or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion › Zack Snyder to direct next Superman movie: Man of Steel
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Zack Snyder to direct next Superman movie: Man of Steel - Page 24

post #691 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by FendersRule View Post

Once the movie ended, "The original is obviously and undoubtably the best"

Of course he loved it better! You kidnapped him and held him hostage in your basement!


Yeah yeah yeah Fender... The original is better.... can I leave now?
post #692 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by reanimator View Post

Because it makes it more real, man. smile.gif You know? This story about a flying super alien who fights robot monsters? If you go all shaky-cam it makes it gritty and real.

The shaky cam is to give it the perspective that you're really involved but I'll tell you this....If I was talking with someone and they were shaking like that I'd probably order him rehab.
post #693 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

The shaky cam is to give it the perspective that you're really involved but I'll tell you this....If I was talking with someone and they were shaking like that I'd probably order him rehab.
If shaky cam is supposed to give us the perspective that you're really involved, or that what we are seeing is as real and current as the evening news, or that the events shown were taking place in real life when, suddenly, an invisible camera and sound crew happened to stumble onto it to capture it for all time in a rush, or whatever the hell the idea is, the filmmakers utilizing this annoying convention have really called it wrong lo' these past couple of decades. We will never know how much more effective (or not, I suppose) these movies would have been had they been presented with more tried and true cinema grammar and not relied so heavily on shaky cam, but it is hard to imagine a less successful or more counterproductive way of trying to generate what pre-shaky cam movies generated so much better in terms of suspense, humor, human interest, empathy, drama, insight, you name it.
post #694 of 1022
http://news.yahoo.com/henry-cavill-throws-kryptonite-justice-league-135126530.html

Ok, so the above link is an article about an interview with Cavill about his thoughts on a Justice League movie, which he prefers the slow approach. However, there's apparently a MOS2 that is fast tracked and discussion about reversing Marvel's formula leading up to the production of The Avengers (I said this was possible).

This is all pretty much still a combination of hype and gossip but I figured it would be an interesting short read for many of you. However, what's most interesting about this article is that there is a hyperlink regarding the Easter Eggs in MOS. At least for me, there are many more that I missed (beyond the building/tanker and satellite ones) that just didn't click for me but would only be recognized by true DC comic fans. Bottom line, the article suggests that the MOS leaves open the opportunity for other superheros to exist in this world. The Easter Egg hyperlink tells you how.

Super-interesting to me. (See what I did there?) biggrin.gif
post #695 of 1022
Whoa...where's everybody? this thread got all quiet all of sudden.

Ok I didn't know there was a Superman 2 Donner version so I got a copy from NF and watched it the other night and couldn't believe how "dated" and hokey it was. If I pay to watch that today in the theaters I would be very disappointed. I guess some movies just don't age well like say a Godfatther or Enter the Dragon because movies like this have become so tech and SFX driven.

Sup 2 looked like it was directed by a film student on a shoe string budget. The stuff out in space and the flying were really ridiculously dated. It looked like they just layed on a table with a black screen in the background when they flew.

And this is from someone who saw the 1st one 3x in one day and I do recall liking Sup 2 almost as much back then. The only thing that still remains unmatched is the music theme score. Some of the acting and lines were really dorky. I def feel Cavill superman is really the best for our time now and the way Snyder did the flying and SFX is nearly perfect and flawless so I'm happy for that aspect.

There is a balance that MOS is missing and that I hope will come in the sequels.

And can you guys stop saying stuff like "do you want another Donner or 1978 superman". It's not that at all, we just use that for point of reference because there's really nothing else to compare it too. For sure I don't think Fender's rule,myself or anyone else wants another 1978 superman, they just want a good film with good story and developed characters that's all ..just the the basic good film 101.
post #696 of 1022
I've read some tidbits here and there that the sequel might come out as soon as next summer. Here's something from Snyder today confirming maybe not necessarily next summer but it's on their table now..

