Man of Steel: The reviews are...

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  06 June 2013
In line to see it, I hope its good. Not seeing it in 3d either.
__________________
Heights of great men reached and kept were not attained by sudden flight, but they while their companions slept were toiling upwards in the night.
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by thethule: God yes, Donner's films are in credibly flawed and go downhill fast after #1. Im not THAT in love with them to be honest..They were great for their time, but very silly and cheesy. Im thinking of Richard Pryor adding TAR to the list of elements that make up Kryptonite..as if tar is a freaking element. Even as a child that bugged the hell out of me..



Donner and Tom Mankiewicz had no involvement with Superman 3. They didnt complete work on Superman 2 before being replaced by Richard Lester.
 
  06 June 2013
Just saw this film in 3D and there is A MAJOR FLAW.

For a film that relies so heavily on CG action, we are missing so much at 24fps. It's getting time now to move to a much faster frame rate for action parts. Cinemas have to get some new equipment in that can do this.

Jules
 
  06 June 2013
Quote: For a film that relies so heavily on CG action, we are missing so much at 24fps. It's getting time now to move to a much faster frame rate for action parts. Cinemas have to get some new equipment in that can do this.


you mean like what was done with the hobbit?
__________________
Heights of great men reached and kept were not attained by sudden flight, but they while their companions slept were toiling upwards in the night.
 
  06 June 2013
Wow and wow!

This movie was not great at all. How can people continue to get Superman wrong and wrong again.


****SPOILER ALERT BELOW****
****SPOILER ALERT BELOW****

I mean we at least finally got to see Superman punch something worth punching vs his fight with the giant kryptonite island. Yay finally a super villian for Superman.

Okay let us break it down.

No Comedy whatsoever. 1 or maybe 2 funny little jokes. I know it wasn't supposed to be all chuckles and more dark, brooding and hard core but even Batman had a few more chuckles and some lighthearted moments. If they wanted to make it realistic put in those light hearted moments. It was all too serious all the time especially for a movie with a guy wearing tights.

I was very sick of the color palate used as well. Really...? You have to use that same old color scheme again and again. It is depressing. It made everything feel grey. I don't know about you but since when was gray anyone's favorite color? It made everything look depressing. I understand Gotham to be gray but Metropolis and well for the most part the rest of the world?

I can live with the costume. A little dark and gray like always but bearable.

Pa Kent...WTF is wrong with the dude. I understand the hiding the son part from the world but at the expense of other peoples death. So Clark should have left a bus load of children die to protect his secret. What a fine hero you were raising? He did not help his son become a hero. Uncle Ben would have slapped the crap out of Peter had he known Peter had powers to save people but didn't. Pa Kent was raising a dude to be selfish and not a hero at all but at the same time sending him mixed signals. It is a wonder how Superman became a hero in the first place with his dad telling him not to save people. What is with DC heros? Stinkin Green Lantern punked out after 5 minutes of training and then all of the sudden becomes a hero. ....Peter Parker became a hero to protect people because his Uncle taught him a nice lesson.. WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY. Pa Kent...hide son and let folks die. If by this time you would have expected people would already be cool with Super Powers. I mean since they are doing a JLA movie you'd think at least Batman, Flash, or any number of heroes and villians would have already been around. Didn't that Green Lantern fight in the city not tip folks off to Aliens?

And the death of Pa Kent, stupid in every which way. Killed by a giant GRAY tornado. I felt like I was in a giant gray tornado the whole movie.

And killing.....Superman straight up kills a guy. Oh he yells about it but since when did Superman kill a guy. He always found a way.

Dude when is WB going to get their stuff together? I'm sure the JLA movie will suck and bomb and forget Wonder Woman being good.

Fight scene in Kansas was okay. The chick was cool but seriously the fight scene in Superman 2 was better. He was fighting 3 dudes and trying to protect people at the same time and he pulled it off.

I'm pretty sure Superman was responsible for several civilian casualties as part of collateral damage. He told them to go in the buildings to be safe but then punches a superpowered chick into the building. I mean Kansas is a lot of fields...couldn't he just taken Zod and gang out to a field and beat the crap out of them there? I mean if you have ever seen Superman Apocalypse you would see Klark capable of fighting in a field and still be exciting. Now that was a fight scene. I mean all through the fight scenes he kept throwing folks straight into buildings. I mean the only time he wasn't throwing Zod into buildings was when they were in the middle of a giant GRAY ditch. Yes a gray ditch. Zod's plan was to turn Earth into something ugly and GRAY. With all the throwing into buildings I could barely see what was happening. Just rubble, rubble, rubble, arm, leg, head rubbble.

