or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Superman Returns in IMAX
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Superman Returns in IMAX - Page 2

post #16 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Get Smart
Aquaman is a DC character...the crapfest legacy continues!

Fantastic 4....I don't think they're that bad. I like the fact that everyone knows who they are, they have no alter egos. That in itself is unique in superhero world so it's worthy of some props.

Tho I won't argue there arent other bad Marvel heroes, just that the DC "A-team" is pretty lame.

Wait, then who am I thinking of? Marvel has an Aquaman-type of character as well, and he also sucks.

What kind of a superhero doesn't have a secret identity? Having everyone know their identity and where the headquarters is located just makes them an open target.

Jon.
post #17 of 44
I'm reminded of an old joke...

Superman is flying around town when he spots Wonder Woman naked on a rooftop really getting working herself good....so Superman decides to swoop in with his superspeed and give her a quickie before she even knows what happens. He does so and flies away, leaving Wonder Woman to ask "what just happened?"....to where the Invisible Man replied "I don't know but my ass sure hurts"
post #18 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Get Smart
I'm reminded of an old joke...

Superman is flying around town when he spots Wonder Woman naked on a rooftop really getting working herself good....so Superman decides to swoop in with his superspeed and give her a quickie before she even knows what happens. He does so and flies away, leaving Wonder Woman to ask "what just happened?"....to where the Invisible Man replied "I don't know but my ass sure hurts"

I have two separate responses:

1) Ignorance is bliss
2) See, I knew the new Superman was gay!

Jon.
post #19 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
Wait, then who am I thinking of? Marvel has an Aquaman-type of character as well, and he also sucks.

What kind of a superhero doesn't have a secret identity? Having everyone know their identity and where the headquarters is located just makes them an open target.

Jon.


You're probably thinking of Namor the Submariner. He isn't the strongest character but after John Byrne started a Namor series I admit to becoming interested in him. Prior to that he was just a villain for the Fantastic 4 or Iron Man to waste time with. Even when he was a member of The Defenders he was lame, but his own book was done very well and made him more complex and interesting.

Re: the Fantastic 4, it's like rival gang members knowing where the "enemy" lives and occasionally will mount an attack, but in the end knowing where someone lives doesnt equate to success in getting rid of them.
post #20 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Get Smart
You're probably thinking of Namor the Submariner. He isn't the strongest character but after John Byrne started a Namor series I admit to becoming interested in him. Prior to that he was just a villain for the Fantastic 4 or Iron Man to waste time with. Even when he was a member of The Defenders he was lame, but his own book was done very well and made him more complex and interesting.

Re: the Fantastic 4, it's like rival gang members knowing where the "enemy" lives and occasionally will mount an attack, but in the end knowing where someone lives doesnt equate to success in getting rid of them.

Except for the fact that rival gangs don't have superpowers (i.e. a lot more destruction) and are nowhere near as well coordinated.

Jon.
post #21 of 44
The only consistent enemy that would try to plan an attack on F4 was probably Dr Doom....all their other enemies didnt have that personal vendetta against them. The Mole Man? gimme a break. Galactus? he was just trying to feed himself. Blastaar? haha, now there's a BAD marvel character.

I still say it's like the gang dynamic, except the level of destruction is higher. Instead of getting shot walking to your car, you get blasted by thermonuclear radiation out of your eyes or some shit
post #22 of 44
Saw the movie on Monday night - have to say it was good, not great, but good.

Truly thought Kevin Spacey and Parker Posey stole the show.

It is weird how much Brandon Routh looks and sounds like Christopher Reeves.

I wish they had done a little more character exposition with Clark Kent, it kind of seemed like they forgot about him and no one even wondered where he had gone throughout much of the film.
post #23 of 44
Everything that follows is spoiler-related, so stop now if you haven't seen the movie.

*
*
*
*

As to the question of the pregnancy, isn't there a scene in Superman II where Lois and Clark are seen together in bed? Seems like there was at least the implication that they consumated their relationship. (This is the problem with billing a film as a sequel to two movies made two decades ago.)

Personally, I thought the kid thing was a waste of time. What was the point? I exected it to tie together in the end, but it never did, except to give Superman someone to make goo-goo eyes at during the overlong ending. And maybe to set up a sequel series.

I was shocked at how poor this movie was. Half the plot made no sense. The use of Kryptonite was entirely inconsistent, and the motivations of the characters were baffling. Why would Superman leave so abruptly, even if the remains of Krypton were found? Clearly he told the staff at the Planet that he was leaving, but he didn't explain it to Lois? What did he expect to find, other than a huge mass of Kryptonite? Then he returns in some sort of spaceship, but from where? Did he fly there in that thing? If so, why the dramatic return?

