Superman: The Man of Tomorrow

1373839404143»

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,788
    I think the best way to describe how comic booky it is is that it’s like actually picking up the most current issue comic as your first introduction into Superman. You can imagine the previous issue ended on a cliffhanger that ends with Superman losing his first battle, and the new issue just picks up from there.
  • Posts: 5,605
    I think the best way to describe how comic booky it is is that it’s like actually picking up the most current issue comic as your first introduction into Superman. You can imagine the previous issue ended on a cliffhanger that ends with Superman losing his first battle, and the new issue just picks up from there.

    Yeah, that’s fine, but personally I couldn’t care less about comic books and like many people am not going to read them. Sorry, but that’s how I approached this film. I need context and I found it hard to understand chunks of this (rather good) film.

    I know I sound like a stickler but I need context in something I’m watching. If not I don’t care.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,759
    I think Gunn was wise to dop us "in media res". No origin story, not too many "beginnings" of anything. Let's skip the bits that hold us back and dive into the story without a clue whatsoever. What I love most about this Superman is that he isn't slowly built as a messianic figure or divinity. Gunn trusts us to know who he is, who Luthor is, who Lois is, and so on. Like a comic written by Grant Morrisson, the film invites us to hop on board, figure out the bits that we need along the way, and have a good time with the adventure. Every minute of this film is spent on its main story; no time was borrowed or added for origin stories and whatnot.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited July 17 Posts: 8,788
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think the best way to describe how comic booky it is is that it’s like actually picking up the most current issue comic as your first introduction into Superman. You can imagine the previous issue ended on a cliffhanger that ends with Superman losing his first battle, and the new issue just picks up from there.

    Yeah, that’s fine, but personally I couldn’t care less about comic books and like many people am not going to read them. Sorry, but that’s how I approached this film. I need context and I found it hard to understand chunks of this (rather good) film.

    I know I sound like a stickler but I need context in something I’m watching. If not I don’t care.

    I didn’t say you need read comics to understand. The Justice characters for example are actually the first time I’ve ever seen them in any medium and I felt I got to know them just enough in the context of the story. I guess a better comparison is the original STAR WARS where you get the opening crawl catching you up on events that just happened and get thrown into the middle of the story where you learn things as it goes.
  • Posts: 2,451
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I think Gunn was wise to dop us "in media res". No origin story, not too many "beginnings" of anything. Let's skip the bits that hold us back and dive into the story without a clue whatsoever. What I love most about this Superman is that he isn't slowly built as a messianic figure or divinity. Gunn trusts us to know who he is, who Luthor is, who Lois is, and so on. Like a comic written by Grant Morrisson, the film invites us to hop on board, figure out the bits that we need along the way, and have a good time with the adventure. Every minute of this film is spent on its main story; no time was borrowed or added for origin stories and whatnot.

    To me it made me feel like I lived in that world. Like the experience of encountering Superman for the first time in your day to day life.
  • edited July 17 Posts: 5,605
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think the best way to describe how comic booky it is is that it’s like actually picking up the most current issue comic as your first introduction into Superman. You can imagine the previous issue ended on a cliffhanger that ends with Superman losing his first battle, and the new issue just picks up from there.

    Yeah, that’s fine, but personally I couldn’t care less about comic books and like many people am not going to read them. Sorry, but that’s how I approached this film. I need context and I found it hard to understand chunks of this (rather good) film.

    I know I sound like a stickler but I need context in something I’m watching. If not I don’t care.

    I didn’t say you need read comics to understand. The Justice characters for example are actually the first time I’ve ever seen them in any medium and I felt I got to know them just enough in the context of the story. I guess a better comparison is the original STAR WARS where you get the opening crawl catching you up on events that just happened and get thrown into the middle of the story where you learn things as it goes.

    Fair. Maybe it’s just me man, but I felt a bit too thrown into the whole story. I feel I needed a bit more context about Luthor’s antagonism with Superman (not just a ham fisted speech at the end) or who these random people were helping him. Just felt a bit off to me… I don’t know.

