Re: Routh's & Huntington's Thoughts About Man Of Steel?

Father Finian Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:49 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:The larger point I was shooting for there is that Reeve did a hell of a lot with the opportunity he'd been given and is at least half the reason the film is as good as it is. Meanwhile BJ The Bartender bumbled around and fucked it all up.

You're full of contradictions. You accept there's more going on like the cinematography yet disregard them. The effects ARE still benchmarks.....I give up.

Again, everyone working on a film are realizing the director's vision. Reeve and Williams included, although their pedigree, and others working on this film is beyond question.

Father Finian Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:54 pm

[quote="thecolorsblend"]

Father Finian wrote:
And just because you don't like the lighthearted tone of the the third act doesn't make you correct either.
It does clash with the first two acts; that much isn't up for debate.

Because you say so don't make it so. I'm reminded of the discussion of what Metropolis should look like versus Burton's backlot Gotham and you went off crying like a little kid who wasn't getting his own way. We know you better than you think, you tell us enough here to draw conclusions.

A change of tone between acts is not something new in film. It doesn't "clash" it merely shifts tone.

Father Finian Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:59 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:If Christopher Reeve COULDN'T be Superman again, that version of the character needed to be put to rest. Period. How muthafuckin' disrespectful is it to throw a talentless piece of shit in a bastardized version of the Superman costume on-screen and say "Look, it's the SAME GUY. But it's not. But he's playing him!!"? Scrape everything away from his 4 Superman movies, and you STILL have Reeve's embodiment of the character. The way he looked like he stepped off the comic page and into real life. That is enough for me, no matter the quality of the films.

But it's time for something new. No matter how much I enjoy and revere those films, I have moved on. The world has moved on.

You don't look backwards in order to move forward.

You'll find I've been saying that since before Singerman premiered. Don't try and stand on the shoulders of the much missed Reeve's Superman by dragging him into promotions for new film, just out of respect for the man.

Father Finian Fri Apr 29, 2011 7:18 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:.....it doesn't epitomize Superman as a comic book character or, for that matter, fare well as the high falutin', high art cinema it's rabid followers regard it as.

It does epitomize Superman as a genuine bona fide MOVIE hero though......that's what we're talking about here, Superman the movie character. If you want to make a successful movie, I'd aim for making Superman a movie star again, otherwise go write a comic. Your knowledge of Superman in the comics is second to none, but movies are not comics.

Nobody is suggesting it's "high art" cinema, that's ridiculous and on par for you lately. It is a "classic" film, then and now that somehow defies YOUR opinion and still speaks to the generations who discover it all these years later. It's standing over time has perhaps increased because AS A MOVIE it HAS stood the test of time all these years later. That's more than just nostalgia.

Father Finian Fri Apr 29, 2011 7:38 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:I think it has a fuckton of weaknesses and shortcomings that nobody ever talks about because....

....as you point out, they're only in your mind, only your opinion of what's "wrong" with the comic book...err I mean film.

I'm going to have to write a paper on the "fuckton" of weaknesses and shortcomings that can be found in "The Wizard Of Oz" (eg: the change of pace in the third act when they get to the Emerald City is a real clash with the earlier part of the film. As for the highly regarded effects....). As for that Hitchcock guy and the clashing tone of the acts in his films....thrill, laugh, thrill, laugh, swoon, thrill, laugh. Luckily he had Grant or Stewart and Hermann to get his movies over the line.

Apologist Puncher Fri Apr 29, 2011 9:47 pm

This film-critic repeats EVERYTHING we have said about BJ over the years.:

http://www.mercurynews.com/entertainment/ci_17958971?nclick_check=1

It's been five years, so maybe doubt has crept into your memory of why the last attempt to revive the Superman franchise, "Superman Returns," failed. That's why "Dylan Dog: Dead of the Night" is useful.

Its star, Brandon Routh, is just as miscast as a droll, world-weary "investigator of the undead" as he was as a boy-Man of Steel in 2006. He is one of only a few actors you'll recognize in this cut-rate film based on a popular Italian comic book series and smuggled into theaters by a malnourished studio.

As the title character, Routh has to carry the movie with bravado and charm, appearing in most every scene, narrating in the style of a hundred film noir private eyes. And he just doesn't have it.

And at the center is the blandest one of all -- the hapless Routh -- struggling to add mileage to his demeanor, foundering as he delivers lines that have the occasional hint of wit.

"Like I always say, the secret to good detective work? Get lucky."

