'Man Of Steel' Reviews *SPOILERS*

Anything that kicks Singerman while it's down is fine by me, esp if it's to build MOS up.

You know, after watching it for the third time on Sunday, something kept bothering me:

Why would Zod want to take away all the Kryptonians powers on Earth? Huh?

But something came to me today, and even if the people behind the film didn't plan it, there is a way to explain what they were doing.

Krypton's atmosphere is what took away Superman's abilities. But guess what? Zod & Co. still had most of THEIRS, even while breathing Krypton air. Why? Because their bodies were bred in that environment, and the sun gave them powers. Eventually, if he survived long enough, Superman's body would have adapted and he would have started storing solar radiation again.

So Kryptonians would have still been super, even on a terra-formed Earth.

That leads in to one of my quibbles with the movie. The nature of superpowers aren't really nailed down. It's not strictly a solar thing but the lesser gravity of this planet only accounts for some stuff. I dunno...

I wondered about AP's point too. I mean, Zod, what do you want, powers or not? At least that's how I looked at it, until AP pointed that out.

I really enjoyed it.

It's a flawed film, there are aspects of the story which should have been better, pacing could have been better, but fuck it, it was really entertaining and I could watch it again and again.

The cast were fantastic. Cavill didn't let me down, he will have much more to work with an  a sequel, but as Superman he was confident, commanding, and he looked like Superman, ridiculously big (anyone think he looked particularly big by his Dad's grave at the end?), chiseled as fuck.  Seen a few comments saying he was wooden, wtf? Shannon, Adams, Traue all fantastic, though for me Russell Crowe was a stand out!

They should have separated the two big battles with more but I can get past that. I think some people forgot about the fantastically emotive scenes in the first 2 thirds due to the intense action in the last third.

As for critics reviews, some probably genuinely had reason for disliking it, others will be pretentious twats, I also think a fair few sharpened the knives before hand because it was a Zack Snyder film and wouldn't give him an ounce of credit if they were held at gunpoint. Hats of to Snyder, I teared up at least 3 times in the film, when they're preparing Kal-El for his journey, when his mum has to calm him and encourage him out of the cupboard in school, and when Pa Kent dies. These were very well done and extremely emotive, but hey, Snyders all style no subtance, so lets not bother giving him any credit for that.  Stick it up your arse critics.

Good  rebuttal for the MOS critics...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-sorensen/4-complaints-of-man-of-st_b_3466388.html



I recently watched the Donner cut of Superman 2. The original was so cheesy that even watching it when I was little made me think Superman was kind of not right for the screen. The Donner cut made it a little better, but then he flew around the world and turn back time negating the events of the movie which ultimately left the entire thing pointless, again.
In that time, Superhero movies were in their infancy, so I give them leeway because of it. But now, we are neck deep in superhero movies and their sequels, sequels to those sequels, television shows, and superhero film spin offs to television shows. Man of Steel had a lot riding on it because Superman has been kind of a letdown in popular media. They tried to reboot him with Superman Returns, but it was boring, and he just fought a mountain and stalked Lois Lane, or had to explain himself to Lois like a boyfriend who had to justify hanging out with his friends without her. Lots of complaints about Man of Steel have come up, and they're from people who should stop breathing with their mouths open.
Too Much Destruction

What a lot of critics are saying is that there is too much damage done to cities and to people in the film. If you base this on Superman 2, where the biggest thing destroyed was a bus that flew a foot off the ground into Superman, then I guess you're right. But when you read the comics, watch the cartoons, this amount of destruction is a comic norm. You think that when superheroes and supervillains fight in a city they aren't going to destroy a lot of real estate? The Avengers sort of destroyed a lot, but most of the time was just aliens riding around on their Jet-ski's with no real objective other than to be attacked by the superheroes (Not you Hawkeye or Black Widow). This movie finally showed what superheroes fighting were supposed to look like. When Superman punched he broke the sound barrier. My childhood inside was overwhelmed with how bad I've waited to see a Superman fight done right.
Not Enough Character Development

Complaints are coming in that Superman's character wasn't that developed. People who say this must have spent the first half of the film in the bathroom because they slammed their 64oz gut busting cherry squishy during the previews. The flashbacks and exposition of Clark Kent's life reinvented the backstory of him learning his powers, being taught to hone them by Jonathan Kent, and also when not to use them (Even his Jonathan saying he possibly should have let that bus of kids drown). We watch Clark act like a teenager who is defiant, go through emotional pain, and learn life lessons that lead him to the present time in the movie. It's a brilliant set up where we learn about him and the both sides of him and his family.
It Was Too Serious