SOrry guys it was like you were trying too hard. I mean did Krypton have to look like a sucky place to live. I mean have you seen the cartoon versions of Kandor. Beautiful, well let cities that weren't gray. Then all the detail you put into everything. Why? Ugghh.

*****SPOILER ALERT END****

*****PLEASE READ BELOW****

Don't stay through the credits...there is NO post credit scene.....WB get it together.

This movie gets a 6 out of 10 for me. Passable but a disappointment. C-

Snyder you suck and I liked Sucker Punch.
Chris stick to Batman and other gray matter stuff.

Last edited by earthboyjacobus : 06 June 2013 at 03:15 PM.
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by earthboyjacobus: This movie gets a 6 out of 10 for me. Passable but a disappointment. C-

Trying to apply logic to a man in lycra, where do you stop? Why do all aliens look exactly like humans and have American accents? You can go on forever with the logic angle.

What I do agree with, you didn't mention, is the total lack of chemistry between Superman and Lois. One or the other was miscast.

More humour is so yesterday. Films nowadays are more serious for whatever reason. Having Kal-El buffoon around like the Reeve's Kent I think would seem forced.

Originally Posted by DuttyFoot: you mean like what was done with the hobbit?

Yes precisely. When CG moves that fast, the action gets much too stuttery and disjointed to follow and appreciate it fully, and needs a higher frame rate.

I give it more than 6 out of 10 because it was much better than Superman Returns, and who remembers that one?

Jules
 
  06 June 2013
@earthboyjacobus

Dude, did it ever occur to you that others aren't able to see it yet?

I just scanned through your post and tripped over one spoiler after the other. Thanks! :(
__________________
CGScenery - CG Landscapes & Terragen 2 tutorials
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by earthboyjacobus: ...


Thank for that review
I'll most probably like it then...
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by DuttyFoot: you mean like what was done with the hobbit?


Yeah i cringe at the suggestion that any film should pick up where the Hobbit left off, in any aspect of filmmaking...
__________________
__________

Nick Marshall
Head of Environments / Generalists
Double Negative :: Vancouver
www.dneg.com
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by Jules123: Just saw this film in 3D and there is A MAJOR FLAW.

For a film that relies so heavily on CG action, we are missing so much at 24fps. It's getting time now to move to a much faster frame rate for action parts. Cinemas have to get some new equipment in that can do this.

Jules


I agree that some fast action shots were stressed visually. Some looked rushed for completion. Overall the rushed shots were rare I thought but I've been in 3D for 25 years so I see more than the average viewer. Anyone working in this fields has to consider that when being critical of production. We see something entirely different than the vast majority of the audience. We have the ability to see "through" the image. 90% of the audience sees only the image.

As for the frame rate, I completely disagree here. Raising the frame is not the way to go. That will only raise the hertz closer to television and make the image feel more electronic. Besides film handles this just fine with an appropriate level of motion blur. If what you are interpreting here is that some of the shots did not seem to have an adequate motion blur treatment, then I would completely agree with that. The raw amount of debris that was tossed about in this film is just staggering. I'd love to hear more from the production companies how they did it and what their production challenges were with ekind of shots.

Joey
 
  06 June 2013
Quote: What I do agree with, you didn't mention, is the total lack of chemistry between Superman and Lois. One or the other was miscast. More humour is so yesterday. Films nowadays are more serious for whatever reason. Having Kal-El buffoon around like the Reeve's Kent I think would seem forced.


Yes that is so true. Went from hey what's up to lets hold hands to lets kiss.

I'm not saying it needs a lot more humour but with all the dark colors, brooding and depression a little "lighthearted-ness" would have been nice. Batman which is darker in nature had that and Batman though brooding actually had more personality than Superman.

Also I don't mind the buffooning around. I mean as quoted by Clark "Clark Kent is who I am, Superman is what I do" I think with all the dark, brooding, and even color scheme they are trying to force Superman to be like a Batmanish type movie. They merely saw the dollar signs and wanted to apply the things they thought made Batman great to Superman. These are the same type people who thought putting the word "MARS" in the title of a movie would cause it to fail.

And a story does not have to be dark and brooding to be good.


Superman all Star was a great cover story.
Also


Superman vs the Elite was also interesting look at the hero. Here he had a problem with everyone loving the ELITE because they would do the things he would not do. Superman was doubting himself while trying to maintain his morals and not do what the Elite was willing to do, namely KILL. And guess who gave him good fatherly advice during that one...Yup PA KENT. Not the lazy, selfish Pa Kent who taught his son to be a loser and non hero.

