Movie Critics Thread

[M-bot]

I would have said blandness myself.

I find Cavil's Superman and Clark Kent pretty uninspiring.

I suspect that is more how Clark Kent/Supes is written rather than what Cavill brought to the role. I think that ultimately, the writers of MOS and BVS and Zack Snyder just don't understand the character and made him morose, depressed, hopeless, unsympathetic, and conflicted. His motivations are muddled and the bon mots of "wisdom" shared by Jonathan Kent in both films just muddied the character even more.

Think of it this way, the difference between Christopher Reeve's Superman (noble, gentle, kind, heroic) and Cavill's is a bit like the difference between the Optimus Prime we know from various fictions (principled, noble, heroic) and Bay's OP (violent, vengeful, even sadistic). May as well be considered different characters.

Cavill was plenty of fun in Guy Ritchie's The Man From UNCLE, playing a charming and suave action hero, so I'm saying the writing and direction was the issue, rather than the actor.

I watched Suicide Squad a bit ago. Damyum. I thought BvsS was a crap movie.... Suzie Squad makes it look like a masterpiece. I ended up pushing through the whole thing hoping it would get better. It didn't. I skipped through the credits to see if there was anything at the end, there wasn't. I breathed a sigh of relief.

Apparenltly the DVD version was a better version than the cinema version. It must have sucked watching it at the movies...

I do like grumpy old man bats. As long as he remains grumpy and ends up with an army of monster bat robots who patrol Gotham for him.

I don't think SS was quite as bad as BVS, but yeah, pretty damned close. A baffling and wasted time at the cinema, that's for sure. In a world where Marvel Studios can bring out fun, popular and successful movies, that at the very least are entertaining, using properties as obscure as Guardians of the Galaxy and Dr Strange, it's perplexing that DC/WB with its iconic slate of properties, can't seem to find a way to use them in a way that isn't cringe-worthingly bad (at least since Nolan's The Dark Knight).

[shockNwave]

I suspect that is more how Clark Kent/Supes is written rather than what Cavill brought to the role. I think that ultimately, the writers of MOS and BVS and Zack Snyder just don't understand the character and made him morose, depressed, hopeless, unsympathetic, and conflicted. His motivations are muddled and the bon mots of "wisdom" shared by Jonathan Kent in both films just muddied the character even more.

Think of it this way, the difference between Christopher Reeve's Superman (noble, gentle, kind, heroic) and Cavill's is a bit like the difference between the Optimus Prime we know from various fictions (principled, noble, heroic) and Bay's OP (violent, vengeful, even sadistic). May as well be considered different characters.

Cavill was plenty of fun in Guy Ritchie's The Man From UNCLE, playing a charming and suave action hero, so I'm saying the writing and direction was the issue, rather than the actor.

I'll say this though, Cavill did a compelling and humorous job as the cocky vegan villain; Todd Ingram in Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World. Although I haven't read the graphic novel so I can't say if he did an accurate portrayal.

[Ralph Wiggum]

That wasn't Henry Cavill in Scott Pilgrim, it was Brandon Routh who played Supes in Bryan Singer's movie

I think Snyder tried to emulate the grittier and darker tone of Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy but couldn't pull it off. Superman IMO is a pain in the ass character to create a 'grounded' movie for because he's so OP in the real world. The moment you try to bring something to match him (Doomsday) you lose the gritty edgy tone.

[Sinnertwin]

Being ridiculously overpowered does indeed have its downsides when attempting to apply to film.

M Bot made some good points regarding Cavill and what he was presented to work with too. I found his portrayal a mix between sleepy toe-tapper and bland, but, hey, if that's what you're given...

[BigTransformerTrev]

Finally watched Antman the other night. One of the few Avenger-eque films I hadn't seen. Was surprisingly good - very funny and great use of the shrink/grow motif.

In the current comics Deadpool is an Avenger and actually funds their activities (Spiderman quit because he finds Deadpool amoral). I dont think we will see him in their next movie though

[GoktimusPrime]

Wow... I'd heard rave reviews about Suicide Squad...
...from my Year 12 students last year.

(which goes to show how teenagers are far easier to please as an audience )

Finally watched Antman the other night. One of the few Avenger-eque films I hadn't seen. Was surprisingly good - very funny and great use of the shrink/grow motif.

One thing I liked about Ant-Man was the updated costume being completely self-contained with no exposure. This is scientifically important because it explains why he can continue breathing when shrunken down. The helmet completely covers his face and appears to have a breathing apparatus. This is important because at his small size Ant-Man would be unable to inhale the number of oxygen molecules required. Breathing the air around him at that size would be like breathing very thin air at the top of Mount Everest... you'd expire.