Routh isn't, and "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" director Kevin Munroe isn't the one to give it to him. It's more years back in supporting roles for the one-off Superman. He acquitted himself far better in "Scott Pilgrim vs. The World" and even "Zack and Miri Make a Porno," where he didn't have to do the heavy lifting. In smaller parts, his career doesn't wear the label "No pulse, no problem."

Routh's & Huntington's Thoughts About Man Of Steel? - Page 2 Funny-pictures-aquatic-mammal-does-exercise-and-feels-the-burn

I can't wait to post some Apologist "reviews" of this floppy turd-fest.......!

webhead2006 Fri Apr 29, 2011 9:56 pm

nice critic review on him.

Father Finian Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:26 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:This film-critic repeats EVERYTHING we have said about BJ over the years.:

It's nice that we have published film authorities agreeing with us again. Well, some of us.......as long as they still don't go calling STM a classic movie or anything crazy like that....

webhead2006 Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:40 pm

heck as any one checked out its box office numbers so far, i dont have any numbers for dosmestic/usa figures. But seen some international numbers where its barely over a mill dollars. plus come on its going to definately be crushed this weekened with rio still playing well, that new tyler perry film, and of course fast five.

Apologist Puncher Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:59 pm

It's got a WHOPPING 10% on RottenTomatoes.com. You know, the site Apologists like to trot out for Singerman reviews?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/dead-of-night-2009/

webhead2006 Fri Apr 29, 2011 11:02 pm

personally i never cared for that site.

Apologist Puncher Fri Apr 29, 2011 11:05 pm

webhead2006 wrote:personally i never cared for that site.

Routh's & Huntington's Thoughts About Man Of Steel? - Page 2 Glikemc5

Apologist Puncher Fri Apr 29, 2011 11:39 pm

Here's an obvious intellectual, and someone who's word I should TRUST!

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=346965

Today, 09:40 PM #19
rogue trooper
Side-Kick
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,417

Re: Man of Steel: The Official Brandon Routh Thread
I just came back from watching "Dylan Dog"! Brandon Routh was terrific!!

Had Bryan Singer known his $h**, Routh would have given much more to Superman. Boy, did Singer underused him!

Man, I think this turd just convinced me to go see it!!

Routh's & Huntington's Thoughts About Man Of Steel? - Page 2 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ7bXBj04i18T_WfaT4lNbXwkuokb4Zx726mllpp1mhTB2btgW1

Routh's & Huntington's Thoughts About Man Of Steel? - Page 2 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ7bXBj04i18T_WfaT4lNbXwkuokb4Zx726mllpp1mhTB2btgW1

thecolorsblend Sat Apr 30, 2011 3:20 am

Apologist Puncher wrote:This film-critic repeats EVERYTHING we have said about BJ over the years.:

http://www.mercurynews.com/entertainment/ci_17958971?nclick_check=1

It's been five years, so maybe doubt has crept into your memory of why the last attempt to revive the Superman franchise, "Superman Returns," failed. That's why "Dylan Dog: Dead of the Night" is useful.

Its star, Brandon Routh, is just as miscast as a droll, world-weary "investigator of the undead" as he was as a boy-Man of Steel in 2006. He is one of only a few actors you'll recognize in this cut-rate film based on a popular Italian comic book series and smuggled into theaters by a malnourished studio.

As the title character, Routh has to carry the movie with bravado and charm, appearing in most every scene, narrating in the style of a hundred film noir private eyes. And he just doesn't have it.

And at the center is the blandest one of all -- the hapless Routh -- struggling to add mileage to his demeanor, foundering as he delivers lines that have the occasional hint of wit.

"Like I always say, the secret to good detective work? Get lucky."

Routh isn't, and "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" director Kevin Munroe isn't the one to give it to him. It's more years back in supporting roles for the one-off Superman. He acquitted himself far better in "Scott Pilgrim vs. The World" and even "Zack and Miri Make a Porno," where he didn't have to do the heavy lifting. In smaller parts, his career doesn't wear the label "No pulse, no problem."

I can't wait to post some Apologist "reviews" of this floppy turd-fest.......!

There was a time when BJ was untouchable by reviewers. Guess those days are over and people are finally calling it like it is.

Apologist Puncher Sat Apr 30, 2011 5:28 pm

My friends, it was even BETTER than expected!!

http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3151&p=.htm

Dylan Dog: Dead of Night was even worse, grossing a mere $270,000 estimate at 875 locations.

BJ Routh, the people have spoken. Again.
Routh's & Huntington's Thoughts About Man Of Steel? - Page 2 You_suck1

Father Finian Sat Apr 30, 2011 5:33 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:Guess those days are over and people are finally calling it like it is.