I'll skip over the rest of the inconsistencies, except for the big one at the end: How is it that Superman is nearly killed by Kryptonite time and again, yet manages to hurl a continent of it into space?

All that said, I liked the setpieces of the movie very much. The shuttle sequence was spectacular, and the encounter with the machine gunner was great. (Though I had to wonder why the thieves would be so crazy as to start gunning down the cops like that. Why?) I also enjoyed the Jimmy Olsen character, and I was surprised at how much I liked Routh as Superman.

Ah well. I'm hoping the Pirates of the Carribean sequel will be better.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovan
That's kinda more than a minor spoiler Get Smart. But, while we're on the discussion...

*SPOILER ALERT AGAIN*

It's implied that Clark Kent as Superman had an intimate relationship with Lois before he disappeared. The audience finally knows why she's so pissed beyond him just leaving. My only problem with this is that apparently she started dating (and also being intimate) with Cyclops there soon after he left if she thinks it's his. But then, that could just be Lois for you.

*END OF SPOILER*
post #24 of 44
The whole baby thing was just dumb....
Spoilers: Highligt to reveal
Why can't anyone see that superman is Clark with no fucking glasses?! It just baffles me oh wait no the kid can put two and two together though.
Why was Superman able to lift the giant island of kryptonite?
post #25 of 44
according to bryan singer's press releases, he picked the story up after superman II, where supe and lois did the superhero-damsel role playing game in niagara falls. i havent seen the new superman but if we were to go back again to superman II, mr superhero had this power to make people forget things by locking lips with them, and thats what he did to lois. so does this mean lois doesnt know how she got pregnant?
post #26 of 44
I just saw Superman Returns last night and i think it was pretty good. I judge whether a movie is bad by whether I say to myself "when is this thing going to end" in the middle of the movie and I never said that during this movie.

If you start thinking about it too much maybe it gets ruined for you, so you just have ot watch and take it for what it is. I don't know, maybe if you're a comic book purist (read: nerd) then you get caught up in all this stuff and it bothers you when something is not perfectly consistent or makes 100% perfectly logical sense.

With regards to nobody knowing that Clark Kent is Superman, I think that's perfectly feasible. I mean, think about - say there's a guy at your work who's the big dork at the place. Nobody really notices him, he's kind of clumsy, not well spoken, and he's totally inconspicuous . Say he looks a bit like the local super hero. It would probably never occur to you that this is the same guy.

Sure, there are a lot of things about this movie that you kind of have to explain to yourself, but all in all, I think it was pretty good and I'm glad I went to see it.
post #27 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
1080P is almost as good as film, and you don't get "╦ťgrain' in digital.
Jon.
1080p merely reflects the resolution. there are other factors, mainly dynamic range, where film is still superior. they shot this movie digitally because they would be entering all the footage into computers anyway, due to the special effects. so by shooting digitally they were able to skip a step.

technically speaking digital video does not have 'grain', it has 'noise.' it's essentially the same thing. noise can be more or less noticeable depending on how the footage is shot and processed; same as with film.
post #28 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by odoreater
With regards to nobody knowing that Clark Kent is Superman, I think that's perfectly feasible. I mean, think about - say there's a guy at your work who's the big dork at the place. Nobody really notices him, he's kind of clumsy, not well spoken, and he's totally inconspicuous . Say he looks a bit like the local super hero. It would probably never occur to you that this is the same guy.

i assumed clark kent also disappeared when superman did. as journalists, not even one of them even thought that there was something fishy going on here?
post #29 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by acidicboy
i assumed clark kent also disappeared when superman did. as journalists, not even one of them even thought that there was something fishy going on here?

That's the thing though, he's so inconspicuous that nobody notices he's gone.

You also have to grant some artistic license here... I mean, if we can believe that there's a guy that's faster than a speeding bullet, stronger than a locamotive, can leap tall buildings in a single bound, shoots lasers from his eyes, and flies, we can believe that nobody notices when Clark is gone.
post #30 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by odoreater
That's the thing though, he's so inconspicuous that nobody notices he's gone.

You also have to grant some artistic license here... I mean, if we can believe that there's a guy that's faster than a speeding bullet, stronger than a locamotive, can leap tall buildings in a single bound, shoots lasers from his eyes, and flies, we can believe that nobody notices when Clark is gone.

as with the celebrity press, perhaps they were all too busy checking out brandon routh's, er, package, too.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Superman Returns in IMAX