|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Man of Steel (2013)
|
Sam Graham
AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues.
Posts: 1431
From: Waukee, IA
Registered: Dec 2004
|
posted 06-15-2013 10:40 PM
CINEMA: Merle Hay Cinema, Des Moines, IA
AUDITORIUM: 1
PRESENTATION: 35mm/Dolby Digital
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: Soft, washed out picture
RATING: Two stars (out of four)
This 1960's era 800-seat single screen house (originally called the Plaza Theater) ends its run next year when a new brewhouse cinema opens on the other side of the mall. It's our last BIG (designed for 70mm) screen and the auditorium, re-furbished in the early 1990's, still looks great. Even with the bad picture (which, washed-out look aside, was solid as a rock), the once THX certified sound kicks ass. Evening admission is still $7.50 and the same amount will still get you a large soda and medium popcorn. If you find yourself in town before the new joint opens, see a movie here and enjoy an increasingly rare experience. They never sell out, but a couple hundred usually show up for a Saturday night. And you might be lucky enough to get a treat...they played the old 50-second version of Dolby's "Train" trailer on the head of the program.
It's a shame they couldn't incorporate this room into the new multiplex, which will be built on the south side of the mall. But Merle Hay Cinema sits in an odd area that not only isn't expandable, but is obscure. They don't have a mall entrance and they're hidden on the back side from street view. They don't even have a marquee. I'm guessing it'll just sit here empty for years to come because there's no practical use for the space.
THE PLOT: Throw a bunch of action and a few Superman characters against the wall and see what sticks. Wackiness ensues.
While not really as dark as Nolan's "Batman" movies (which I mostly hated), this isn't exactly a fun movie to watch either. There's glances of Kal-El's heritage, a horribly miscast Lois Lane (Amy Adams has absolutely NO business in this role), and lots of WHOMP BAM BAM BOOM BAM POW BAM BAM BOOM BAM action at a feverish pace. That's about it. Although Russel Crowe generally stole every scene he was in. He was awesome. Zod, not so much.
It's basically a brain-dead action movie with a DC franchise sparkled in. It wouldn't have taken any effort at all to re-write this as a Transformers sequel.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 06-17-2013 05:49 PM
For a couple of minutes in the big action finale scene I thought it WAS a Transformers sequel or maybe a Spider-Man movie, what with all the liquid-metal-ish snake snapping things trying to pull Supe out of the sky.
This movie was OK from an action standpoint, and it had a story that was miles more coherent that the Iron Man 3 mish-mash, but it was just too dark and humorless for a Superman movie. They could have made a flick unlike all the recent noise-fests, but instead they made a movie JUST like all of them.
They also futzed bigtime with the Superman "canon." Such as, Lois Lane knows who Clark Kent is. Krypton apparently has a great big sun that looks yellow like ours, rather than a "red sun" which used to be the reason Supe had extra powers on earth.
I also hate it when movies take a female character, have her pick up an automatic weapon for the first time in her life while an insanely perilous situation is happening, and "amazingly" she is instantly an expert marksman with this unfamiliar weapon while buildings and stuff are crashing around her.
Why don't they ever look at some of this stuff and say "Naahh, that's just far too unbelievable" and do something less ridiculous? No, they always have to go about 40 miles over the top with this crap.
Not that there was nothing to enjoy. I liked the idea that people would greet this new "hero" with skepticism, especially in this day and age. I liked the way they explained how Supe needed to "train himself" not to hear and see what he didn't want to. I had thought of that before, regarding "x-ray vision" -- how do you NOT see through stuff?
But, sadly, the stuff I didn't like outweighed the stuff I did. There was zero chemistry between Lois Lane and Superman, for example. Why did they need to use General Zod as a nemesis, when there are other characters from the comic books that haven't been in previous movies? Why re-hash a story when there are thousands of other stories available? Did anyone actually go read the comic books or did they just pull this story off the Microsoft Action Movie Plot Generator?
I thought it was stupid the way it made Superman and Zod each seem to weigh about 100 tons. How else do you explain that if Zod knocks Superman across a street, he digs a giant trench as he's moving across it? Oh that's right, it's because we need more special effects.
The biggest problem with this film for me was its lack of humor and humanity. Every version of Superman before this has had some laughs woven through it. This one, like all action movies these days, just can't wait to get to the next instance of blowing stuff up real good. Why do all the superheroes now have to have something "wrong" with them? Can't the movie's villians provide enough "darkness" to the story?
The movie wasn't fun to watch. It was too long. It was also too gloomy, all the way from the story to the color palette to the sound. Superman movies (and the comics) used to be fun, which is what made them unique.
They didn't make this movie for Superman fans -- they made it for Chris Nolan's Batman fans, that's basically the problem with it I think.
My score: 2 out of 5 stars. We watched it in 2-D so I can't comment on the 3-D effects.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 06-28-2013 12:41 AM
I watched it in D-IMAX 3D... It wasn't my actual preferred choice, watching scope content on any IMAX screen is stupid if you ask me.
We were sitting quite close to the screen, pixelfest all over it. And in addition to that, it was goddamn LOUD, it was more like a rock concert right in front of you.
As for the 3D: Totally pointless... Even in D-IMAX it just wasn't there in most of the scenes. Also, this movie contains a lot of shaky camera work, that just doesn't fit with 3D and huge screens. Christopher Nolan was producing, why couldn't he tell Zack Snyder not to use shaky cam?