    I’m glad most people seemed to like it. Honestly. But no, it wasn’t my cup of tea. Something about the film felt off in my opinion.
  • Posts: 418
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I think Gunn was wise to dop us "in media res". No origin story, not too many "beginnings" of anything. Let's skip the bits that hold us back and dive into the story without a clue whatsoever. What I love most about this Superman is that he isn't slowly built as a messianic figure or divinity. Gunn trusts us to know who he is, who Luthor is, who Lois is, and so on. Like a comic written by Grant Morrisson, the film invites us to hop on board, figure out the bits that we need along the way, and have a good time with the adventure. Every minute of this film is spent on its main story; no time was borrowed or added for origin stories and whatnot.

    I don't think the problem some people have is being dropped "in media res", but that Gunn just didn't do it very effectively.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 1,209
    To be honest? I'm just happy that DC is finally stepping off the shadow of the Snyderverse (well, for most people at least.)
    Not that i hate it, it’s just that Zack's vision has already done enough to the characters' image.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,788
    Snyder’s vision is one thing, but I think what hurt the films more than simply a choice of tone was really the writing. Snyder seems like a nice guy, but in so many interviews I see with him he’s really terrible at trying to articulate his thoughts. It just comes out as word salad, and I think we see this reflected in the scripts.

    For example, there’s that infamous scene where Clark asks Pa Kent “what was I supposed to do, let [a bus full of school children] die?” and Pa’s reply is “maybe” he delivers with uncertainty. If I were attached to the film, I would have strongly suggested that Pa Kent say “I don’t know” to emphasize the fact he doesn’t have the answers, because saying “maybe” makes it sounds like letting school children is a viable option. If they had Pa say “I’m not sure”, that would have made a world of difference and there wouldn’t be so much griping by fans over how Pa was portrayed.

    But that’s just ONE example.

    I think Snyder feels more at home with something like WATCHMEN, which deconstructs the superhero genre. That’s not the kind of mindset that works with SUPERMAN, in fact that’s why WATCHMEN was originally composed of new characters in the first place because the DC heroes wouldn’t have worked under that conceit.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,945
    007HallY wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think the best way to describe how comic booky it is is that it’s like actually picking up the most current issue comic as your first introduction into Superman. You can imagine the previous issue ended on a cliffhanger that ends with Superman losing his first battle, and the new issue just picks up from there.

    Yeah, that’s fine, but personally I couldn’t care less about comic books and like many people am not going to read them. Sorry, but that’s how I approached this film. I need context and I found it hard to understand chunks of this (rather good) film.

    I know I sound like a stickler but I need context in something I’m watching. If not I don’t care.

    I didn’t say you need read comics to understand. The Justice characters for example are actually the first time I’ve ever seen them in any medium and I felt I got to know them just enough in the context of the story. I guess a better comparison is the original STAR WARS where you get the opening crawl catching you up on events that just happened and get thrown into the middle of the story where you learn things as it goes.

    Fair. Maybe it’s just me man, but I felt a bit too thrown into the whole story. I feel I needed a bit more context about Luthor’s antagonism with Superman (not just a ham fisted speech at the end) or who these random people were helping him. Just felt a bit off to me… I don’t know.

    I’m glad most people seemed to like it. Honestly. But no, it wasn’t my cup of tea. Something about the film felt off in my opinion.

    I'm in your camp @007HallY people I have chatted with say, please no origin story. I agree, I don't need to see Superman fly to earth and all that. But I do need a better understanding of where things are and who is who. Yes we have seen some of these characters before, but this is all new.
    I have no understanding of Lex other than he's really rich and hates Superman because he's an "it". I have no understanding of the relationship between Superman and Lois, dated for years, dated for a few months? The by the mid way point the only character whose motivation I understood was Lex. Superman did some un-Superman type things in my opinion and I wasn't sure why.

    I found the humour problematic in a few scenes, we had some real tender, dramatic moments and gag! It got to be repetitive and took away from my emotional tie to the movie. This somewhat surprised me as GOG Volume 3 hit in the feels with the Rocket backstory. Gunn can do emotional scenes, but for whatever reason it seemed whenever we got close to that it was time for a joke.

    I really wanted to like this movie, I was excited to see it, I left the theatre saying "meh". I should have left the theatre fist pumping excited for the next adventure. I didn't have that feeling at all.
Sign In or Register to comment.