Which reboot did it better?

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

which did it better?


  • Total voters
    86
  • Poll closed .

OSCORP

Super Freak
***
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
18,700
Reaction score
24
Location
Twin Cities
Both were kinda Mediocre IMO. Both sequels are what i'm looking at to see some meat and potatoes.


I liked Andrew's PP/SM quite a bit. I also liked Henry's Superman. Andrew didn't really have big shoes to fill, Henry on the other hand had to fill in for CR.

Both films were origin again, told in a different way. That said, i have to give it to ASM just because i felt it had more charm/chemistry and felt a bit more for the characters. Superman the Movie is still my Superman movie, and SM2 is the best Spider-Man movie.

All in all both were just OK. And the sequels will decide the franchise's future.

:peace
 
reboot.jpg
 
I was really disappointed by MOS, but even so, it was miles better!

ASM is, I think, the first movie in my life I couldn't watch through. I had to stop after the sewer encounter because I couldn't take it more.

Actually, I was gonna buy the HT fig but the movie was enough to make me save the money for another fig!
 
Man of Steel. ASM was way too soon, way too similar ... and not quite as good as its predecessor.

SnakeDoc
 
It's sad, but as much as I disliked ******-Parker Witwicky and the blatant Raimi ripoff (despite being touted as something we've never seen before), overall, that film was still truer to the key aspects of Spider-Man than Man of Steel's Hope Man was to Superman.
 
Chose ASM, though I thoroughly enjoyed both. You know, some times I honestly think some of you guys truly believe that watching a movie you don't like is literally equally as painful as having a pair of scissors thrust into your eyeballs while simultaneously being kicked in the groin by a steel-toed boot. At the end of the day, they are just movies.:nana:
 
Chose ASM, though I thoroughly enjoyed both. You know, some times I honestly think some of you guys truly believe that watching a movie you don't like is literally equally as painful as having a pair of scissors thrust into your eyeballs while simultaneously being kicked in the groin by a steel-toed boot. At the end of the day, they are just movies.:nana:

No less than you sitting down to a bowl of chicken broth and a celery stalk thinking it's the "BESTUST CHEEKAN NOODAL SOOP EVARRRRRRRRR!" :huh
 
Tough one, both were let-downs. At least MOS was different I guess and therefore not utterly pointless in its objective of 'rebooting' like ASM was. Although I actually would have preferred had MOS not been so different as to no longer feel like the correct tone for that character.
 
Yeah - I'll go with TAS. I just enjoyed it a HELL of a lot more than Cavillman.

Sure - it was less than perfect, but I didn't leave the theatre shaking my head either. :lol
 
well... at least Spiderman didn't destroy a city and killed thousands of people in the process... just saying... :dunno

I say ASM.
 
Like others are saying, they were both pretty average, and I at least respect Man of Steel for trying to do something different (even though "different" in this case wasn't really "interesting," "creative," or even "appropriate" to my eyes--more pandering to some perceived audience base). Having said that, I prefer Spider-Man because as Nam says, at least he felt really true to the character and story. Maybe that movie was redundant, but to me, being redundant and doing a character proper justice is better than being fairly novel and crapping on a franchise I care about.

I actually wasn't too surprised with either though, because I went in with expectations that were pretty much met. Particularly with MOS, where Snyder gave me what I figured he would. The scene Spidey had with the carjacker was great. I wish we got to see more of that sort of thing.
 
Back
Top