By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kaizar on 15 June 2013
Edit Thread
Hynad said:

Just came back from watching it.

This is definitely and easily the best Superman movie ever made.  Not that it was difficult to do. Reeve's movies were good for their time, but when you watch them today, they haven't aged too well. Way too camp for my taste. Even if Reeve's charm is undeniable and still alive to this day. His Superman represents an older era that just doesn't work as well today.

Now that this is out of the way... I really enjoyed the portrayal by all the actors in Man of Steel. Henry Cavill is very good as Kal-El, and his acting is awesome throughout the whole movie. His acting is made all the more enjoyable when you see Clark in different eras of his [early] adult age. Where he's in different states of mind, in his build-up to becoming the Man of Steel. I'm trying not to spoil the movie so I'll remain this vague. :P

Amy Adams as Lois Lane is a delight. This actress is hypnotic. Something about her eyes, I think...

In any case, the creators did mix things up a bit when it comes to the mythos but still remained very truthful and respectful to the canon. Which I really enjoyed. Everything is explained in a convincing way. Old questions even, that have more often than not been ignored in the comics and other itterations of the story are resolved in this movie. 

Since I just came back from the movie, I could probably go on and on... But I haven't yet fully composed my thoughts about it.  My mind is still overwhelmed by how awesome it was.

I only have 2 small "complaints" about the movie. 

- The movie could have benefited from a bit more character interactions between Lois and Superman/Clark/Kal-El...
- And sometimes, too much action isn't better than too little. xD


But I'm definitely going to go watch it again.

Oh, an other minus, but it's not really a complaint... Don't pay extra to watch the movie in 3D. I did, because they weren't showing the movie at the theater I went, and I thought the 3D wasn't really necessary, and was in fact barely noticeable throughout the entire movie (only exception being the Krypton scenes). 

 

For now, the movie is a solid 4.5 out of 5


LOL, this was recorded in 3D like Iron Man 3 & G.I. Joe Retaliation, specifically 3D IMAX Cameras.

And since these are recorded in 3D IMAX to be specific, well that means the theater format of the images is only suited for IMAX size screen.

Dont worry, they will re-format the stereoscopic images before they release it on 3D Blu-Ray to look full blown 3D in a minimum size of 40 to 50 inch screen. Samething happen with the Hobbit too.

I would suggest 3D IMAX for the theater format of the 3D, for movies recorded with 3D IMAX Cameras.

The Great Gatsby was just recorded in 3D (non-IMAX) so they formatted the 3D effect for the theater version for regular size theater screen for the theater format of the images to bring the lambarts closer to 19 lambarts which is what they actually get with the IMAX size screen format.

Star Trek Into Darkness was converted from 2D, so a minimum of 100 inch screen will guarantee you a good looking 3D effect, but smaller then that is when you start to get screwed over.

They really need to make multiple theater formats, (1) for 200+ inch screen (like Flagship theater) (2) for 500+ inch screen (3) if it's IMAX, then IMAX size screen format as well for true 19 lambarts.