- Joined
- Sep 8, 2006
- Messages
- 16,407
- Reaction score
- 556
Not as good as Wilma's, but a toe is toe.
![]()
Some toes are better than others, Dr. Theopolis.
Not as good as Wilma's, but a toe is toe.
![]()
The council scene from S1 blows MOS council scene away.
I accidentally deleted my earlier post, but I do think Crowe was much better than Brando, even though I have a nostalgic connection to Brando's performance. It is a bit godly and "magical," but the one thing MOS really fails at--demonstrating heart--is one thing Crowe did much better than Brando IMO. Could well be the case that Brando did more considering the relative effortBut the performance is the performance, and based on that I just don't think Brando matches up to what Crowe did. Of course, part of that is no doubt the writing and direction.
Found it.
Here's what I was talking about. It's GREAT stuff if you haven't seen it before.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvELw4_pdXQ
Glenn Ford does a lot without smashing you over the head with it. He's just a terrific actor across the board, and was a great father figure for Reeve in my eyes. Costner was fine, but was just a slight tweak on characters he's played over and over in the course of his career (Field of Dreams, Prince of Thieves, WaterworldBut overall Costner Pa is way more heartwarming and fatherly than Ford's IMO.
Yeah, Crowe was the best thing about this movie to me (the only really good thing?). You bring up a good point thought--maybe it's because he had more character development than the primary protagonistCrowe was actually one of my favorite things about MoS. I liked his silly Jedi door-closing ghost bit. But that's probably because he had way more dialogue and character than Superman.
It's not as confusing as you think.That makes absolutely no sense, either you care for a character or you don't, how can a CGI scene "trick you" into thinking you care for a character?
I cared more for this Superman than Reeve's in Superman 1, and also the rest of the characters.
Glenn Ford does a lot without smashing you over the head with it. He's just a terrific actor across the board, and was a great father figure for Reeve in my eyes. Costner was fine, but was just a slight tweak on characters he's played over and over in the course of his career (Field of Dreams, Prince of Thieves, Waterworld). He had some scenes that were supposed to be really emotional but like most of MOS the supposed drama just felt like window dressing over a pretty spare emotional center. It didn't ring true to me or really connect. Felt like empty platitudes.
That is pretty dang hilarious. A bagel talking to Superman using electronic beepsFound it.
Here's what I was talking about. It's GREAT stuff if you haven't seen it before.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvELw4_pdXQ
It's not as confusing as you think.
The images, the dialoge, the music, all give the appearance of heart, and soul, but it's all fake. None of it's genuine. But your brain thinks it is because of these things.
Jye's right. The brain is a funny thing. Hence why an hour and a half of lectures and uplifting speeches do not correlate with punching and mass death.
In full disclosure I, uh. . .think I went to the little boys room during the scene where Costner must have bought itI'm really not judging the actors for anything else other than this movie franchise, I sound like a broken record because I liked both characters and both actors, but Costner scenes were a lot more satisfying to me.
If I had to choose one death scene over the other, I'd pick S1 scene, but not by much, still think Coster does an overall better job.
It is. The thing is, the movie isn't about the effects. It's about the resonance of it. Like I said 100 times before. The themes, characters, all hold true today.
Man of Steel, really will not have that lasting impact.
In fairness, I wonder if any of the superhero movies we see today will, though. The original Superman was the first big time, legitimate comic movie made. Just due to historical importance it's got a lasting impact. Batman ('89) has the benefit of being made by a film auteur, and so it has artistic value. The Marvel U movies may be somewhat popular in the next 10 or 15 years due to the charisma of the actors, and the appealing nature of the action and stories. But I don't think any recent comic films--apart from maybe the Nolan Bat movies--are particularly "timeless" or anything.Man of Steel, really will not have that lasting impact.
It's not as confusing as you think.
The images, the dialoge, the music, all give the appearance of heart, and soul, but it's all fake. None of it's genuine. But your brain thinks it is because of these things.
Jye's right. The brain is a funny thing. Hence why an hour and a half of lectures and uplifting speeches do not correlate with punching and mass death.
That is pretty dang hilarious. A bagel talking to Superman using electronic beepsOh, Brando. . .