Originally posted by wakkawakkawakkaWhen I read this, I immediately thought of the Neo vs Many-Smiths fight in Matrix: Reloaded. It was easy to tell who the stuntman on the wire was when a Smith, or Neo, got knocked away, and when CGI was used. The stuntman looked like a man being carried by an edited-out harness: his trajectory looked controlled and not fluid. However, when a CGI Smith or Neo was knocked away, the trajectory looked smooth and natural, like how a man-shaped object would actually spin and/or go flying through the air.
Also a little less CGI would work wonders IMO...c'mon what's wrong with a few stuntmen performing some of those fights?
I can understand why not everyone is crazy about CGI. But for me, paradoxically, it brings a sense of naturalness to the action. It also worked for me when Spider-Man was web-slinging through the concrete canyons of NY, or when Selene was fighting the giant werewolf in the last Underworld flick.
Originally posted by Mindship
When I read this, I immediately thought of the Neo vs Many-Smiths fight in Matrix: Reloaded. It was easy to tell who the stuntman on the wire was when a Smith, or Neo, got knocked away, and when CGI was used. The stuntman looked like a man being carried by an edited-out harness: his trajectory looked controlled and not fluid. However, when a CGI Smith or Neo was knocked away, the trajectory looked smooth and natural, like how a man-shaped object would actually spin and/or go flying through the air.I can understand why not everyone is crazy about CGI. But for me, paradoxically, it brings a sense of naturalness to the action. It also worked for me when Spider-Man was web-slinging through the concrete canyons of NY, or when Selene was fighting the giant werewolf in the last Underworld flick.
Not saying that it was bad but I'm just saying that it could've looked better with people I think. So I guess a decent compromise would be better CGI? Or at least more fighting where I could appreciate the effects more. In all honesty I didn't make the Matrix connection at all with any of the fights in MoS. Also I'm going to hope for a directors cut with extended fights...hopefully.
Sometimes CGI works and other times it looks weird.
Originally posted by Kotor3
No, they can do what they did in MOS:
• Show superman for 23 minutes in which:
o 3 minutes is spent on him learning how to fly
o 10 minutes is spent on him fighting
o 5 minutes on him talking to humans, his dad and kissing Lois
o The last 5 minutes is spent on him having Zod in a choke hold before breaking his neck and screaming.Show some action on Kryton and spend the rest of the movie showing a moping Clark with some flashbacks of his life.
Or they could have made things much more balance as they did in the original superman.
You've actually described a lot of different entertaining stuff that happened in the movie. So I don't see what your point it. If you just want to see Superman fly go watch Returns.
Some of the complaints about this movie are phucking stupid, seriously. Fair enough complaints about the dismal characterization (Letting your pa get cornholed by a tornado? Seriously) but really, that's all that was lacking. Yeah, it's important, but the movie succeeded in more than enough areas for me to be excited for a sequel, and to give them the benefit of the doubt that they will improve.
7/10, with high hopes for the future. Which is what Superman is really ultimately about.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
You've actually described a lot of different entertaining stuff that happened in the movie. So I don't see what your point it. If you just want to see Superman fly go watch Returns.
Really? Well, if you want to use superman returns as an example of what happens when too much focus is put on superman flying, what about the previous superman movies?
I understand why Zack Fair thinks MOS is great, but if you find 23 minutes of on screen superman out of 2 hours and 23 minutes of movie acceptable, THEN GOOD FOR YOU!
Originally posted by Martian_mind👆
Some of the complaints about this movie are phucking stupid, seriously. Fair enough complaints about the dismal characterization (Letting your pa get cornholed by a tornado? Seriously) but really, that's all that was lacking. Yeah, it's important, but the movie succeeded in more than enough areas for me to be excited for a sequel, and to give them the benefit of the doubt that they will improve.7/10, with high hopes for the future. Which is what Superman is really ultimately about.
Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Well at least it's not like every Batman movie where he gets less screen time than his villains.
I would not call that statement true for the Tim Burton’s Batman movies but I get what you are stating.
As for MOS, I do not know, it depends on who you are talking about Clark or Superman. Zod was in the beginning of the movie and appear at the same time Superman appears. So, if it is Superman vs Zod then Zod has more screen time.
Brandon Routh was good as Superman shame they didn't continue with him.
Originally posted by wakkawakkawakka
Also how is flying a complaint? I'm sorry but of all the things that were wrong with the movie I don't think the Kryptonian's flight was one of them.
Out of curiosity I re-watched Superman Returns lastnight & IMO the flight sequences were handled better than MOS & in most scenes more realistic & believable.
Singer showed more close-ups of Superman in flight whether at full speed or just hovering, whereas Snyder utilised a lot of long distance shots giving little empathy to the character.
I also remember a lot of people in awe of the trailers when Supes broke the sound barrier...Singer already showed that in Returns.
Originally posted by Kotor3
Really? Well, if you want to use superman returns as an example of what happens when too much focus is put on superman flying, what about the previous superman movies?I understand why Zack Fair thinks MOS is great, but if you find 23 minutes of on screen superman out of 2 hours and 23 minutes of movie acceptable, THEN GOOD FOR YOU!
Did you even get the movie? It wasn't 23 minutes of Superman, and the rest Clark Kent.
No, it was an entire film about the MAN OF STEEL minus the first Krypton chapter.
If your talking about using his powers in suit time, then you should really go time exactly how much Iron man we had fighting away in the last IM movie, or how much action time Captain America had in his movie.
Like I said if all you want is Kal dressed as Superman flying around, then there's plenty of that in Superman Returns for you.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Did you even get the movie? It wasn't 23 minutes of Superman, and the rest Clark Kent.
No, it was an entire film about the MAN OF STEEL minus the first Krypton chapter.
This comment is hilarious.
I’m really not going to repeat my previous comments about this movie. You totally ignore my comment referencing the balance of scenes between characters that was done in the original superman.
As I stated before, you like the movie good for you.
Please stop making pointless sarcastic comments and referring to superman returns.