thanks for the correction.Originally Posted by Jayhawkk
07-05-2006, 10:18 AM
I thought it was pretty damn good overall, and I was going into it expecting to be disappointed. It was a bit longish, I think for most people though that'll come out on a second viewing kind of like the recent King Kong. Overall the effects were incredible, the actors were all good though I didn't quite buy the actress who played Lois. I was never a fan of Margot Kidder either though. This movie kind of reminds me of Batman Begins. I loved the latter, but it didn't quite fit in with the existing movies. I think Superman has more room to expand though. Solid three out of four stars I'd say.
07-05-2006, 10:27 AM
07-05-2006, 10:27 AM
the symbolism isn't new, just more noticeable now.Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
from: UAHC - Reform Judaism Magazine
Superman actualized the adolescent power fantasies of its creators--two Jewish Depression kids craving a muscle-bound redeemer to liberate them from the social and economic impoverishment of their lives. And, as Michael Chabon (author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay, about two Siegel and Shuster-style cartoonists) notes, there's a parallel between Kavalier and Clay's superhero creations and the Golem--the legendary creature magically conceived by the rabbi of medieval Prague to defend the community from an invasion by its antisemitic enemies. Cartoonist, writer, and comic-book historian Will Eisner (creator of The Spirit) also views Superman as a mythic descendant of the Golem and thus a link in the chain of Jewish tradition. "[Jews needed] a hero who could protect us against an almost invincible force," Eisner says. "So [Siegel and Shuster] created an invincible hero."
The Superman narrative is also rich in Jewish symbolism. He is a child survivor named Kal-El (in Hebrew, "All that is God") from the planet Krypton, whose population, a race of brilliant scientists, is decimated. His parents send him to Earth in a tiny rocket ship, reminiscent of how baby Moses survived Pharaoh's decree to kill all Jewish newborn sons. In the context of the 1930s, the story also reflects the saga of the Kindertransports--the evacuation to safety of hundreds of Jewish children, without their parents, from Austria, Germany, Poland, and Czechoslovakia to Great Britain.
07-05-2006, 01:47 PM
He's a classic savior-type hero..the archetype really. If one wishes to draw parallels to Jesus they can, but I really didn't feel that was the over riding theme. He's invincible but is limited in his abilities to save people based on how fast he can get to them. This causes him grief for even though he has the right intentions, he is not a god and limited in what he can do for men. I rather like the theme that an advanced alien has "faith" in us and that faith is not contingent upon us believing in him. In the end, he just does what he does with pizazz.
07-05-2006, 02:33 PM
07-05-2006, 02:53 PM
New outfit worked well too. I didn't like the color choice at first, but it really worked in the movie.Originally Posted by bioman
07-05-2006, 02:59 PM
yeah color choice wasn't good but they did everything could to make superman a non-american but at the same time.. the more drab color is less fruity... though CR wore it like a champ.. this guy would have just looked like a big ol banana if he wore the tradition red white and blue
07-05-2006, 03:10 PM
Haven't seen it but the trailer I keep seeing on TV doesn't make it look worth watching, I'll hold my breath though and maybe check it out.
07-05-2006, 03:32 PM
The special effects were awesome, but it was a bit too dramatic for me. The story line was weak and barely kept my interest.
07-05-2006, 03:59 PM
The actors portrayed the characters quite well, however the plot sucked for me. Basically felt like Superman 1 + Superman 2 over again..like almost a total rehash.
The action sequences were cool and Brandon Routh seems like a good choice as Reeve's successor to don the red & blue.
Spoilers: (highlight below to see)
Lex was involved in a real-estate scheme..again.. this time by growing a continent that would crush two-thirds of the US - enough of the got-dang real-estate BS already! Ticked me off that they have a Genius Super-Villain, who they could've developed in endless ways (ie. the way he is in Justice League or even Smallville) just mess around with real-estate again, like in Superman 1.
I mean come on, with the technology today, it would've been awesome to see Supes in a fight with a physically challenging villain like Metallo or even Braniac - who would've been 'tag-teaming' with Lex. I mean how freaking exciting is a climax where Supe's lifts a Kryptonian Island out of the Pacific ocean and tosses it into space? More of an anti-climactic scene. I'm not a huge fan of mindless fighting/bashing, but it's about time that Supes kicks some serious ass on film using todays graphic technology.
Then there's the kid. Nothing pissed me off more than the kid. Why the F did they give Supes a kid right off the bat in a film that took almost 20 years to materialize?? Maybe a kid in the third installment would've been fine, but already? Geez - lets focus on Superman not share the screen with super-brat.
While most of the computer graphics were awesome, some of them seriously sucked - almost seemed as they ran out of budget and had some kid taking a CG course in college do a few animation scenes.
The ending was too dragged out. People actually started getting bored in the theatre and even whispered "Damn when's this gonna be over?" The ending with Supe's monologue to his kid would've been perfect as an ending to a trilogy - not in the first movie back after 2 decades.
The film dragged on for 2.5 hrs, while they could've kept it at 2 hrs tops.
Sadly, I came out of the theatre a bit disappointed. I was very much looking forward to this film. Barely 3/5 stars for me.
Nacho Libre was 20x better IMO.
07-05-2006, 05:01 PM
I'm going to have to agree that I was a tad let down, BR was acceptable as Superman but his acting felt a bit bland at times. Kate Bosworth was a terrible lois lane, and kevin spacey stole the movie in my opinion giving the best performance of the bunch. What gets me is how this movie cost 250 million to make, I've seen many movies with better special effects and cgi yet they did not come close to this price tag. Also in terms of this department the movie blew its proverbial load at the plane crash scene and after that nothing felt that "cool looking". I do have hope for the franchise continuing though and I hope someone has the balls to make the next installment the final one. With superman facing off against doomsday and "dying", he is one of the few villans you could cast that would actually be able to do any damage to supes and would make for some of the most electrifying fight sequences in cinematic history if done correctly.
07-05-2006, 10:17 PM
I agree with Bioman, the theme was good. Unfortantely the movie was boring as hell. It was a total remake. Brandon Routh didn't play Superman, he played Christopher Reeve. I am a huge Superman fan, but there was nothing new. Kate Bosworth should find a new job. Maybe she was bored. The plot was insulting to anyone with any intelligence. I know this sounds like a rant, but I was really dissappointed.
07-06-2006, 10:43 AM
07-07-2006, 10:21 PM
Similar Forum Threads
- By Y2Jversion1 in forum General ChatReplies: 103Last Post: 06-21-2006, 04:55 PM
- By rebelhead in forum AnabolicsReplies: 43Last Post: 07-31-2004, 02:12 PM
- By pestis in forum AnabolicsReplies: 15Last Post: 04-10-2004, 11:30 AM
- By WiNgS in forum General ChatReplies: 23Last Post: 01-06-2004, 06:58 PM
- By YellowJacket in forum General ChatReplies: 16Last Post: 02-06-2003, 02:31 PM