Who cares? Superman can be serious. Sure, even the dark, gritty Batman series by Nolan had jabs of humor in it, but does that make them even better because of it? There were a few chuckle moments in this movie, but the seriousness overshadowed it. Again, bringing up Superman 2, that movie was full of chuckle moments. By chuckle, I mean "This movie is awful." Remember when Superman ripped off the cellophane "S" off of his chest and threw it at Zod's enforcer? That should have ruined the franchise. And then there was Superman 3 with Richard Pryor. What? Who thought that was a good idea?
(Boardroom)
Yes man -- "We need a Superman 3. Ideas?"
Exec -- "Wife and I just saw that funny black man, Richard Pryor. Put him in that."
Yes man -- "Ye...yeah, okay."
(Yes man looks over at group of writers wondering if the high-rise window is shatterproof.)
Superman Was Too Emotional

Imagine going through grade school knowing that you could beat everyone up, but you're bullied because you allow it because a punch could decapitate them. Imagine being the outsider for all of your life because you don't know your place or your purpose. Imagine on top of puberty, you can see through everything and you can't control it yet. Imagine you lose the person closest to you when you needed them the most. Oh, and you're also an alien. Would you not be an emotional mess of a person, let alone a God on a planet? This makes Superman become a stronger person emotionally, mentally, and even more physically as the movie progresses. He learns that there is no limit to his strengths and keeps overcoming his boundaries.
I suggest you go into this movie expecting what you've always wanted: A superhero movie done right with a hint of realism that brings you back to when your imagination wanted and hoped for more. That's what I got out of Man of Steel.

I've never understood what was so damn bad about the cellophane S in Superman II. That's everybody's go-to talking point about the movie and it makes no sense to me at all.

So the conclusion of Man of Steel bothered people, huh?

And Richard Roper complained about Henry Cavill balling up his fists? And he liked this?!

Jett wrote:It’s an action film that never becomes a “spectacle.”

URL- http://www.batman-on-film.com/on-film_review_MAN-OF-STEEL_byJett_6-10-13.html

This comes from the same guy who's favorite comic book movies are afraid to call themselves comic book movies. I refer to Nolan's trilogy, of course.

And not to split hairs but, um, yes, MOS is a spectacle. It delivers all the action, fights, explosions and other shit that we have all wanted from a Superman movie for decades but haven't gotten. It is a spectacle but that doesn't make the film bad. At least not in my world. But then we all know which world "Jett" lives in.

Don't know about the rest of you but my plan is to just accept that this idiot is right for the wrong reasons and then dismiss his jackoff review accordingly. He liked it but Massa Nolan's name is on the poster so his positive review was never in doubt. What a hoser...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-sorensen/4-complaints-of-man-of-st_b_3466388.html

I'm aware that superman1938 has already posted this & he beat me to it but there are a few points I think should be highlighted.

First of all, the title says it all about duh critics:

4 Complaints of Man Of Steel (and Why They're Bullsh*t)

How about this opinion about Superman II:

I recently watched the Donner cut of Superman 2. The original was so cheesy that even watching it when I was little made me think Superman was kind of not right for the screen. The Donner cut made it a little better, but then he flew around the world and turn back time negating the events of the movie which ultimately left the entire thing pointless, again.

I loved Superman II back in the day. It was one of those rare films that I watched over & over like with Batman (1989). Back then I was really impressed with the effects especially in comparison of the old George Reeves TV series. I thought they were ground-breaking. Now? Not so much. The writer has a point. Even though these films will always have a place in heart & all of that, MAN OF STEEL blew them away! I recently watched STM again & sure, I loved it & all but then I went & saw MOS & it didn't even compare! And it's not really even an issue of whether or not Cavill is better than Reeve but rather the film itself. We finally got what a Superman film should've been all along!

The writer goes on:

In that time, Superhero movies were in their infancy, so I give them leeway because of it. But now, we are neck deep in superhero movies and their sequels, sequels to those sequels, television shows, and superhero film spin offs to television shows. Man of Steel had a lot riding on it because Superman has been kind of a letdown in popular media. They tried to reboot him with Superman Returns, but it was boring, and he just fought a mountain and stalked Lois Lane, or had to explain himself to Lois like a boyfriend who had to justify hanging out with his friends without her. Lots of complaints about Man of Steel have come up, and they're from people who should stop breathing with their mouths open.

