Spoilers Superman Spoiler Thread

[Belen]

Hoult was good as Lex; however, he was not at the same level as Michael Rosenbaum or Clancy Brown. Gunn did a great job of writing Lex as he was always meant to be written. A genius that was envious and frightened of Superman and wanted to be the greatest human that ever lived.

Rachel Brosnahan as Lois was excellent. She is probably the best film Lois, but again, she was not quite as good as Erica Durance, Dana Delaney, or Teri Hatcher. I really liked how she challenged Superman. She was very believable as a tough reporter.

Overall, this may be my favorite Superman film. I love the 78 film but I always hated the version of Lex that turned him into a two dimensional mustache twister wanting a land grab.

I loathe Snyder. He is a most overrated director. Man of Steel sits just above Superman Returns. I really liked Cavill as Superman but he never got decent writing and we kept getting the washed out, dark, grim and gritty BS of the Snyder-verse.

 

[Epic Meepo]

As someone who doesn't really follow Superman or the DC universe, I'll offer a few thoughts about this movie as a sci-fi action movie in general instead of a Superman movie in particular:

I'll start by saying the cast did well with what they were given, but the writing and directing didn't click for me:

Firstly, there were too many named characters in this film. I guess I'm supposed to conclude this is a lived-in world because everyone and their henchmen gets a name and a few lines of dialogue. All this really did is make it difficult for me to develop any sort of attachment to these characters. There are so many of them wandering into the spotlight, none of them stands out from the crowd. "Oh, no! They killed named guy on the street who said two lines that one time! Now I know all the other forgetable background characters with names are also vulnerable! Oh, wait. I have no emotional connection to any of them."

Secondly, Ultraman being a Superman clone wasn't much of a twist. I didn't realize before reading this thread that Superman clones are such an overused plot device in the DC universe, but the Superman clone still failed to surprise me. This film has corporate-sponsored superhero teams, flying armies with powered armor, an amorphous nanotech cyborg, a captive kaiju, multiple aliens, billionaires with custom pocket universes, and heroes who've seen enough pocket universes to know how they function, inside and out. By the time all that was introduced, I stopped caring who Ultraman was. Due to the rampant super-science, Ultraman could be whomever or whatever the plot required. No reveal could possibly be shocking.

Thirdly, this film included too much exposition for an action movie. We start we a wall of text. ("3 seconds ago, you were reading about what happened 3 minutes ago.") I'm willing to forgive the opening text crawl, since it's right at the beginning of the film, establishing the scene. What really threw off the pacing for me was the nonstop exposition during the final fight scene. During the course of the final battle, Lex Luthor explains his ingenious plan to kill Superman, offers footnotes describing his methodology, comments on geopolitics, and does some self-reflection worthy of a therapist's couch. That's a level of commentary I don't really appreciate during an action sequence that should speak for itself. If you're writing an action movie and you haven't explained all the moving parts involved in the final fight scene by the time the first punch is thrown, you're doing something wrong.

(Also, nitpick: Lex Luthor has drones with facial recognition software that can I.D. anyone in their field of vision, yet he somehow doesn't know Clark Kent is Superman. No amount of "hypo-glasses" handwaving is explaining away how Superman's alter ego is undetectable to mindless cameras with pattern recognition software.)

Despite all that, I wouldn't say this film is a terrible action movie. It's a fun popcorn film with some interesting set pieces here and there. Middling CGI for a Hollywood blockbuster. A few jokes that land, many that don't. It's the sort of thing I'd want to catch when it's streaming and I'm in the mood for some mindless sci-fi action.

 

[Reynard]

As someone who doesn't really follow Superman or the DC universe, I'll offer a few thoughts about this movie as a sci-fi action movie in general instead of a Superman movie in particular:

I'll start by saying the cast did well with what they were given, but the writing and directing didn't click for me:

Firstly, there were too many named characters in this film. I guess I'm supposed to conclude this is a lived-in world because everyone and their henchmen gets a name and a few lines of dialogue. All this really did is make it difficult for me to develop any sort of attachment to these characters. There are so many of them wandering into the spotlight, none of them stands out from the crowd. "Oh, no! They killed named guy on the street who said two lines that one time! Now I know all the other forgetable background characters with names are also vulnerable! Oh, wait. I have no emotional connection to any of them."

Secondly, Ultraman being a Superman clone wasn't much of a twist. I didn't realize before reading this thread that Superman clones are such an overused plot device in the DC universe, but the Superman clone still failed to surprise me. This film has corporate-sponsored superhero teams, flying armies with powered armor, an amorphous nanotech cyborg, a captive kaiju, multiple aliens, billionaires with custom pocket universes, and heroes who've seen enough pocket universes to know how they function, inside and out. By the time all that was introduced, I stopped caring who Ultraman was. Due to the rampant super-science, Ultraman could be whomever or whatever the plot required. No reveal could possibly be shocking.

Thirdly, this film included too much exposition for an action movie. We start we a wall of text. ("3 seconds ago, you were reading about what happened 3 minutes ago.") I'm willing to forgive the opening text crawl, since it's right at the beginning of the film, establishing the scene. What really threw off the pacing for me was the nonstop exposition during the final fight scene. During the course of the final battle, Lex Luthor explains his ingenious plan to kill Superman, offers footnotes describing his methodology, comments on geopolitics, and does some self-reflection worthy of a therapist's couch. That's a level of commentary I don't really appreciate during an action sequence that should speak for itself. If you're writing an action movie and you haven't explained all the moving parts involved in the final fight scene by the time the first punch is thrown, you're doing something wrong.

(Also, nitpick: Lex Luthor has drones with facial recognition software that can I.D. anyone in their field of vision, yet he somehow doesn't know Clark Kent is Superman. No amount of "hypo-glasses" handwaving is explaining away how Superman's alter ego is undetectable to mindless cameras with pattern recognition software.)

Despite all that, I wouldn't say this film is a terrible action movie. It's a fun popcorn film with some interesting set pieces here and there. Middling CGI for a Hollywood blockbuster. A few jokes that land, many that don't. It's the sort of thing I'd want to catch when it's streaming and I'm in the mood for some mindless sci-fi action.

I'm not shocked that the negative voices feel.the need to write the most words, but I'm still flustered by it.

So, you're not going to critique it as a Superman film, but then do so? Right. Typical.

 

[Staffan]

(Also, nitpick: Lex Luthor has drones with facial recognition software that can I.D. anyone in their field of vision, yet he somehow doesn't know Clark Kent is Superman. No amount of "hypo-glasses" handwaving is explaining away how Superman's alter ego is undetectable to mindless cameras with pattern recognition software.)

There's an old-ish Superman comic, I think it's one of the early ones after John Byrne's post-Crisis reboot (80s?). It's the era where Lex was turned into a business tycoon rather than a lone mad scientist. Anyway, in this comic Lex realizes there has to be some connection between Clark Kent and Superman, because Kent always has the first scoops on what Supes is doing and such.

So he gets one of his minions to write a computer program to analyze all available data on Clark Kent and on Superman to figure out what their connection is. And of course, the computer tells him, "Clark Kent is Superman". This is how Lex reacts:

Spoiler: Lex's reaction to being told Clark Kent is Superman

 

[Piperken]

Re: Science-y stuff in super hero films; this one is a classic:

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'll offer a few thoughts about this movie as a sci-fi action movie

Next, do Star Wars as a family drama.

 

[beta-ray]

I thought it was… okay. I feel a little weird because I've seen so much positivity about it but I just thought it was fine. I'm usually not too nitpicky about stuff and just let the story guide me where it does, but for some reason I kept getting taken out of the story at points.

