Yes that was by far the worst part. You would expect a Batman v Superman movie to make the two main characters somewhat interesting and show a complex relationship develop between them. That part was completely botched so we can have more time to follow Lois Lane around and see Batman's parents die a few more times, I guess.

I think Superman is a bit harder to write for than Captain America even, because Captain America starts out as a weakling, which makes him much more relatable. For me, his defining moment in the movies thus far is when he jumps on that grenade in the first movie, before he took he super serum. Superman on the other hand is basically all-powerful from the start, which makes him harder to get into.

If you think Henry cavill is the biggest problem here you've got a serious misread on the Superman movies.

I didn't always know what the hell was going on in this movie, but it was less bad than I expected.

Thought Affleck was pretty cool. Are they planning on making a standalone film with him as Murder Man whoops I mean Batman? I'd definitely be up for more of that.

The talk (that's been going on for decades) about Superman stories/movies sucking because he's too powerful and "non-relatable" is overblown. The answer is simply that he hasn't had good writers or good filmmakers.

All-Star Superman the comic is pretty great, because it's written by a good writer. Alan Moore also wrote at least one Superman comic that is good for the same reason.

As I said earlier, Alan Moore's Swamp Thing becomes significantly more powerful than Superman is, yet the stories are incredible because Moore is a great writer. Incidentally, it also features an incredible short appearance by Lex Luthor (I had no interest in that character before that) and some Superman and Batman.

If you like superheroes and you're okay with reading comics, read Alan Moore's Swamp Thing (just start with volume 1 out of 6). Tom Strong by the same author is essentially Superman, and is also excellent. It shows that the actual Superman certainly could have good stories if anybody wanted to bother.

Yes I agree. One of the things I disliked the most about MoS was that they have all this new technology for special effects and photography, yet for some reason they still need to rip off the script? Makes no sense. It's actually something I quite liked about this movie, it wasn't perfect, but it was at least pretty original.

Also, when it comes to great scenes, how about this one:



A little campy by today's standards, but the best part is that Superman vanquishes the enemies with his wits rather than his muscles, which is what we kids loved. The actors are again all terrific too. Lois decking the chick is a great moment as well. Apparently the scene where Zod's crew were flying back and forth between the crystal pillars was quite technically challenging for the time as well, so all and all some pretty great film making.

You olds need to gtfo with your love of the campy Christopher Reeve superman movies. They don't hold up. They're bad and you should feel bad for liking them.

It's funny how people spending $200k to make a movie spend more time and attention on the script than do people spending $200 million.

He is all-powerful, but the great narrative in the 1978 movie is Superman struggling to come to terms with his power - hiding it from his peers at school and not being able to save his human father, and then struggling to fit in at the Daily Planet.

There is that great monologue in Kill Bill where Bill talks about Superman's costume being Clark Kent - Superman is Superman, and Clark Kent is his alter ego. This is why Superman can be interesting and relevant when it's done well.

Superman II is by far the best Superman movie. It has some minor flaws but blows every other one away. The original gets a lot of praise but the whole reversing Earth's rotation = reversing time just killed it for me, wtf was Donner thinking?

That wasn't supposed to be the ending of Superman. Pretty much everything you want to know about those two movies is in the big Superman DVD collection (called the Superman Ultimate Collector's Edition). Superman II was infamously taken from Donner (I and II were being shot at the same time, but Donner and the Salkinds could not get along), and the vision wasn't close to what he intended (though it used a significant amount of what he shot). In that collection, the Donner cut of Superman II is available (done specifically for the collection), and is worth watching to get a better idea of what he was trying to accomplish (he obviously didn't have everything done he needed to tell the story perfectly), but it's a good cut and worth watching, especially if you're a fan of Superman II. Him and Tom Mankiewicz also do a commentary for this version.

I've seen the Donner cut, and prefer the Salkind version (ignoring the fact that many scenes in the Donner cut are raw). But even Donner's original versions have the reverse rotation (just at the end of 2 instead of 1), which I find even more absurd because it reverses time beyond just the Earth. I just absolutely abhor the premise of that.

To say that Superman I and II were troubled productions is an understatement of epic proportions. I was in the audience for the premiere of the Donner cut, and really really weirdly Salkind was there. He was almost taking credit for it being done, and could not have been more out of place there if he were a human piece of kryptonite. Donner continued to savage him in the Q&A...lol.

As for the ending, I was just making the comment that the ending was not intended for that movie, not how good it was.

This, this, and more this.

To be fair you generally only hear about the good $200k budget movies, whereas you hear about every $200M budget movie.

There would be a lot of horrible $200k movies that are filling shelves in some studios.

But I bet they all had completed scripts before shooting the movie.

The main difference between movies with $200k & $200 million budgets is the number of people that have input into the script.

When you have execs, actors, agents, corporate sponsers, etc all needing to sign off on a script it often sinks to the lowest common denomitor.

It's definitely the reverse if anything. More low budget movies shoot with unfinished scripts or scripts that change more, even if purely because of logistics.

Wow you're dumb

I saw it today, I thought it was about 6/10

I think WW is well done even with her lack of tits. Very pretty.

It was better than the new Star Wars.


SW: 6/10
BvS: 7/10


Come at me, bros

Probably best DC movie not made by Christopher Nolan.


I know that's a low bar.

.

Well sheeeeit