I guess this is where we have come as fans. The older films could get a pass because they were in their infancy just like Marvel was with their TV programs like The Incredible Hulk. The products were good for the time but now in hindsight they do have their fair amount of 'cheese' in them. This present generation of comics films just expects more.

How about this point:

This movie finally showed what superheroes fighting were supposed to look like. When Superman punched he broke the sound barrier. My childhood inside was overwhelmed with how bad I've waited to see a Superman fight done right.

 'NUFF SAID!

How about those complaints about 'no character development':

Complaints are coming in that Superman's character wasn't that developed. People who say this must have spent the first half of the film in the bathroom because they slammed their 64oz gut busting cherry squishy during the previews. The flashbacks and exposition of Clark Kent's life reinvented the backstory of him learning his powers, being taught to hone them by Jonathan Kent, and also when not to use them (Even his Jonathan saying he possibly should have let that bus of kids drown). We watch Clark act like a teenager who is defiant, go through emotional pain, and learn life lessons that lead him to the present time in the movie. It's a brilliant set up where we learn about him and the both sides of him and his family.

I could go on & on but the dude does close with a good point:

I suggest you go into this movie expecting what you've always wanted: A superhero movie done right with a hint of realism that brings you back to when your imagination wanted and hoped for more. That's what I got out of Man of Steel.

 
And MOS gives me at least some hope for duh brothers Warner. And as far as I'm concerned duh critics' opinions are falling on deaf ears this time around.

I just had to return to see if my impressions of this group were correct and as I see they were. I fully expected this bunch of self-styled Superman fans to be giddy over this piece of heaping excrement. Well, if this sort of entertainment was all you were looking for you could have gone to the DC Universe online game and masturbated your little A.D.H.D. selves into oblivion. So glad I figured out why I did not fit into this nest of imbeciles and bailed 18 months ago…

Have nice life boys and do not become distracted by bright and shining things for too long…

non_amos wrote:And it's not really even an issue of whether or not Cavill is better than Reeve but rather the film itself. We finally got what a Superman film should've been all along!

Bingo.

Rduce wrote:I just had to return to see if my impressions of this group were correct and as I see they were. I fully expected this bunch of self-styled Superman fans to be giddy over this piece of heaping excrement. Well, if this sort of entertainment was all you were looking for you could have gone to the DC Universe online game and masturbated your little A.D.H.D. selves into oblivion. So glad I figured out why I did not fit into this nest of imbeciles and bailed 18 months ago…

Have nice life boys and do not become distracted by bright and shining things for too long…

Is the baby still sad that Singerman was forgotten the weekend after it came out? Poor thing. Don't cry, you'll always have your Singerman Blu-Ray and the memories.

Rduce wrote:I just had to return to see if my impressions of this group were correct and as I see they were. I fully expected this bunch of self-styled Superman fans to be giddy over this piece of heaping excrement. Well, if this sort of entertainment was all you were looking for you could have gone to the DC Universe online game and masturbated your little A.D.H.D. selves into oblivion. So glad I figured out why I did not fit into this nest of imbeciles and bailed 18 months ago…

Have nice life boys and do not become distracted by bright and shining things for too long…

I think this is an example of the sorta person that should be banned from here. Like Colors pointed out it'd take an awful lot to get banned from here unlike this dude's residence of choice, duh Homopage.

Who is this 'Rduce' exactly anyway? I know our numbers here may not be as great as that of apologist havens like duh Homopage but quality over quantity any day, right? And as I'm sure you know there are probably very few literate people there in the first place. But can anyone tell me, did 'Rduce' ever contribute anything worthwhile to these forums?

I don't need to ban him because his arguments defeat themselves. I've checked out some of his older posts and he was anti-reboot from way back. And I bet now the son of a bitch is just too proud to admit he was wrong. Besides, every forum needs a punching bag; maybe Rduce can be ours.

thecolorsblend wrote:I don't need to ban him because his arguments defeat themselves. I've checked out some of his older posts and he was anti-reboot from way back. And I bet now the son of a bitch is just too proud to admit he was wrong. Besides, every forum needs a punching bag; maybe Rduce can be ours.

