Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Just Saw Man of Steel


Frizzy350

Recommended Posts

Not going to really get into the movie, but at the end of it when everything is resolved and Clark Kent lands his job at the Daily Planet he's rocking the typical Clark Kent glasses and I swear it the spitting image of Keuchly in his glasses.  I know we've all made comments on how he looks like Clark Kent with his glasses, but the imagery in this legitimately looks like they were inspired by Keuchly's manliness.

 

PS:  That Zod guy who runs this place is a crazy douche bag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw it as well right after This Is The End.

My only question is why does every movie these days seem to involve the destruction of Earth? I'm about ready for a decent film that didn't involve annihilating the planet; at some point you wish they'd just do it already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, nice Zod jab.

As for the film, Snyder basically made Whedon's Avengers appear like child's play.

 

I'd take the Avengers over this.  The noise and visual effects were just too much for too long, it completely exhausted me.  Wish it was a little more light-hearted too, it seemed to take itself a bit too seriously and was nowhere on the same page as the Batman movies in terms of plot and thematic elements.  It felt like a transformers movie with a very serious tone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw it as well right after This Is The End.

My only question is why does every movie these days seem to involve the destruction of Earth? I'm about ready for a decent film that didn't involve annihilating the planet; at some point you wish they'd just do it already.

 

I feel that way about the white house.  Ever since Obama has been president it seems like every third action movie blows up the white house, or terrorist attack the white house.  Oh and don't even mention the poor Washington Monument. ......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I'm happy that MOS didn't follow Marvel Studios' cookie-cutter formula. Some comic fans might precieve an adaptation with gravitas as pompous but I don't. Kal-El was more relatable this way than some perfect dork.

The action sequences puts The Avengers to shame in my opinion, especially since Whedon can't seem to escape his TV formatting.

 

Oh no I find most of the Marvel movies pretty... well yeah cookie cutter.  I really liked the Avengers though.  Just felt they handled the juggling of all those characters perfectly and it was a really fun movie that wasn't delusional about what it was.  I did like the way Clark/Superman was portrayed - he was very relatable.  The action was incredible, it was just absolute sensual overload.  The final fight sequences I swear lasted for 40 minutes though and like Revenge of the Sith, after the initial emotion of the fight wears off it just seemed to drag onnnnn and onnnn through the explosions and flying.  IDK its obviously a personal difference in taste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw the Man of Steel, huh? What was Smitty doing earlier tonight?

 

Sure is nice to have a third name for Supes. Now Cam can be Superman, Luke can be Clark Kent, and Smitty can be the Man of Steel.

 

Memo to the rest of the Panthers: don't get a visible Superman tattoo and fug this up, unless you WANT to have the nickname of Kal-El.

 

Or Superboy.

 

Or Supergirl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's getting a little repetitive. I think the sequel should go smaller, but man... the action and scale for this film was insane. Dragonball Z level of crazy.

 

that really excites me. gonna check it out this weekend from that comparison alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's getting a little repetitive. I think the sequel should go smaller, but man... the action and scale for this film was insane. Dragonball Z level of crazy.

 

Can't believe an adult actually used Dragonball Z to describe something.  My kids stopped watching that poo when they were like 10 years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was an ok movie. Basically very little story, character development, dialogue, and a poo ton of violence. That has to be the most violent super hero movie of all time.

Good cast. Looked really good. Was just an empty shell though. Lacked storytelling skills.

Better than superman returns, not nearly as good as Superman and Superman 2 from the 70s and 80s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...