Friday, March 30, 2012

"Man of Steel" Banner Looks Like You'd Expect

The familiar Superman shield rendered in weirdly-lit foundry/iron look? Okay, whatever. I like it more than the plasticky look from "Returns." It will, of course, be irrationally hated-upon; because apparently Zack Snyder ran over everyone on The Internet's dog at some point in the past.


People are assuming, with little evidence, that there'll be a trailer for this attached to "Dark Knight Rises." It will likely include a speed-ramping shot, despite the technique having been criminalized at the Movie Nerd Summit of 2010. Oh, Snyder... when will you learn that good composition isn't "cool" anymore?

19 comments:

David said...

Not bad, although I would prefer it if it kept the yellow.

In any case, they better DON'T scrap John Williams' legendary "Main Titles".

It was already pretty sad when they scrapped Batman's Main Theme in the Nolan movies.

Kyle said...

If I can clearly see how hard one guy punches another guy it just takes me right out of the movie. I need shaky-cam realism!

(I really really don't.)

Anonymous said...

@David

John Williams is notoriously expensive to hire and/or license. As in... seven digits just to incorporate that single musical cue. It would be money well spent, but it could go either way. They could also make the case that since they're giving this the grim and gritty approach, they wouldn't want to associate it with the continuity that had Superman turn back time by spinning the world around really fast.

KevinCV said...

I'm actually kinda digging this logo. I agree there should be a bit more yellow, though.

I'm also glad that I'm not the only one who wants John Williams' "Superman March" to be used, David. Pleases me to know there's someone out there with some musical taste and recognizes an iconic theme when he hears one. However, as much as I liked Danny Elfman's Batman theme, I didn't mind that they scrapped it for Nolan's series. Mostly because Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard are pretty good composers in their own right.

@Anonymous 2:20: I understand where you're coming from on both counts, but that obviously didn't stop Bryan Singer from using it when he made "Superman Returns". In my opinion, John Williams' theme has become so synonymous with the character that you'd be either stupid or insane not to include it in some capacity. Let's pray Bob is right and that Zak Snyder isn't either one of them. Or both.

Chris Cesarano said...

Most of the universe is not a bunch of movie nerds, or comic book nerds, or what have you. The biggest reason the iconic Batman theme is embedded in everyone's mind is probably because of the cartoon more than the film.

As this film will not be part of the old continuity, I feel it would be better not to use the old theme in order to separate from it. People will not be outraged or angry or even disappointed unless they're nerds, at which point you can't avoid pissing them off somehow anyway.

As for the emblem, meh. It's the Superman emblem all grimdark'ed up. Oddly enough, it looks like it belongs with Nolan's Batman universe somehow, even though he wants to keep the two separate.

Chris Wyatt said...

That logo is about what I expected too, and overall I don't really have much bad to say about it. There's no denying that it's the Superman symbol. Plus between that and the first image of the new costume, call me cautiously optimistic.

I agree that it would be nice to hear the classic John Williams theme in the new film, but I'm highly doubtful that will happen. While I did like Superman Returns, one if it's biggest problems was that it really was really little more than a bigger-budget remake of the first film and as a result was left in the shadows of the Reeves-era films and wasn't allowed to be it's own movie. So while I wouldn't be opposed to hearing it show up again, I'd be just fine if it didn't too (as long as the new music is good, obviously)

I'm just hoping that Snyder tries something different but still stays true to the Superman comics and mythos. And I think you mentioned this before on a previous post Bob, I'm sure that the movie will, at the very least, look great.

Popcorn Dave said...

One of the main issues with Superman Returns was that it tried to be its own thing AND tried to link itself to the earlier films at the same time. Much as I'd like to hear that wonderful theme tune again, I think they'd be better off avoiding it here.

Cut the passive aggressive nonsense Bob... whatever you think of Snyder, his work so far doesn't suggest he's right for Superman at all. I'm sure he can make a decent B-movie about superpowered guys punching each other through walls, but his fondness for jaded badasses and exaggerated violence is a poor fit for the Superman character. I know everyone likes to joke about how "lame" and goody-two-shoes" Superman is, but I really doubt anyone wants to see him ripping people's arms off and splattering blood all over the screen.

Markus said...

I think the main reason why a lot of people hate Zack Snyder is because they think he's all style and no substance, because he overuses slow-motion, and because "Sucker Punch" was very hated by several people.

BRENDAN FALCONER said...

Fine with the logo, still hoping against hope that Snyder can direct a Superman film worth a damn...

Man of Steel isn't encumbered with awkward continuity placement like 'Returns was, but it has been a long time since Snyder made film that was better than mediocre.

Pat said...

I think whether or not you will probably like "Man of Steel" depends entirely on whether or not you enjoyed "Watchmen". If you hated "Watchmen", I doubt Snyder will surprise you here.

Personally, I love Snyder's composition style. It's like the opposite of shaky-cam garbage like in Transformers and Hunger Games (which I liked, but the camera work was atrocious). Instead of trying (and failing) to make it seem like "you're there in the thick of the fight", Snyder makes all of the action crystal clear and makes every impact feel visceral. I think this will work beautifully for Superman.

I'm looking forward to this.

Adam S said...