Once again, you prove my point with your vitriol toward any person who does not agree with your personal points of view. You will distort the facts so they align nicely with reality they way you wish them to be. I believe if you were to actually read my past offerings you would see that I never once offered up any evidence that I am a member of any other board that discusses the topics of Superman, Batman or any other DC Universe character. The simple fact is I do not.

I was never an advocate for a sequel to Returns; in fact, my abhorrence for that film is perhaps as intense, if not more, than your own. I simply fail to see the need for another origins film. Everyone knows Superman’s back-story, at least used to, and to waste a third of the film explaining why Kal-El is here was not necessary. The flashbacks in this film were a nice touch and worked for me in that regard. Although, young Clark running about with a flowing red cape pretending to be, who, George Reeves, no wait that was me as a child, was a waste. I guess he was pretending to be a Roman Centurion.  

I just feel this is not a true Superman movie, just as Returns was not a true Superman movie. Sadly, I feel, Snyder missed the chance for it to be great and once again given us mediocrity. He and the writer stumble badly in so many parts trying to distance themselves from Returns. Too much energy was exhausted trying to make Kal Christ like, and just how many times do you need to see him power his way threw another building before you get that fact, Oh WOW, he’s got superpowers! 

I personally feel that the pressure to deliver a great Superman movie got to Snyder and as a result, he tried to darken the character of Superman, which I have been against since the rumors began two years ago and killing Zod was too much for me. Perhaps, I have grown too old to enjoy a modern age Superman. Once again I will state what makes Superman’s character so distinct is not that fact he has superpowers, but how he chooses to use those powers. 

He could easily kill every one of his enemies, yet he holds himself to a higher standard and values life above all else. If that means my Man of Tomorrow is so Yesterday, so be it. Time will tell if the next installment can build upon those qualities that have come to be expected of Superman. I gave Returns an F as a Superman film and this one I give a C-. For me this film is on a par with Green Lantern, disappointing. With that, I will leave you to rant and rile against the dissenter and promise never to darken your door again. Because you see, your like this film, are not the Superman fans I am looking for...

I'll let Colors take out the trash on that one but here's the latest rumor for MOS2 that I just got word of on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/Superman.in.2013

RUMOR PATROL: It's a rumor, but it's fun. We're filing it under rumor as of right now, but pictured is Mark Strong, rumored to be Zack Snyder's #1 choice for a certain bald baddie in the Man of Steel 2. If Lex Luthor is in a sequel, you KNOW there would be other villains.

Whether it is an accurate rumor or not, it certainly could be pleasing if Lex is "done right."

What challenges would you like to see Superman face in the sequel?

READ MORE HERE: http://bit.ly/12jfvR6

And here's what that link actually is:

http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/exclusive-zack-snyder-wants-mark-strong-lex-luthor-man-steel-2


Exclusive: Zack Snyder Wants Mark Strong As Lex Luthor For Man of Steel 2

Posted by: Matt McGloin, Editor/Publisher
June 23, 2013 11:48 | Updated: 21 sec Ago

With Man of Steel tipping the scales domestically at over $200 million it seems a sequel is more than likely, with lots of talk surrounding that.
Both director Zack Snyder and Henry Cavill have stated they want more Superman before the Justice League movie, as well as mention of Big Blue taking the lead in the JL film as well.
There has also been a rather large development at Warner Bros. in regards to WB Movie president Jeff Robinov apparently leaving; just how that affects the DC movies remains to be seen.
Chatting with our DC Entertainment source, we were told the following.
Robinov was a big DC supporter; depends what the new guy at the top thinks, but the source is pretty sure all of WB will get behind the DCCU after Man of Steel.
We were told a tidbit regarding General Swanwick in the Man of Steel as the character was originally General Lane, and that is how Lois got access to Superman when he surrendered. They changed it around and replaced General Lane with General Swanwick played by Harry Lennix.
The source says it's been said that filming for the Man of Steel sequel will be begin next year, and Mark Strong is wanted for Lex Luthor by Zack Snyder. Expect pre-production to start coming together by October-December.
David Goyer is hard at work on a first draft of the screenplay for Man of Steel 2. The source says Chris Nolan is sort of overseeing the script/story, but may not have as much input as before as he is focusing on his new film project, Interstellar.
The source noted he would personally like Jonathan Nolan to help Goyer with the screenplay.
Also, David Goyer has a short treatment for Justice League, but there is no story or script so far.
Our DC Entertainment source previously provided us information on the Man of Steel including the bus crash scene that was featured in the movie and more.

