Why Man of Steel Superman Does not Top Reeve’s version

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Or a super-punch AWAY from buildings instead of through them?

I mean that would've been more dramatic, Supes fighting to save the city & staving off Zod's approach to where the populace was.
It could've been portrayed as Supes being the "final bastion" to the fall of Metropolis.

Divert all his attention to punching Zod away from buildings within a city lined with sky scrapers that that guy is trying to destroy with him, meanwhile he has to somehow kill the guy who has the same powers as him, and win the fight to save the earth, never would worked on screen for production or for the movie storyline.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
Man of Steel had tremendous hype. The most hype I've had for a film since TDKR. It lived up to the hype in every way and in some ways surprised me.

So I'm supposed to bow down simply because I'm in the minority? Yea, no thanks. I've debated MOS with [b]dozens of people in real life and online and the majority of critique I've accumulated from them about the film, to me, is honestly trivial(to be civil).

As Lestov said above, box office sucess is cool but I try not to get hung up on it. Justin Bieber has more YouTube views than pretty much every music artist there is but.....

In my opinion, Watchmen: The Director's Cut is the best film this genre has to offer and it barely made 100 million domestic if I'm not mistaken. The film is probably the only comic-book film that is even more polarizing than Man of Steel with many people to this day still bashing it. [/B]

No need to bow down to no one man you liked the movie and that's all that mattered. It took me a few times to watch it before It started to grow on me.

Originally posted by zeel
No need to bow down to no one man you liked the movie and that's all that mattered. It took me a few times to watch it before It started to grow on me.

Agreed most of critics and haters saw it once in theater in 3D and didn't spend the money or time to watch it a few more times and understand the movie.

I mean, like, they are both not that great, are they?

Needing to watch the movie more than once to like it is not something that works in its favour.

Well I thought Superman I was really lame the first time I saw it. Also shut it off to watch Rambo. Eventually, I did rewatch it and gain an appreciation of Reeves' charm.

Originally posted by Dramatic Gecko
Needing to watch the movie more than once to like it is not something that works in its favour.

Pull your head off that bong and it might be 😆

Originally posted by -Pr-
Why does Cavill have to be better though? He can't just be a good Superman? I'm not sure I follow.
I liked Dean Cain as Superman, but he was nowhere close to Reeve level.

He doesn’t and no one said he had to. As for actors I believe Cavill is the best to play Superman since Reeve. However, just because he is second best in my eyes does not mean he excelled at being Superman. I do not blame this on Cavill so much as the script he had to deal with.

Here let me try to put this in perspective:
When you think of the Donner’s Superman movies do you not think of Christopher Reeve? The special effects for that time were just as amazing as MOS for our time yet you think of Reeve first. Why? Reeve excelled at being Superman due to his acting (display of Superman and Clark Kent personalities and his poses for flying which is something he did and made it look cool and wonderful).

I cannot say the same for MOS for Cavill portrayal of Superman. The special effects stand out more than his portrayal of Superman. A lot of the complaints with MOS had to do with the portrayal of Superman.

What I expect to see in a Superman movie:
• Krypton – Done well in MOS
• Superman – Up for debate as to how well he was portrayed.
• Alternate personality Clark Kent – Did not exist until the end of the movie
• Louis Lane – She existed
• Amazing Special Effects – Done well
• Amazing flying – Flying reminded me of Hancock.
• Great Villain – Done well

Those are the reasons why I felt Cavill was cheated by the script he was dealt and did not surpass Reeve version in MOS therefore not making the lasting impression that Reeve’s version did.

Please remember the basis of this thread is thoughts as to why Cavill version did not surpass Reeve's version.

Originally posted by Kotor3
He doesn’t and no one said he had to. As for actors I believe Cavill is the best to play Superman since Reeve. However, just because he is second best in my eyes does not mean he excelled at being Superman. I do not blame this on Cavill so much as the script he had to deal with.

Cavill did the best he could with a weak script. Cavill and Shannon saved MoS from being the worst superhero film of the decade

Originally posted by Kotor3
He doesn’t and no one said he had to. As for actors I believe Cavill is the best to play Superman since Reeve. However, just because he is second best in my eyes does not mean he excelled at being Superman. I do not blame this on Cavill so much as the script he had to deal with.

Here let me try to put this in perspective:
When you think of the Donner’s Superman movies do you not think of Christopher Reeve? The special effects for that time were just as amazing as MOS for our time yet you think of Reeve first. Why? Reeve excelled at being Superman due to his acting (display of Superman and Clark Kent personalities and his poses for flying which is something he did and made it look cool and wonderful).

I cannot say the same for MOS for Cavill portrayal of Superman. The special effects stand out more than his portrayal of Superman. A lot of the complaints with MOS had to do with the portrayal of Superman.

What I expect to see in a Superman movie:
• Krypton – Done well in MOS
• Superman – Up for debate as to how well he was portrayed.
• Alternate personality Clark Kent – Did not exist until the end of the movie
• Louis Lane – She existed
• Amazing Special Effects – Done well
• Amazing flying – Flying reminded me of Hancock.
• Great Villain – Done well

Those are the reasons why I felt Cavill was cheated by the script he was dealt and did not surpass Reeve version in MOS therefore not making the lasting impression that Reeve’s version did.

Please remember the basis of this thread is thoughts as to why Cavill version did not surpass Reeve's version.

Cavill did an okay job, imo, but I think it needs to be remembered that Reeve played an older, more experienced Superman, and he had the chance to do it over several films.

He had more to work with than Cavill did. I don't regard the MOS script to be as bad as some, but at the same time, it was a very tunnel-vision script, almost. We saw a young Superman become Superman. We didn't see him much as Clark, or with Lois. Sure, there was a spark between them, but shit like that needs time to grow. In the Reeve movies they had that.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Cavill did the best he could with a weak script. Cavill and Shannon saved MoS from being the worst superhero film of the decade

Yes they made a good team

Originally posted by Firefly218
Cavill did the best he could with a weak script. Cavill and Shannon saved MoS from being the worst superhero film of the decade

Yeah...I won't say MOS was perfect, but you're biased as hell if you call it the worst superhero film script of the decade. Apparently you've never heard of Catwoman or Spiderman 3.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Yeah...I won't say MOS was perfect, but you're biased as hell if you call it the worst superhero film script of the decade. Apparently you've never heard of Catwoman or Spiderman 3.

Or Superman 3 and 4 😆

Or Superman 1 for that matter. MOS might have had some flaws, but at least there was no ridiculous bullshit about reversing time by flying around the world.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Yeah...I won't say MOS was perfect, but you're biased as hell if you call it the worst superhero film script of the decade. Apparently you've never heard of Catwoman or Spiderman 3.

I was exaggerating. There are certainly worse superhero movie scripts, like the ones you mentioned.

I'm not Marvel biased or anything, I just hate the way WB made MoS.

Or Super logo tossing, which is really taking the piss.

And yet, for the time, it fit. Superman back then was always doing crazy shit like that. In that sense, I don't think the script was bad... It just took things a little far.

Powers like that? Just don't work nowadays.

People were too high on acid to notice that kind of stuff back in the day

Originally posted by Lestov16
Or Superman 1 for that matter. MOS might have had some flaws, but at least there was no ridiculous bullshit about reversing time by flying around the world.

I think you quoted the wrong post