Hang on, on the previous page you don't give "two fucks" what those people say?

At least apologists maintain their crazy opinion without fail. You're on record here for being all over the shop.

Father Finian Sat Apr 30, 2011 5:36 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:My friends, it was even BETTER than expected!!

http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3151&p=.htm

Dylan Dog: Dead of Night was even worse, grossing a mere $270,000 estimate at 875 locations.

Wonderful news.

kivara Sat Apr 30, 2011 7:45 pm

Even being disappointed with SR, I was willing to give BR another chance as Supes. My thinking was that the script and direction he received was sub-par and being force to emulate Reeve's performance didn't help. But having watched him in a few episodes of Chuck and couple of other things. I have to say that the guy is bland as fuck!

Apologist Puncher Sat Apr 30, 2011 7:46 pm

Father Finian wrote:Wonderful news.

I enjoy passing the time by rubbing salt in the Apologists wound.

And BJ makes it soooooo easy.

Apologist Puncher Sat Apr 30, 2011 7:48 pm

kivara wrote:Even being disappointed with SR, I was willing to give BR another chance as Supes. My thinking was that the script and direction he received was sub-par and being force to emulate Reeve's performance didn't help. But having watched him in a few episodes of Chuck and couple of other things. I have to say that the guy is bland as fuck!

Routh's & Huntington's Thoughts About Man Of Steel? - Page 2 Original

kivara Sat Apr 30, 2011 8:11 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:
kivara wrote:Even being disappointed with SR, I was willing to give BR another chance as Supes. My thinking was that the script and direction he received was sub-par and being force to emulate Reeve's performance didn't help. But having watched him in a few episodes of Chuck and couple of other things. I have to say that the guy is bland as fuck!

non_amos Sat Apr 30, 2011 8:47 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:My friends, it was even BETTER than expected!!

http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3151&p=.htm

Dylan Dog: Dead of Night was even worse, grossing a mere $270,000 estimate at 875 locations.

BJ Routh, the people have spoken. Again.

But why only 875 locations? Don't major films get like a 3000-screen showing nationwide, with some getting more & some less but still that kinda ballpark? I thought films with that kinda release were like 'limited releases'? Not trying to support BJ here but wouldn't that box office be even more impressive if it really did have a wide release?

Apologist Puncher Sat Apr 30, 2011 8:56 pm

non_amos wrote:But why only 875 locations? Don't major films get like a 3000-screen showing nationwide, with some getting more & some less but still that kinda ballpark? I thought films with that kinda release were like 'limited releases'? Not trying to support BJ here but wouldn't that box office be even more impressive if it really did have a wide release?

It's called "cutting your losses", non_amos.

But here, just a little "Fun With Mathematics":

'Dylan Does Dogs' made $270,000 on 872 screens. Let's times that by four, and see what we get: $1,080,000 on 3,488 screens. On a comparable number of screens, 3,644, 'Fast Five' made $33,233,000. $33,233,000.

That means BJ Routh's LAST starring role would have grossed .3% of 'Fast Five''s box office gross for Friday, April 29th. And THAT is by QUADRUPLING it's actual gross.

See it for the MEGA FLOP it IS yet?

Father Finian Sat Apr 30, 2011 9:11 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:'Dylan Does Dogs' made $270,000 on 872 screens.

Jeez, that is hilarious!

We could make more cash by having a garage sale.

It gives one a sense of satisfaction having called Ruth out from day one, doesn't it? What were they expecting? Remember, Ruth is the movie star who hit the autograph shilling circuit years ago. I'm staggered they bothered opening on that many screens as it is. I bet there's a few suits regretting that decision now too.

A Brandon Ruth Film: Dog By Name, Dog By Nature

Apologist Puncher Sat Apr 30, 2011 9:24 pm

Father Finian wrote:Jeez, that is hilarious!

We could make more cash by having a garage sale.

Want to know how BAD that REALLY is?

It made $309.63 per screening.

Wow.

It gives one a sense of satisfaction having called Ruth out from day one, doesn't it? What were they expecting? Remember, Ruth is the movie star who hit the autograph shilling circuit years ago. I'm staggered they bothered opening on that many screens as it is. I bet there's a few suits regretting that decision now too.

Oh yes. Those idiots were hoping it made enough on-screen to make the combined DVD sales "respectable".

Fail.

A Brandon Ruth Film: Dog By Name, Dog By Nature

And always guaranteed to be:
Routh's & Huntington's Thoughts About Man Of Steel? - Page 2 Pic-DogShitOnClinton

Sponsored content