Don't know anything about this guy yet but here's some pics.

Mark Strong was Sinestro in Green Lamtern....he was of the few highlights of the film....I have to see more of his work to give an overall opinion ...

superman1938 wrote:Mark Strong was Sinestro in Green Lamtern....he was of the few highlights of the film....I have to see more of his work to give an overall opinion ...

I didn't even make that connection. Even though I like GL 'OK' it did stand room for improvement & the thing is, the guys who played the villains seemed to be considered 'perfect casting' while the rest of the cast was considered 'miscast'.

Okay kiddos, The Teacher is here to break it down for all of you.

Rduce wrote:I was never an advocate for a sequel to Returns; in fact, my abhorrence for that film is perhaps as intense, if not more, than your own.

You read this and may instantly think "Oh, this guy isn't an Apologist after all. He says he didn't want a sequel to 'Returns'."

And yet, most Realists call it "Singerman". Not the movie's proper title, not an abbreviation, usually nothing else. It's not universal but it's a tip off.

Rduce wrote:I simply fail to see the need for another origins film. Everyone knows Superman’s back-story, at least used to,

And here it is. This is one of the most common Apologist talking points to be found anywhere. "Everyone knows where Superman came from! We don't need an origin story!" Singerman itself though proves that we do. Wide audiences had not been treated to a significant retelling of the origin since 1978. Lois & Clark wasn't a highly rated show, STAS was targeted at children and Smallville didn't have a condensed "A" to "Z" origin story like a feature would offer.

By any standard, a new origin story was long overdue. It's mostly Apologists (desperate for a Singerman 2) who don't agree.

Rduce wrote:Although, young Clark running about with a flowing red cape pretending to be, who, George Reeves, no wait that was me as a child, was a waste. I guess he was pretending to be a Roman Centurion.

Who says superheroes aren't meta-fiction? This isn't Nolan's universe where there are no fictional superheroes.

Rduce wrote:I just feel this is not a true Superman movie, just as Returns was not a true Superman movie. Sadly, I feel, Snyder missed the chance for it to be great and once again given us mediocrity. He and the writer stumble badly in so many parts trying to distance themselves from Returns. Too much energy was exhausted trying to make Kal Christ like, and just how many times do you need to see him power his way threw another building before you get that fact, Oh WOW, he’s got superpowers!

One of the most common gripes about your beloved Singerman was the abject lack of action. Zack Snyder had to play the hand he was dealt. That means putting in tons of action to prove to both core fans and to wide audiences that this version of Superman is going to deliver all the shock and awe which modern technology can provide. If your buddy Singer had taken care to put more action in Singerman, it might not have been necessary. But no use dwelling on what might have been, eh Apologist?

Rduce wrote:killing Zod was too much for me.

Superman crushed Zod's and then killed him in Superman II (take your fucking deleted scenes someplace else; if it ain't in the final movie, it didn't fucking happen). He also killed Zod in the pages of Superman #22. At this point, there is precedent for him to do that. There is also a rational justification in that Zod more or less forced him to do it. More and more, this is becoming my new litmus test for fandom. If you think Superman shouldn't have killed Zod, you for damn sure had better have a consistent attitude on the subject (and nobody ever seems to).

Rduce wrote:Perhaps, I have grown too old to enjoy a modern age Superman. Once again I will state what makes Superman’s character so distinct is not that fact he has superpowers, but how he chooses to use those powers.

You're right, MOS was no Singerman.

Rduce wrote:With that, I will leave you to rant and rile against the dissenter and promise never to darken your door again. Because you see, your like this film, are not the Superman fans I am looking for...

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

Just came back from finally seeing this flick. It was a matinee screening and on a Monday, so most of the audience in my screening were just regular folks ranging from teenage friends, to adults, to families and even elderly couples instead of just being mainly packed with genre fans, which opening weekends are known to attract the most. Even so, after the film had finished, most of the audiences gave an applause. I've seen that happen on opening weekends, but not matinee screenings on a Monday. Just only goes to show you how much of a crowd pleaser this flick really is.