There are so many ways they could have gotten Superman right. They do it well in the cartoon movies. So it can be done.

The movie was not horrible. Like I said I gave it a C-. It still passes. It was okay but very disappointing.
 
  06 June 2013
I took the family last night to see Man of Steel. I thought it was an awesome movie. Great movie for me. It's a different superman that I expected but still overall I enjoyed it!.

Guess I'll try and add the rest of my comments in spoilers for those who haven't seen the movie just yet.
[ SPOILER - Click to reveal ]
Spoiler:
You really should watch the movie before reading this part of my post!! (You have been warned!

First off it was cool to see a fleshed out Kyrpton. Also giving it a feeling that they are aliens. The colors of the movie had a very blue and orange feel to a lot of the shots. I really like these color pallets. I know some people posted they didn't like the colors but hey everyone is different right.. The armor that Zod had on looked pretty bad ass. I know it was a step up from the old black pajamas from the 80's superman. But this set a pretty good tone that aliens visiting our planet didn't fly around in black pajamas. I really like dark movies so this movie was perfect for me.

Oh and thank god they didn't do that whole crap with Lois going around the whole movie trying to piece together if superman was Clark. I'm sorry I know some people grew up with superman playing Clark and hiding his identity.

Some people mentioned about how Clarks dad dies. This made me wonder if people in other regions who don't have tornadoes get this part. Do people in other regions get that the sky can open up and swallow you and spit you out? Only reason I say this is cause if I didn't live where I live I wouldn't buy this part of the movie either. But since I live in an area that gets tornado alerts often I can buy this part of the story much easier.

The CG in the movie is really good. It did have a few weird animation jerkiness but hey over all who cares it was still bad ass. In a way some of the ending felt like a dragon ball Z movie (but again..thats not a bad thing). Over all I give two thumbs up and look forward to a sequel .
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by earthboyjacobus:
I was very sick of the color palate used as well. Really...? You have to use that same old color scheme again and again. It is depressing. It made everything feel grey. I don't know about you but since when was gray anyone's favorite color? It made everything look depressing. I understand Gotham to be gray but Metropolis and well for the most part the rest of the world?

I can live with the costume. A little dark and gray like always but bearable.


Since there has been enough imagery from trailers and promotional photos, I'm comfortable giving my take on this and expanding on the foundation.

The architectural style of this Krypton is very acceptable. It differs only slightly from the traditional DC imagery, mainly the patina. But some of it is right on the money. I did notice the organic "Avatar" twist on it. However, that is quite accurate if you know anything about DC's Krypton mythos. But the big deviation from traditional "Kryptonian" city imagery was the appearance. They "gray" as you put it.

The comic book mythos depicted Krypton cities as refined, metallic, glassy, shiny, clean, and on enormous scale. Scale wise this movie got it right. Architecture wise, very close. The wider shots certainly felt Kryptonian, the interior close up shots, less so. But I can live with it. I think there is plenty of room for translation and interpretation in the close up and while I am a purist on this I much prefer what they did here to anything else that has ever been done for the large screen.

What did they do? They attempted to illustrate an arrogant, aging, and dying society. Which is what Krypton was. The patina, the wear and tear, the shadow, the dust and rust, it was just absolutely beautiful. No its not the "shining city" appearance so aptly conceived in DC's The Krypton Chronicles back in the 80s or that which preceded it. Or from the cartoon adaptations that have translated this precisely.

But why so gray? Krypton is dying. Krypton is race of humans so scientifically sophisticated they have become arrogant beyond reason. This has been consistent since Superman's earliest well-defined origins. It's gray because the society is not only dying but in severe denial of its suicidal actions. They ignored Jor-el's pleas to the final end.

This not only works, it's highly appropriate and far more preferable to what the 78 film tried to do with crystalline design which absolutely had no relationship to any of the Kryptonian city styles. One could argue it might have been related to the Jewel Mountains, but Krypton architectural style has always been dominated by metal and glass than anything else, not crystal. An interesting fact is that Gam-El, one of Kal-El's ancestors was portrayed to be the father of modern Kryptonian architecture.

The 78 style was an attempt to capture the bright and positive aspect of the Superman pathos, I think. But it failed. I did not like it and never will. First there was this crystal thing that had little background in Superman history, tradition, or mythos. It took over everything and just removed the oxygen from the room so to speak. There was no way to imagine or interpret from comic to screen. It was bad. Worse, I always believed it was an attempt to make cheap sets when, as the most expensive movie of its time, they spent something like 50 million mostly to make Superman "fly". With that much funding at that time there should have been plenty of funding for better sets.