I've never been a real Superman fan, but I liked this movie version more than the last try. I liked the way they portrayed Krypton and their technology in a somewhat timeless fashion. Also some of the dramatic parts weren't all that bad. Laws of physic don't seem to exist in this movie, but since it's Superman, we're probably supposed to ignore that. He's Superman from Krypton, sure he can do it...
quote: Mike Blakesley
Something else -- they are fiddling with the earth's gravity, causing cars and water etc. to float in the air and then slam down again, but people still are able to run across the ground. GAAAAAAAHH why does someone like me, a lowly single screen theater owner, think of this crap while these high paid Hollywood big shots don't see it?
It obviously only works on metal, as long as you don't have to much fillings in your teeth or are Wolverine, you're fine ![[Smile]](smile.gif) .
quote: Mike Blakesley
Did anyone actually go read the comic books or did they just pull this story off the Microsoft Action Movie Plot Generator?
Maybe it will be part of the new Office, when they will bring back Clippy. You only need to write a sentence or two and he will come up with: "Looks like you're writing a script, click here to let me finish it for you!"
quote: Joe Redifer
Umm. if Superman's powers on Earth came from the Sun, wouldn't he be powerless at night? Also, how could he fly to Krypton and back in Superman returns?
It's not that complicated: At night he draws its power from the moon and while flying to Krypton, he draws it from the stars...
and if that doesn't answer your question: He's Superman!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 06-28-2013 01:36 PM
Cinema: Harkins Theatres Bricktown 16
Screen: Cine Capris
Format: Christie DLP, 2D, Dolby Atmos
Presentation Problems: Nothing too serious
Rating: 2.5 stars out of 4
I'm just finally getting around to writing a review of Man of Steel. My girlfriend, Cynthia and I watched the 4:00pm show, Sat. June 15, on Harkins Theaters' biggest, "Cine Capris" named screen. Harkins had just installed Dolby Atmos on all the Cine Capris houses in its chain of theaters. I had no desire to watch Man of Steel in 3D since it was largely a 2D-3D conversion job. I was more interested in checking out Dolby Atmos. Watching the movie in a large theater with a new sound process and paying no premium upcharge was definitely a plus. I just wish the movie was better.
What it did have going for it: some pretty cool visuals. Certain things were clever, like the way Russel Crowe's Kal-El digital character could pop in and out of different areas of a spaceship. I thought Hans Zimmer's score was pretty good, but it's not in the same league as John Williams original score from the 1979 movie.
What it didn't have going for it: the movie lacked an emotional core. I'm not sure why. It could be that so much of the dramatic narrative felt like movie clip art cobbled from other scripts. It also could be the overbearing style element squashing the performances, not to mention certain bits of logic. The story was needlessly complicated by a bunch of stuff that didn't even seem at place in a Superman story. The weird flying creatures and skull thing holding the DNA of every Kryptonian just didn't feel right. And then they threw out the very simple things that have been common in all the previous Superman movies, TV shows, comics, etc. Where the hell is the Kryptonite? I didn't mind them doing away with the whole Clark Kent can't be recognized as Superman when he puts on his glasses (because that has always been pretty damn stupid). But they didn't handle the story alternative worth a damn either.
I'm sure a long discussion could go on for many pages here about liberties newer remakes have been taking with story lines. It seems like maintaining the integrity of a story "canon" really isn't important these days. The producers and directors make the big changes anyway and try to gloss over them with visuals.
And how about that dreary, depressing color palette? Were they making a Superman movie or a sequel to Book of Eli?
The two biggest action sequences (fight scenes really) in the movie were big, but they got suprisingly dull very fast. Superman and these super villains punch and pummel each other endlessly and none of the hits make any impact or story progress. Spoiler Alert - Click to Toggle
So it seemed like a really cheap cop out at the end when all Superman had to do to defeat Zod was twist his neck. Maybe they should have had Sgt. Riggs from Lethal Weapon do the fighting. That scene would have been over in 2 seconds. And without the loss of $100 billion worth of CGI buildings!
I like visually stylized things in movies when the style is done with taste. Ridley Scott and David Fincher are very good at using visual style without losing too much of the emotional focus. Zack Snyder, like so many younger directors, doesn't know when to let up. I started groaning every time I saw that CGI camera zoom in and then zoom closer schtique. That crap was done to death in the Battlestar Galactica TV series. There's little sense doing the same style trick to death years later. Some characterizations played out in the worst senses of "mannerism," like Lara Lor-Van's death. If I looked outside and saw the entire landscape of Lawton and the Wichita Mountains exploding upwards in giant columns of fire & smoke I'd probably be shitting myself. I wouldn't be slowly walking towards it like a fashion model on a runway. But that's just how it goes. The creedo of today's style before substance director: Let's just throw some really cool looking shit on the screen. If it looks cool enough it won't matter if it doesn't make a damned bit of sense!
Speaking of Dolby Atmos, I thought the mix was pretty good. Although, I didn't really hear a whole lot of point source specific sounds placed in 3D space within the room. The Dolby Atmos trailer did a much more clear job of demonstrating all of the wild zig zag surround movement that is possible. The Man of Steel mix did more to fill the space in the room rather than sound like it was merely coming from the walls. At least that was good. My only complaint is the bass level could have been better. But I don't expect huge, stadium seated rooms like the Cine Capris to deliver chest rattling bass like I've heard in certain other standard seated auditoriums in the past.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic