Man of Steel (2013)

[wunderbar]

no-one else get major tree of life vibes from that trailer?

[kitsofan34]

Probably the first and last time Zack Ryder will ever be compare to Terrence Malick.

[vrailaine]

Absolutely everyone is comparing it to tree of life.

I actually have pretty high hopes for this, after seeing the trailer and all. Probably still mostly due to Michael Shannon being in the film.

[El Unicornio, mang]

New trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVu3gS7iJu4

This really looks quite good

[vrailaine]

Is this Zack Snyder's first big superhero thing where he wasn't working off a very fixed template? Watchmen and 300 were more or less page by page recreations, right?

I still think it can be good, but my expectations are a bit more realistic now. Kevin Costner seems like a good casting choice there, imo. Plus, Michael Shannon.

[BlodwynPig]

Aspirational guff - seen (and heard) it all before. Hope no pigeons were harmed in the making of the film.

[El Unicornio, mang]

Is this Zack Snyder's first big superhero thing where he wasn't working off a very fixed template? Watchmen and 300 were more or less page by page recreations, right?

I still think it can be good, but my expectations are a bit more realistic now. Kevin Costner seems like a good casting choice there, imo. Plus, Michael Shannon.

I notice the trailer is focusing mostly on the pre-Superman stuff. Possibly as that's always been the most angsty aspect of the character and thus appealing (in the eyes of the studio) to young folk. Shame they don't show any scenes of Clark Kent bumbling around as those are as important as the Superman bits I think.

[Replies From View]

Weird to include clips of Gladiator or whatever it was in there.

Shame they don't show any scenes of Clark Kent bumbling around as those are as important as the Superman bits I think.

Agreed.  They probably will have differently-pitched trailers as the time gets closer though.  Normally the final trailers end up revealing the entire plot of a film so we'll presumably get Clark Kent bumbling in those.

[checkoutgirl]

Watchmen and 300 were more or less page by page recreations, right?

I don't think Alan Moore would agree with that notion.

[kitsofan34]

Was really impressed by the first half of that trailer, before it slowly descended into the typical bombastic, explosions ahoy overkill we're subjected to in all of these summer "blockbusters".

[UncouthHayseed]

Hope no pigeons were harmed in the making of the film.

I am afraid thousands of pigeons were harmed. Christopher Nolan characteristically insisted that a minimum of CG should be utilised throughout the film, so the sequence in this new trailer (which also concluded the teaser trailer), with Superman whizzing through the clouds, was achieved by tying a multitude of pigeons to Henry Cavill and having the birds drag the actor into the sky at the highest of speeds. The harnesses and wires, digitally removed along with the pigeons in post-production, were often too restrictive and would suffocate the birds. Others exploded in a burst of fiery feathers on reaching the sound barrier. I believe these same techniques were utilised during the opening scene of The Dark Knight Rises, with digitally enlarged pigeons also playing the hooded prisoners brought with Bane to the CIA agent.

[vrailaine]

I don't think Alan Moore would agree with that notion.

Would he?

A page by page recreation could still be a complete bastardisation.

[phantom_power]

This certainly seems like a darknightification of Superman, which hasn't been seen in the films yet. It could go either way really, judging by that trailer

[Replies From View]

Bring back Dick Lester.

[El Unicornio, mang]

Ewww no

[Dead kate moss]

Whatever you said to Alan Moore about any adaptations of his work he would reply with a huge whine that went on for fucking decades.

[Tiny Poster]

Woin.

[checkoutgirl]

at the highest of speeds.

What, infinity miles an hour ? That's pretty fast.

[checkoutgirl]

Would he?
A page by page recreation could still be a complete bastardisation.

Well then "a page by page recreation" just means that they generally followed the story, or something. Or maybe it means that the shooting script was made up of pages. I'll be honest, I have no idea what you mean by page by page recreation. I assumed that it meant a faithful rendering of the source material but you clearly didn't.

[Replies From View]

What, infinity miles an hour ? That's pretty fast.

Infinity plus one.

[UncouthHayseed]

What, infinity miles an hour ? That's pretty fast.

Faster, my friend. Faster than infinity. Infinity and beyond.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Despite the plentiful issues with Watchmen, it's a pretty faithful adaptation.  It's maybe heresy, but even some of the changes could be considered improvements to the basic shape of the story - the ending of the movie works better than the space-squid.

Anyway, as a trailer I quite liked that.  My interest is now 'piqued'.

[QDRPHNC]

Despite the plentiful issues with Watchmen, it's a pretty faithful adaptation.  It's maybe heresy, but even some of the changes could be considered improvements to the basic shape of the story - the ending of the movie works better than the space-squid.

I'm sorry, but no, it doesn't. And moving the key line of the entire thing, "Nothing ever ends..." to a different character in a different was scene was just unbelievably crap and stupid.

[MojoJojo]

Compared to that godawful screenplay that was around for ages it was pretty good. I'd actually argue that Watchmen, along with many other recent adoptions, is far too similar to the comic. To think that a film adaption of a 20 year old comic, very closely tied to the cold war and comic tropes is somehow faithful by ignoring the fact that the cold war has ended and it's a film just seems a bit weird. It's easy to criticise changes; that doesn't means changes are bad.

Although I agree the who says the "Nothing ever ends..." bit just some pointless - although it hardly ruins the film.