Although there's a butt load of other stuff which makes no sense, but ya for the suspension of disbelief.

[shockNwave]

That wasn't Henry Cavill in Scott Pilgrim, it was Brandon Routh who played Supes in Bryan Singer's movie

I think Snyder tried to emulate the grittier and darker tone of Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy but couldn't pull it off. Superman IMO is a pain in the ass character to create a 'grounded' movie for because he's so OP in the real world. The moment you try to bring something to match him (Doomsday) you lose the gritty edgy tone.

My bad!

[Lord_Zed]

I suspect that is more how Clark Kent/Supes is written rather than what Cavill brought to the role. I think that ultimately, the writers of MOS and BVS and Zack Snyder just don't understand the character and made him morose, depressed, hopeless, unsympathetic, and conflicted. His motivations are muddled and the bon mots of "wisdom" shared by Jonathan Kent in both films just muddied the character even more.

Think of it this way, the difference between Christopher Reeve's Superman (noble, gentle, kind, heroic) and Cavill's is a bit like the difference between the Optimus Prime we know from various fictions (principled, noble, heroic) and Bay's OP (violent, vengeful, even sadistic). May as well be considered different characters.

Cavill was plenty of fun in Guy Ritchie's The Man From UNCLE, playing a charming and suave action hero, so I'm saying the writing and direction was the issue, rather than the actor.

Each to their own possibly, I didn't find Cavil's performance particularly memorable in that film either, I much prefer the other actors who were in it. Not saying he can't act, just saying I have yet to see him give any sort of stand out performance. He's got the look, but that's all I see.

[GoktimusPrime]

The thing that I love about Christopher Reeve's Superman/Clark Kent is that he portrayed both characters very differently from each other. Reeve's Superman was heroic, utterly fearless and exuded a powerful yet compassionate presence. His Clark Kent on the other hand was a bumbling, naïve and appeared to be socially awkward and lost. It really helped to sell the Clark Kent persona to the audience, cos let's face it, a pair of glasses aren't the greatest disguise* in the world.

Cavill doesn't even make an effort to really behave differently as Clark or Superman. Lois was able to see through his disguise instantly when Clark first rocked up with his specs on at the Daily Planet (as the Man of Steel ended with the two of them giving each other a knowing smile) - and it was simple enough for Luthor to discover his identity, kidnap Mrs. Kent... you know, the precise reason why superheroes have secret identities in the first place! Not just for their own protection but also for the protection of their loved ones. #Martha

Reeve's mannerisms completely change when he's Clark. Even his voice is at a higher octave and becomes deeper when he's Superman. There's that scene in Superman II when Clark tries to tell Lois the truth (at the hotel at Niagara Falls); we see Clark remove his glasses and speak to Lois with a lower voice, then he quickly changes his mind, puts his glasses back on and his voice goes higher and he starts speaking awkwardly etc. There's a lot more theatrics that go behind Reeve's Clark Kent persona.

With most other superheroes, their superhero identity is the false identity and their secret identity is who they really are. e.g. Bruce Wayne is the true identity and Batman is the created one. But Superman is Kal-El's true identity whereas the post-Smallville Clark Kent persona which he presents to those around him is the constructed one. Superman wears no mask, whereas Clark's glasses acts as a mask. Having a different persona in Clark also acts as a psychological mask - and both the Reeve Superman films and Superman Returns makes light of this as there are moments where people start to wonder if Clark might be Superman, only to think, "Naaaah!" because despite the physical similarities there's just no way that someone has daggy as Clark Kent could be Superman. And this is all deliberate on Kal-El's part in the way that he behaves as Clark.

This is a quality that I find completely absent in Cavill's Clark Kent. e.g. when he confronts Bruce Wayne at Luthor's party, he is basically behaving like Superman. He's strong, resilient etc., not the bumbling dork that we saw Reeve and even Routh play. It's even parodied in the Jimmy Kimmel version of that scene where Kimmel points out that there is no difference between Clark and Superman. Batffleck at least has a different voice!

-----------------------------------
*rivalled only by Prince Adam/He-Man's pasty vs bronzed skin.

[BruiseLee]

^ totally agree on Reeve's portrayal of Clark Kent. Very true to the comics how he played it. Seem to recall in one issue of Superman where Luthor used some findangy to discover that Clark was Superman and did not believe it as why would someone with the power of a god stoop to be a bumbling, poor excuse of a man like Clark. Reeve played this perfectly.

Have to disagree about the Bruce Wayne being the true identity though as I feel that this is his created persona and Batman is his true identity. You can read many cases in the comics where he has to pretend to be this irresponsible playboy rich dude and keep up the facade where he would rather put on skin tight leathers and keep swinging...