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=105897
post #697 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitchfan View Post

As usual, the overuse of hand held shaky-cam shook all the potential suspense, humor, humanity and cinematic value right out of the movie. Same thing happens in World War Z. Over reliance on hand held shaky-cam to photograph people talking and doing stuff in a movie out of laziness or lack of a more cinematic master plan is one fine way to ensure your audience will see the sign as big as a billboard that you are a lazy filmmaker with no cinematic master plan for your product.
Agreed.
There is "a time and a place" for shaky-cam....and it ISN'T everywhere and everyplace.wink.gif



FWIW, I do think it is important to remember the original Reeve Superman was a product of its time, and MOS is a product of its time....
It is OK to prefer one over the other or simply enjoy both for what they are.
There is NO right or wrong here.wink.gif
post #698 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post


FWIW, I do think it is important to remember the original Reeve Superman was a product of its time, and MOS is a product of its time....
It is OK to prefer one over the other or simply enjoy both for what they are.
There is NO right or wrong here.wink.gif

I second that.
post #699 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Agreed.
There is "a time and a place" for shaky-cam....and it ISN'T everywhere and everyplace.wink.gif



FWIW, I do think it is important to remember the original Reeve Superman was a product of its time, and MOS is a product of its time....
It is OK to prefer one over the other or simply enjoy both for what they are.
There is NO right or wrong here.wink.gif
Hey Mr Oink, just curious when was the last time you saw Sup 1 or 2? If the answer is over 15 yrs+ and if you have Sup 1 or 2 in your collection I like to ask a little favor if you can watch Sup 2 again and see if you thought it was ridiculously dated and not the same movie you saw back in 79/81. I had a real hard time watching it and just hoped it would end soon.

Yes I know, amazing and incredible for that time but the way movies are made and produced now with so much more budget money, advance cameras and production crews, set designs, etc it's a totally different era now. Movies today even with a moderate budget can look and feel a lot better than a big blockbuster 25 yrs ago..esp the action/adventure/Sci-Fi ones.,
post #700 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

Hey Mr Oink, just curious when was the last time you saw Sup 1 or 2? If the answer is over 15 yrs+ and if you have Sup 1 or 2 in your collection I like to ask a little favor if you can watch Sup 2 again and see if you thought it was ridiculously dated and not the same movie you saw back in 79/81. I had a real hard time watching it and just hoped it would end soon.

Yes I know, amazing and incredible for that time but the way movies are made and produced now with so much more budget money, advance cameras and production crews, set designs, etc it's a totally different era now. Movies today even with a moderate budget can look and feel a lot better than a big blockbuster 25 yrs ago..esp the action/adventure/Sci-Fi ones.,

I know this wasn't addressed to me, so forgive me please, but I just watched both 1 & 2 about a week ago with my kids. Sure, it looks dated but not in a distracting way, IMO. Frankly, its fun for me to watch it and see the contrast in presentation. One is bright, colorful and cheery. The other is muted, solemn, deeper and dare I say more violent. Two different versions of the same story and each holds their own in my opinion.

Along these same lines, I am a huge Star Wars fan and am definitely more the purist side of it. But I do often wonder what the movie would be like remade with updated sfx and such. There are a handful of movies (and music for that matter) that I feel are untouchable and should never be remade, Star Wars is one of them, but if they did, I'd simply look at the remake as it's own self contained picture. It wouldn't diminish the original in any way or change my perception of it...even if they made Greedo shoot first.

Couldn't resist! biggrin.gif
post #701 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

I am a huge Star Wars fan and am definitely more the purist side of it. But I do often wonder what the movie would be like remade with updated sfx and such.
As a Star Wars fan (still have my Revenge of the Jedi poster), I would love to see those movies remade. Not so much for updated fx, since the originals were updated with cg, but to see a fresh take on that story: boy from desert planet becomes prophet like leader who, along with his sister, takes down an evil emperor. A fresh take on that story wouldn't make the originals vanish off my shelf, so I wouldn't greet the new movies with contempt just because they weren't like the original. In fact, I would hope they were different, otherwise what would be the point. The best covers of old songs are the ones that bring new identity to the remake, not the ones that slavishly mimic the original.
post #702 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

Holy smokes, I didn't see that coming at all... esp after Oink said he couldn't even get past the 1st half of the Last Stand. Wow I feel like I don't know who or where the real Oink is now. I'm shaking my head in disbelief right now. I'm def going to watch it again on dvd with no distractions this time my myself. That fancy pants Cinepolis I couldn't really focus on the movie the 1st hour.. like with the waiters bringing out our food several times and me eating my food and chatting.

Hey Morph, how did you use those smiley icons not given to us here? would be nice if we have the whole set of them like you find on other forums.

Wow. You've been bashing this movie up and down all this time and you weren't even paying attention when you watched it? You were "chatting" during the first hour of the movie?!?

Good god.

Luckily, you're clearly not the demographic for this kind of film, so you hating it means very little.


As for my own opinion of the film:

Personally, I loved it. It was everything that Superman Returns wasn't - and that's a very good thing. Can't wait to see it on BD when it comes out this fall. Well done, Mr. Snyder. Well done.
Edited by Steeb - 6/28/13 at 4:10pm
post #703 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

Ok now this also another main big NO-NO for me. Superman and Batman are comic books at the very heart and nature intended for kids 1st and foremost. Making it for mature audiences is EXACTLY the opposite same as making Deep Throat for kids. It's just not inherently right.

