Reply With QuoteOriginally Posted by PPatty
Spoiler for next movie…:
Enjoyable movie overall, with positives outweighing negatives by an easy margin.
The good:
* Krypto. Gunn and his team clearly put a lot of thought into dog behavior and worked it into the storyline perfectly. The dog is worth the price of admission alone.
* The lead actors. The film franchise hasn't seen this level of chemistry between Lois and Clark/Superman since Kidder & Reeve in the Donner movies. Nicholas Hoult as Luthor flows with the material, so I don't blame him for turning into a ranting clown at the end.
* Pacing. It's a brisk 2+ hours without ever feeling rushed or frenzied. It's efficient storytelling overall. And as Philo notes, it's fun.
* In media res. Gunn dispenses with a full reboot, which works because Supes is the most iconic superhero. Everyone watching this movie knows the classic elements of the character and surrounding mythology, so Gunn sums the backstory in three sentences at the beginning of the film, keeps the Jor-El/Lara-El presence to a minimum even though they play a central (in a very surprising yet logical twist) role in this plot and casually drops in stuff without bogging things down with exposition.
* Set pieces. The fights and related action flow smoothly, and Gunn includes some lovely transitions between scenes.
* Fan service. The movie hits the mark here, including a few nods here and there without smashing the nostalgia button. I'm impressed that near the end, Gunn included what appeared to me to be a tip of the hat to one of my favorite movie scenes of all time, the Superman-takes-Lois flying sequence from Superman Returns.
* Krypto's owner. It makes sense to me.
The bad:
* Overstuffed story. Somehow, this thing manages to be efficient yet overwritten. While Gunn avoids lingering overly long on moments, he rolls out so many ideas and elements that some of it just feels like seedlings for future DCU endeavors rather than necessary to this particular tale. And while he doesn't indulge in exposition, he sometimes adds quick explanations where none is needed.
Spoiler for For example…:
* Luthor's devolution. As noted above, he turns into a rambling buffoon in the last quarter of the movie. It's a shame, because he starts out smoldering, but once things start tipping the heroes' way, the smooth and self-assured tycoon immediately and unconvincingly falls apart and turns into a speechifying doofus. It would have worked much better had he been portrayed that way from the beginning as other movies did.
* Ma & Pa Kent. Do people from Kansas talk like that? They spoke and sounded more like characters from Dukes of Hazzard.
* Krypto's owner. Yes, it makes sense as an explanation for Krypto's lack of discipline, but it felt cheap and cliched. If there's a follow-up movie, I hope it's not two hours of that.
Spoiler for next movie…:
And that's fine, as long as there's some depth to the character development. If it's nonstop party animal, I will be disappointed.
First, I thought this was the best superhero movie since Endgame and it is easily the best Superman movie since the first and second Christopher Reeves Superman movies. It doesn't apologize for being a comic book movie and in fact leans into it. I think it works (interestingly enough, the Fantastic Four movie trailer that proceeded this appears to be taking the same approach, although I have some theories on what they are doing....and no, I don't know as I have intentionally avoided reading or watching anything about it).
Spoiler for Comments on PPatty's thoughts:
I 100% agree with this, although I really don't think it will be.
I have no complaints and, upon first watch(*) am firmly setting this at a 7.75 personal score. (The score was amazing, and I'm annoyed it's not on CD.)
* - Between the couple next to me talking, being on their phones, and making out, and the one on the other side of my father-in-law asking all kinds of stupid questions during the movie (you know the type) I have to see it again without morons interfering, to better grade it and reflect.
CD? You are OLD. But it is on streaming music services — I listened to it the other day on Amazon Music. And it is inspiring for the first few minutes, but it gets repetitive. Much of it is basically the opening of the John Williams theme played at a slow tempo over and over again.
We watched this over the weekend and were pretty underwhelmed. Not sure what all the hype is about. -And I'm pretty certain there is no one still frequenting this board that wanted this movie to succeed more than me lol. I'm a huge DC fan and much prefer their heroes to Marvel's.
It wasn't terrible. I very much enjoyed Krypto. I LOVED the Starro Easter egg. Also loved the Hall of Justice Easter egg. But overall the movie just seemed bleh. I was hoping for something much more epic, especially for a Superman movie. I don't think this flick would even make my top five for best Superman movies of all time.
Wife totally agreed with me. We ended up watching Man of Steel as a cleansing lol.
It isn't looking good for you man. This combined with you living in Ohio...
Supergirl | Official Teaser Trailer
I was not disappointed, but also was not blown away. The actors and production team generally did well with the material available to them, but it feels like the DCEU honchos got a little ahead of themselves — I was never emotionally engaged by the movie because Kara as a movie character hasn't been developed enough.
The Woman of Tomorrow miniseries that inspired this film works because its pathos is firmly grounded in several decades of Supergirl's history in the comics. Missy Alcock's Supergirl had less than two minutes on screen before her own movie. You can do that with Superman and Batman because they're such cultural touchstones that almost everyone knows the basic who-what-when-where-why, but Supergirl doesn't have that. The movie's few minutes of clumsy exposition explain her character intellectually, but you don't feel it, just like the Cliff's Notes for a great play will never land with the impact of a live production. So yeah, they should have saved this one for a second film and started with a fleshed-out origin story.
On the other hand, at least her backstory did get a few minutes. The movie's big baddie makes Duane Johnson's Black Adam look like a Shakespearean villain. Yeah, I get it, the movie is mainly a character study of Kara Zor-El, but again, given that we didn't get the on-screen investment into her journey to this point, a more developed antagonist might have given the audience something to care about.
Speaking of nothing to care about: Lobo felt like a character shoehorned into the story purely to promote his own upcoming film, like the Julia Louis-Dreyfus scenes in Black Panther 2. You could have saved him for a post-credit scene instead of adding empty calories to the main meal.
Oh, and we only need one shot of Kara rising dramatically with the sun behind her. Doing it multiple times kills the impact.
Yet I'm not sorry I spent for two movie tickets and popcorn because of the two main actors. Clearly, the intention was for the plucky little Ruthye, aka Arya Stark 2.0, to create a relationship for the audience to care about. The actress does everything that could be reasonably expected, given the script, which can also be said of Missy Alcock. It's a classic case of performers transcending the script.
Posting Permissions