And I don't think Alan Moore would disagree - by his account he'll never watch it. He'd jus be pissed off you asked about it.

[QDRPHNC]

Compared to that godawful screenplay that was around for ages it was pretty good. I'd actually argue that Watchmen, along with many other recent adoptions, is far too similar to the comic. To think that a film adaption of a 20 year old comic, very closely tied to the cold war and comic tropes is somehow faithful by ignoring the fact that the cold war has ended and it's a film just seems a bit weird. It's easy to criticise changes; that doesn't means changes are bad.

Although I agree the who says the "Nothing ever ends..." bit just some pointless - although it hardly ruins the film.

And I don't think Alan Moore would disagree - by his account he'll never watch it. He'd jus be pissed off you asked about it.

Actually, I really don't mind Watchman as far as Moore adaptations go, and no, moving that line and getting rid of the squid didn't ruin it, but it sure as hell made it a lot thinner.

[Bingo Fury]

Despite the plentiful issues with Watchmen, it's a pretty faithful adaptation.  It's maybe heresy, but even some of the changes could be considered improvements to the basic shape of the story - the ending of the movie works better than the space-squid.

Heresy from this corner too. I thought the movie version of Adrian's master plan made for a tighter story than Moore's original. And having seen From Hell and V For Vendetta, I never thought I'd say something like that.

[Mister Six]

Despite the plentiful issues with Watchmen, it's a pretty faithful adaptation. 

It's superficially faithful. You can point and go, 'Ooh, I remember that line,' or 'Look, that segue is in the comic...' but it completely misunderstands the comic on a fundamental level. All the stuff with the slo-mo, Eddie punching through the wall, Dan and Laurie killing the knot-tops in the alley - it shows an appalling failure to understand the essential humanity (physically and emotionally) of its characters and of the realism that made Watchmen's world so compelling.

None of the violence in the comic is 'fun'. Eddie ends up bloodied and beaten and crying, gazing through Veidt's eyes and into the reader's, before he's thrown from his apartment window. Rorschach's attempts to flee the police are exciting, but also horribly brutal, and the climax of the scene - his battered, squealing, ugly face - is the exact opposite of handsome Superman standing triumphant over a vanquished foe. When people die in New York they spill hot, thick blood everywhere. It looks squalid and dirty. Who'd want to be a part of that?

But Snyder doesn't understand that. He thinks violence is cool. In the comic Laurie breaks a knot-top's nose and it looks gross; in the movie she stabs him in the neck and it looks awesome. Everything has a sheen of gloss that makes it look like an airbrushed porn photo. You can imagine Snyder fumbling in his pants as Dan snaps a thug's arm and Dr Manhattan bursts a gangster, leaving his skeleton stuck to the ceiling in its own gore.

So when he films violence that is unequivocally supposed to he horrible - the attempted rape, the shooting of the pregnant Vietnamese woman - it's tainted by the sheen of 'cool' applied to everything else. We're supposed to be revolted by Eddie, not by the film itself. Jesus.

That so much detail went into the world-building and set design etc makes it even more galling. This isn't a film made by someone who doesn't give a fuck, a write-off from the beginning; it's a film made by someone who's just a bit too thick to understand what he has, and will pour huge amounts of money into very nearly getting it right - but leaving in a few flaws so severe that they ruin the whole thing.

But you get to see Dr Manhattan's cock. So there's that, I suppose.

[Mister Six]

Oh, Superman. Yeah, trailer leaves me cold. Bored of films being all cyan and fucking orange, bored of mopey superheroes questioning their place in the world, bored of eerie choral singing, bored of origin stories, bored BORED BORED.

A Superman film should be closer in tone to The Avengers than The Dark Knight, surely? Or Iron Man 1 at most.

Also having Pa Kent be a cunt is stupid. Again, fundamentally misunderstanding one of the core aspects of Superman. I know why it happens - to create conflict early on, so there's some reason for him not to go around saving just everyone. But you know what? I'm going to a Superman film because I WANT to see him saving everyone. Superman's overpowered, but you don't solve that problem by weakening him - you solve it by presenting him with bigger and bigger problems to solve. The Avengers gave us a full-on alien invasion led by a Norse god. Grant Morrison's JLA comics managed to create threats big enough to task Superman and another six superheroes fighting together. Do better than them or fuck off.

[Jemble Fred]

THing is, I watched The Avengers and really can't remember a single thing about it. Well, besides the obvious stuff that it had Thor and them in it. I love Branagh's Thor, the director's magic touch seemed to show through in every shot, but The Avengers was just one big shrug. Man Of Steel looks far more interesting, to me.

[Blumf]

Oh, Superman. Yeah, trailer leaves me cold. Bored of films being all cyan and fucking orange, bored of mopey superheroes questioning their place in the world, bored of eerie choral singing, bored of origin stories, bored BORED BORED.

yup, the trailer suggests there will be nothing surprising about this film, just a run of the mill superhero arc. The emo stuff just suggesting that it'll be po-faced and dull about it too.

Superman's overpowered, but you don't solve that problem by weakening him - you solve it by presenting him with bigger and bigger problems to solve.

The early Superman fought social injustice. Something that super strength and X-ray vision can't really defeat. Imagine what a smart writer could do with that in our current times with the econo-fuck-ageddon getting it's austere on, contrast with the mess the last Batman film made of the subject.