As for my own thoughts on the film? I'd say the applause is well deserved. I enjoyed this a lot for what it is: An action packed Superman film that wipes the slate clean, allowing the series to go where the filmmakers see fit. This was a necessary reboot and it's the kind of film we should have gotten in 2006 as opposed to the misguided love letter to Donner. Many critics did not enjoy this because it didn't resemble the Reeve films of yesteryear. I'm sorry you can't try to enjoy the film on its own terms. I wouldn't call the film "joyless", but I suppose when your ideal Superman film has the hero wink and smile at the camera in the end, I can see your point. I still enjoy that film very much and I'd probably rank it above MOS mainly because while it's flawed it still has certain qualities that appeals to me greatly. It's really just a preference though, as MOS in many ways is superior as far as coherent stories go. That wasn't a strong-suit for the Reeve films, but they worked on a different level.

As a first installment of this rebooted series, I think it does a good job setting up this new interpretation and makes me really look forward to what the filmmakers will do next, as opposed to where SR left the series on an uncertain note. Cavill makes a fine Superman, hopefully more will be done with his character now that everything is established. He gets the core of the character right, doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do. That's what Superman is all about. Zod made a good villain and I liked how the film acknowledged his more alien sensibilities, he does what he does because he's programed and that in a way makes him somewhat sympathetic. What he does is wrong and evil, but he's overpowered by his purpose, he doesn't have the option of a choice like Superman. I think the solution at the end with Superman taking down Zod once and for all was handled very well. Cavil does a great job telling you what's going on in his mind without a word of dialogue, and the ending where he has to make a choice at the end really makes a great example.

If there's anything I don't like in this flick, it's that Costner wasn't in it as much as I liked. I've always preferred that Pa Kent lives well into Clark's adulthood, and it was a big problem for me when SMALLVILLE took that route especially the way that show handled it. However, I'll admit that the way his death was handled in MOS I think worked for this film and when that moment came I found it very effective and heartbreaking.

My super-rankings:

SUPERMAN
MAN OF STEEL
SUPERMAN II (Donner Cut)
SUPERMAN II
SUPERMAN III
SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE
SUPERMAN RETURNS

I'd even go as far to say that I like this film a lot better than the Nolan Batman films. Superman in a way has always been more appealing to me as a superhero to look up to, while Batman always made a great contrast and more interesting character. It's apples and oranges, and I happen to have a preference for one. If you wanna know, it's apple. You know what you can make with apples? Pie, and that's about as American as Superman can get.


And I must note, I loved that line "I'm from Kansas. It's about as American as it gets" and unsurprisingly that got a good reaction from audiences.

You only just now saw it? Cool.

Disagree with your rankings. I want to put STM on top now and forever for sentimentality's sake but when I really think about it, MOS gave me a lot more of what I want from Superman films. For that reason, it's #1.

Yeah, I had to wait it out because of timing and money.

Really though it's tough to rank the top two because they're so different. STM only gets the slight edge because that's what I grew up with and have a lot of love for it, but I'm very satisfied with MOS and am happy to see Superman return to relevancy in theaters. If I have to revise the list, I might as well just place them together in the same spot. I look forward to giving it a second watch and seeing how it holds up.

On a side note, how would you rank all of Snyder's films? I think I may still rank WATCHMEN as his best. Hadn't seen 300 since it was in theaters, I may need to revisit that.

Hey man, you're speaking my language. I'm in love with Watchmen and have been ever since it came out. I've never once watched the movie and not pined for an 8 (or 12) hour cut of the movie. If the biggest nitpick you have with a movie is that you wish it was longer, you know the director kicked ass.

I'd probably have to rank MOS ahead of Watchmen simply because it's Superman. Unfortunately I haven't gotten a chance for a 2nd viewing yet. I hope that changes soon but I have my doubts. I will say this though. I know I've yet to give an 'official' review but MOS is one of those films like BATMAN (1989). I saw that in the theater 8 times & countless more times on video of one format or another. I'd certainly be doing MOS the same way if finances would cooperate. There were 3 films that I absolutely wanted to see this summer if I didn't get to see anything else: MOS, IM3 & Star Trek Into Darkness. I've seen the first two but I've yet to see the new Trek. It's not really an award winning summer in the funds department.

One thing I wish would happen now with Watchmen though is that due to interest in MOS that maybe, just maybe, there would be a renewed interest in Snyder's previous work & therefore fans might just discover the film for the first time. Maybe it'll finally be appreciated.