The costume in this movie? Love the costume! Every attempt to make a superman costume match the CMYK color bandwidth of a comic book has failed in my opinion. The suit comes out as fluorescent. Unrealistic. You can see every seam in the material. You can see all of the bulges or "packing material" to build up body mass. This reincarnation is the best I've ever seen. The cape is perfect. Only one complaint though. The deviation with the briefs is the only thing I still don't understand.





Originally Posted by earthboyjacobus:
SOrry guys it was like you were trying too hard. I mean did Krypton have to look like a sucky place to live. I mean have you seen the cartoon versions of Kandor. Beautiful, well let cities that weren't gray. Then all the detail you put into everything. Why? Ugghh.


Your curious about the organic aspect of this Krypton(Man of Steel)? There is an enormous amount of historical reference in DC's Kryptonian history for that. Krypton had an "old world hemisphere" and a "new world hemisphere". It had very ancient cities such as Erkol and Xan. It had ancient dinosaur like animal's like thought beasts or rondors, and many more, for example. There was also spectacular natural environments like the Glass Forest, the Fungus Caverns, the Boiling Sea, the Fire Falls, the Gold Vocano, and the Scarlett Jungle.

The planet further is not an expanse of concrete, steel, and glass. It is supposed to have a very dynamic organic flora where huge scarlett mushrooms play a significant role in the planet's biosphere. As a result the organic pod based underwater breeding process is entirely plausible.

It's cities, however, such as the capitol city of Kandor and Kryptonopolis(Kal-el's birthplace) were in stark contrast to the organic and sometimes harsh inhospitable regions of Krypton. The image of Krypton in this movie adequately captures the entirety of the Krypton mythology. Its an incredibly beautiful portrait and is evidence that the producers of this movie either thoroughly did their homework or were just crazy lucky.

Granted, Kryptonopolis in this movie is a hybrid, and not completely in the style more clearly depicted by what we recognize as found in the Bottle City of Kandor(shrunk by Brainiac and stolen from Krypton prior to its demise). But I'd much rather see it this way, as a hybrid of all things Kryptonian than as that crystalline garbage that was hoisted on us in 78 film.

Folks need to understand, there is so much more to the Superman and Krypton mythology than most people realize. There is 75 years of written and visualized Superman history to draw from. Its one of the oldest and most well developed super-hero mythologies in existence. When I saw the creature that Jor-el was flying I immediately realized this would be a major breakout movie. The creature could either be a Snagriff or a flame dragon, at least that's only my guess really, but more detail from the movie would have been nice.

In case anyone is wondering how I know all this, my reference is

The Great Superman Book, Michael L. Fleisher, 1978, Warner Books.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Great-Sup...a/dp/0446874949


There was also a series of absolutely terrific miniseries that DC did back in the 80's which are must have's in the formal Superman mythos. The Krypton Chronicles did a great job of tying a lot of the disjointed Superman and Krypton history together.

http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Krypton_Chronicles_Vol_1_1


And then there was one for the Fortress of Solitude.

http://superman.wikia.com/wiki/The_Fortress_of_Solitude


We never really saw the FoS in this movie. Though I think there is a suggestion here that it might eventually be built off of the Kryptonian spaceships that remain. Can't wait for the next movie! A real FoS! Finally!



Joey
 
  06 June 2013
Can't wait to see it next week!
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by JoeyP88: they spent something like 50 million mostly to make Superman "fly". With that much funding at that time there should have been plenty of funding for better sets.



John Barry was a respected production designer--I suspect they didnt set out to cut the budget for sets at all--it was probably designed that way to tie into the fact that the Fortress of Solitude would be in the North Pole so to make him seem more at home--thus Krypton also had an ice and crystal appearance. The crystal was a clever symbolic image for his alien origin and very cinematic.

One of the hardest things to portray is a futuristic setting--smart of them to not attempt to guess the future and have computer banks or displays around that would appear completely dated now.
One thing about ice and crystals--they are timeless.


From a cinematography point of view--they probably also wanted to contrast Superman's colorful appearance with the background--and that all white and crystal appearance worked well for it.
If they had made the background with reds and blues he would disappear.

They couldnt have been expected to follow the comics closely--it was a miracle that a director was selected who treated the dramatic story seriously as he did (Lex Luther was comical but not Superman). It could have easily gone in a different direction.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.