I think tonally it was kind of all over the place. Some serious parts and some really goofy parts. Don't get me wrong, I like goofy, but I think there is a limit, especially if the movie is not a comedy.

I'm sorry, I really didn't like Lex and his henchmen. They were a bit too goofy for me. Intellectually, I understand Lex and eventually understood what drove him, but for some reason it didn't feel earned to me. Those drone operators seemed a bit too cheesy for me as well.

For the most part, I liked the Justice Gang (though the name really made me think of the Injustice Gang everytime I heard it). The standout being Mr. Terrific, even though he seemed way touchier than I remember from the comics. I guess hanging around Guy would do that to you. Wish we got to know more about Hawkgirl (was she an alien? Reincarnation? Just a human with sonic powers and wings?

The whole thing with the black hole and Metropolis was kind of confusing to me. That seemed to be the biggest threat to me, but it didn't seem to have been treated as such, as it seemed to be ignored for long periods of time when it was supposed to be quite urgent.

Lois and Clark were pretty good for the most part. I did not like the twist with the Els, but whatever.

I did not read the comic that shared the title of the upcoming Supergirl movie (like Superman, they changed the title to just the character name though), so I don't know that version of Supergirl, but I didn't like her cameo in the movie. I'm not sure I'll be interested in a movie featuring that character.

Anyway, that was just a ramble sorry. It seems kind of negative looking at it, but I didn't hate the movie, but I didn't love it. It was okay. As far as movies go, for me it was the best Superman movie after the '78 movie and its sequel. Superman was never my favorite character though, I think my favorite iteration of the character was the 90s animated series.

 

[Belen]

Anyway, that was just a ramble sorry. It seems kind of negative looking at it, but I didn't hate the movie, but I didn't love it. It was okay. As far as movies go, for me it was the best Superman movie after the '78 movie and its sequel. Superman was never my favorite character though, I think my favorite iteration of the character was the 90s animated series.

Agreed on the animated series. Superman is my favorite character in DC. None of the live action stuff has surpassed any of the Batman: TAS, Superman: TAS, Batman Beyond, Justice League series.

I also love Smallville.

I really enjoyed this movie and you could see Gunn pick up some of the themes from Animated but I also did not like the Jor El twist. That felt contrived just to fit the plot device they needed to hit.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I really enjoyed this movie and you could see Gunn pick up some of the themes from Animated but I also did not like the Jor El twist. That felt contrived just to fit the plot device they needed to hit.

While it struck me as a slightly odd choice, there's been a strain of viewing Jor-El in that direction since back when Byrne was writing the comic; it just seemed a little odd with the otherwise Bronze-Age sort of feel of the movie.

 

[Argyle King]

I saw it yesterday.

Overall, it was okay.

I do agree with what @Epic Meepo said about there being a lot of exposition. ...a lot of telling instead of showing.

I think it was an okay movie for a Sunday matinee. Had it been competing against something else, I may have chosen a different movie. But I don't feel upset about spending money to see it.

Sometimes the movie felt shallow. I was interested in learning more about the robots and various other things in the movie, but everything was stretched so thin that it felt as though nothing really got enough attention to be given substance.

Nathion Fillion did a good job at playing Guy Gardener. He found a middle ground between being cartoony in some of his motivations and overacting. It worked.

I'm not sure if Hawk Girl's screeching was supposed to be funny or not. I laughed because the closeups of her face reminded me of Birdman, but I don't know if that's the intent.

In general, I liked the portrayal of Lex Luthor (even if it did occasionally border feeling like a watered down Doctor Doom). I think the actor did very well with the material he was given. I'm not entirely sure if the movie really explains his deep hatred of Superman. I think that the movie probably did, but I didn't catch it. I dozed off few a couple minutes in the middle, so I may have missed it.

The least interesting part of the movie was Superman. The performance wasn't bad. I think the actor did well with what he was given. But something felt off. I feel like you could have almost not had Superman in the movie at all, and you'd have largely the same movie.