Originally posted by Darth Thor
Oh so you Bandwagoning on to Affleck's Batman now as well after saying he looked Awful as Batman? 😆
Originally posted by Firefly218Darth Thor you're an idiot. Apparently I am a hater but if I say anything nice I'm a bandwagoner. You don't even grasp what it is I'm saying. Your hatred is warping you.
He's talking about acting ability, not appearance
Originally posted by Lestov16
MOS was 2/3 of a good movie. It's prologue on Krypton and everything that happened from the moment Zod and his boys showed up was some of the best stuff I've seen on film. It's 1st act was undeniably God awful though.I think above all things, MOS suffered because for whatever reason, Goyer decided to give Superman a different backstory for no reason other than to make him into a brooding drifter because that's hip. And changing a backstory can be fine, but not when the one you replaced it with is horribly confusing and inconsistent, especially in regards to Pa Kent. It's a damn shame when Smallville has a better Superman backstory than your big budget movie.
Still love MOS, but it's impossible to ignore it's flaws because they are so noticeable because the film would be so much better otherwise. I think with some script edits, it would have been on par with TDK.
Goyer wrote him as a drifter because that is pretty much what he is in "Superman: Earth One" volume 1, and the film borrowed heavily from it, even the method for Jor-El storing the codex. If you like MoS you should pick up that book. MoS was basically Superman: Earth One The Movie.
I have to ask, because I see it said all the time and it does not make sense to me: How does looking for clues to ones origins qualify as brooding? Would an orphan looking for their birth parents be classified as a "brooder"? Kal was searching for something that could shed light on where he comes from while working odd jobs with, in my opinion, as pleasant a disposition as one could manage under the circumstances. And once he did find those things he was pretty much all smiles (until Zod showed up). What makes you think differently?
I find it interesting that you don't like the first act though. Most of the people who dislike the film say that was the best part!
Originally posted by Firefly218
He's talking about acting ability, not appearance
Affleck's appearance in the role is part of his Batman portrayal, which he just said he'd be fine in, despite previously jumping on the Affleck/Batman hate with the initial pictures.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Darth Thor you're an idiot. Apparently I am a hater but if I say anything nice I'm a bandwagoner. You don't even grasp what it is I'm saying. Your hatred is warping you.
So you going to deny now that you said Affleck looked Awful as Batman?
You'd have a better point if you were more consistent in your comments. But you're not because you're run by your Bias.
Is this a tease? Hmmm...