So, about those Man of Steel reviews...

[Bagpuss]

While I agree that content wasn't there, I'm glad it wasn't. I don't think I could face yet another superhero origin story movie. Hell, in this one he still takes half a movie to get there.

Honestly, I'd prefer they'd missed ALL of the origin stuff. Just start with "Here's a fully formed Superman. Go!"

Yeah unfortunately with this film it kind of went downhill once it was "fully formed Superman. Go!" the stuff on Krypton were some of the best bits, when he is actually rescuing people (before he puts on the costume, and starts killing them) that was good, and if you ignored Pa Kent's "let them all die" dialogue the flash backs weren't to back either.

 

[Morrus]

Yeah unfortunately with this film it kind of went downhill once it was "fully formed Superman. Go!" the stuff on Krypton were some of the best bits, when he is actually rescuing people (before he puts on the costume, and starts killing them) that was good, and if you ignored Pa Kent's "let them all die" dialogue the flash backs weren't to back either.

I'm the exact opposite. That's when it started getting good for me. I've seen all the rest before.

 

[Everett]

While I agree that content wasn't there, I'm glad it wasn't. I don't think I could face yet another superhero origin story movie. Hell, in this one he still takes half a movie to get there.

Honestly, I'd prefer they'd missed ALL of the origin stuff. Just start with "Here's a fully formed Superman. Go!"

That's one of the reasons why Superman Returns didn't work very well. When a decade or more passes between films, you need to re-introduce him unless there's some specific angle that makes creative sense.

 

[Everett]

If you didn't know who Superman was before entering this film, it would have made even less sense. As the flashbacks really didn't show where Superman got his moral code, you need to know Superman before going to the film. Which is fair enough, I think it is safe to assume that knowledge, but what you did see in flashback, actually worked against that, his dad spent most of the time telling Clark to never use his powers, let kids die, let your own family die, but never reveal you are different. Going from what you saw in this film alone, why does Clark ever become Superman? Why does he ever bother saving anyone?

I don't agree. Jonathan Kent in this film stood for a voice of reasonable doubt. If an alien were growing up among us, revealing himself to the world would be a point of no return for humanity, and that's something that no Superman film before this one has addressed. You might argue how well the film addressed the point, but its inclusion was, in 2013, necessary; the world no longer possesses the innocence it still had during the Christopher Reeve years.

 

[Morrus]

That's one of the reasons why Superman Returns didn't work very well. When a decade or more passes between films, you need to re-introduce him unless there's some specific angle that makes creative sense.

Superman Returns failed for a lot of reasons, but the lack of another origin story wasn't one of them.

 

[Raunalyn]

Superman Returns failed for a lot of reasons, but the lack of another origin story wasn't one of them.

I thought Brandon Routh did a fantastic job. Kevin Spacey did an excellent job as Luthor, chewing up the scenery. But the whole movie suffered from the lack of a good story. The movie, as a whole, was just....dull.

 

[Everett]

I thought Brandon Routh did a fantastic job. Kevin Spacey did an excellent job as Luthor, chewing up the scenery. But the whole movie suffered from the lack of a good story. The movie, as a whole, was just....dull.

Lack of story: period, yes. A good origin story being one option. But even just, "I went back to Krypton... and something interesting happened there" would've helped a lot.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Honestly, I'd prefer they'd missed ALL of the origin stuff. Just start with "Here's a fully formed Superman. Go!"

This reflects on an interesting point made by Robin Laws and Ken Hite's podcast earlier this year - hollywood 'knows' how to do 'personal growth and change' stories, but they don't know how to do stories so much about 'iconic hero does iconic things in an interesting way'. That's why they keep going back to origin stories (see every superhero franchise ever, almost!) or they change a hero in order to give a 'dramatic arc' (e.g. John Carter of Mars).

So whether it's a reflection of either the scriptwriters inability to do it or the producers inability to conceive it or the marketeers inability to believe that anything else won't fly with the audience... origin stories is what we get!

Cheers

 

[Grumpy RPG Reviews]

This reflects on an interesting point made by Robin Laws and Ken Hite's podcast...

I am interested in this - do you have a link?

 

[Everett]

This reflects on an interesting point made by Robin Laws and Ken Hite's podcast earlier this year - hollywood 'knows' how to do 'personal growth and change' stories, but they don't know how to do stories so much about 'iconic hero does iconic things in an interesting way'. That's why they keep going back to origin stories (see every superhero franchise ever, almost!) or they change a hero in order to give a 'dramatic arc' (e.g. John Carter of Mars).

So whether it's a reflection of either the scriptwriters inability to do it or the producers inability to conceive it or the marketeers inability to believe that anything else won't fly with the audience... origin stories is what we get!

I suppose that's what makes The Dark Knight so uniquely great. Heath Ledger's Joker is never less than interesting.