I think that Snyder's cinematic style is exactly what comic book movies need, but what really makes him a good fit for the franchise is how frigging devoted he is to the franchises he takes on. Watchmen was (aside from the ending, which is a mixed bag) a love song to the graphic novel, with some scenes remade shot-for-shot. If he shows the same kind of faithfulness and attention to detail with the Superman mythos and isn't afraid to push the envelope a bit (not grimdark, but deconstructionist. Think Kingdom Come/For The Man Who Has Everything) then I think this could be a really good movie.

Dave from canada said...

@ Popcorn

Snyder not right for superman? What, superman doesn't need more gore and a slowmotion rape scene?

@ Bob

Astounding as it may seem, when you like something that many other people don't it's not a grand liberal media conspiracy. People dislike snyder because HIS MOVIES ARE TERRIBLE.

His only 'talent' is in following the instructions of those more capable thn him, so if he has good source material


This is a guy who adapted Watchmen and threw out two of the most important character moments for Rorshach...an especially stupid decision considering how badly Snyder wanted him to be the main character.

This is the guy who adapted a frank miller novel and made it MORE racist and mysogynistic....while making it less subtle. That shouldn't even be matehmatically possible.

Whenever Snyder is allowed to deviate from established works and do his own thing, it becomes an incoherent mess of illogic punctuated by occasional bouts of his creepy-ass rape fetish.

And ramping is not good composition. It's more overused than bullet time in 2000 and unlike bullet time, is mostly done seriously. It's a cheap, hackneyed and unoriginal technique that was overused in POWER RANGERS before snyder ever came along.

lemonvampire said...

For my two cents Superman Returns was not only the best Superman movie, but also the best superhero movie, so I was really heartbroken at its lukewarm reception and the subsequent reboot. I'm not really fond of the look of everything that we've seen so far; the suit looks too desaturated, Zod is apparently going to be CGI, Zack Snyder (loved Watchmen, hated Sucker Punch) may or may not be right for the project, and where are Henry Cavill's eyebrows in that first promo image? Superman should not look like Grima Wormtongue.

That said, I'm still trying to keep optimistic about the film. I kinda like the logo and a actually hope they don't use the John Williams theme. That theme was for a different series of films about a different version of Superman. I just hope this version can live up to him.

B.L.C. Agnew said...

I'm down with the logo - also down with Snyder as the director (still), and anyone who cries "oh, but the slow down, speed up thing is SOOOOOO 2007!" I say to them, SUCKER PUNCH.

Even if you hated it and thought it was total shit, the action was AMAZING and that particular technique is almost nowhere to be found. Even with some of the most incredibly insane (and also awesome) action scenes filmed in the last 10 years.

So yeah, we already know he's not a one-trick pony.

Brick said...

http://i.imgur.com/FFCwH.png

Blue Highwind said...

MORTAL KOMBAT!!!!

Anonymous said...

If there's one character I really think doesn't need to be grim and gritty, its Supes. Please.
You know, I've heard the arguement that super hero movies are made dark because it helps broaden appeal to the masses, i.e. nobody wants the fun of colorful do-gooders protecting the the innocent, instead deuchebag nation wants a dark avenger bringing punishment and retribution to criminals. But doesn't Hollywood make most of it's money on kid friendly family films? Wouldn't they want color and fun? You don't have to dilute the drama, just do what Disney does and cut to chirping birdies after mommy dies.

Anonymous said...

I'm the Same guy as above.
Life's full of more than dark drama. You can have fun and be serious in the same movie. In fact, these movies are better because there's something to juxtapose the grim stuff too. There's something to fight for, a HOPE for the future. This I think is what Supes is about. Obsession of dark and gritty is just childish.
I once did a poll on facebook, asking if people preferred Batman or Superman. Not one person said Superman. They said he was too strong. He was gay. That the rich guy beating up people several times poorer than him in his pajamas because he misses mommy was so much more plausible (by the way bats, if you've got enough for seven custom made batplanes, why don't you just open a charity for chrissakes and give Gothams poorest a reason not to steal). Now I love Batman, but I love Supes too, and this is ridiculous. Film Crit Hulk did an article on this recently, and its totally true, from my experiences, that inner city kids actually prefer Supes because they face the reality of inner city crime everyday, and would much rather have the power to protect themselves and their loved ones than beat up the bad guys like batman, no matter how "realistic" the dark atmosphere of Gotham may seem to be to most suburbanites.
I really wonder what this obsession over edgeyness says about us.

SK said...

I'm on the other side of the previous 2 commenters.

I just love serious realistic superhero movies like Batman Begins or The Dark Knight.

I always found Superman to be the most boring, uninteresting unplausible superhero.

I understand those who don't agree with me and Isee their point. And their opinion is as valid as mine (I say this because with the two previous paragraphs I probably already earned the "douchebag" title).

I know what Supes is supposed to represent and I respect that, but I just don't like him.
He is so "goody-good" that he is totally inhuman and unrelatable (well technically he's an alien, but most kryptonians are jerks, so..)
He doesn't drink, doesn't spy on ladies' underwear, he's freaking omnipotent and doesn't succumb to temptation to abuse his power not even once.. he's freakin' JESUS (except that Jesus has the excuse of being the son of God).

I prefer my fiction characters more complex, verosimile and interesting, it makes for more mature storytelling. And by mature I don't mean the adolescent conception of the word (ooh dude look TITS GUNS PORN RAPE KILL BLOOD!!!1!)

I don't say that anybody who thinks differently is wrong, just that I don'r share (or even understand) their tastes).