Wow, is that a warped perspective, or what?!?

How anyone can think that making a porn movie for kids is the same as making a movie based on comic books (which are read and collected by a lot of 20- and 30-something adults, who also tend to turn up in droves for said movies) that's aimed more at younger adults than small children, is mind-boggling. The film is rated PG-13, so it's clearly intended for older children and up.

Of course, good luck getting the kids who were bored with this film excited about watching Superman: The Movie. If their attention spans are that short, how in the world will they ever sit for an hour waiting for Superman to make his first real appearance?
post #704 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steeb View Post

How anyone can think that making a porn movie for kids is the same as making a movie based on comic books (which are read and collected by a lot of 20- and 30-something adults, who also tend to turn up in droves for said movies) that's aimed more at younger adults than small children, is mind-boggling.
No more mind-boggling than people out there who believe that animation is at its very heart and nature intended for kids first and foremost, and then have to reconcile that premise with x-rated Ralph Bakshi movies or an r-rated South Park film. I don't see it as a warped perspective as much as starting from a false (intended for kids) premise.
post #705 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

No more mind-boggling than people out there who believe that animation is at its very heart and nature intended for kids first and foremost, and then have to reconcile that premise with x-rated Ralph Bakshi movies or an r-rated South Park film.
True enough. I can agree with this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

I don't see it as a warped perspective as much as starting from a false (intended for kids) premise.
I still think it's pretty warped to leap from a comic book movie not intended for small children right to a "Deep Throat for kids." It's just so absurd, especially coming from someone who's been bashing something she watched once while chatting, interacting with the wait staff, eating, and drinking wine (to the point that she had to "sober up," according to a follow-up post.)
post #706 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

I know this wasn't addressed to me, so forgive me please, but I just watched both 1 & 2 about a week ago with my kids. Sure, it looks dated but not in a distracting way, IMO. Frankly, its fun for me to watch it and see the contrast in presentation. One is bright, colorful and cheery. The other is muted, solemn, deeper and dare I say more violent. Two different versions of the same story and each holds their own in my opinion.

Along these same lines, I am a huge Star Wars fan and am definitely more the purist side of it. But I do often wonder what the movie would be like remade with updated sfx and such. There are a handful of movies (and music for that matter) that I feel are untouchable and should never be remade, Star Wars is one of them, but if they did, I'd simply look at the remake as it's own self contained picture. It wouldn't diminish the original in any way or change my perception of it...even if they made Greedo shoot first.

Couldn't resist! biggrin.gif
oh no thats fine, I very much appreciate you taking the liberty and did exactly what i asked for even though we had diff on the entertainment value. I have no prob with civil and courteous reply such as that,..its the jerk off that try to invalidate my opinion by saying i wasnt paying attn heres all i need to say about that:
Dont talk to me & pls STFU okee dokey
post #707 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

oh no thats fine, I very much appreciate you taking the liberty and did exactly what i asked for even though we had diff on the entertainment value. I have no prob with civil and courteous reply such as that,..its the jerk off that try to invalidate my opinion by saying i wasnt paying attn heres all i need to say about that:
Dont talk to me & pls STFU okee dokey
No need for me to try to "invalidate your opinion," as you've done a fine job yourself. I certainly didn't make up the fact that you were distracted and couldn't really focus for at least the first hour of the movie. I didn't make up the fact that you were "chatting" during the film (clearly you're quite the film lover. rolleyes.gif ) Everything I posted was based on what you've volunteered.


Stay classy, zoey67. Perhaps one too many glasses of vino this particular evening?
post #708 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

Hey Mr Oink, just curious when was the last time you saw Sup 1 or 2? If the answer is over 15 yrs+ and if you have Sup 1 or 2 in your collection I like to ask a little favor if you can watch Sup 2 again and see if you thought it was ridiculously dated and not the same movie you saw back in 79/81.
Sadly, I have to admit I can't remember the last time I saw those films.
It is VERY hard for an old sci-fi movie to keep from seeming or appearing "out-dated."
I can only think of only a few.....wink.gif
post #709 of 1022
100+ degrees here today so sought out some cinematic a/c relief

$5.00 matinee man of steel

Great bang for the buck. Zach Snyder is getting to be one of my favorite action directors
post #710 of 1022
I ****ING ABSOLUTELY LOVED THIS MOVIE!!!

I love that they are going for a more darker Superman story like how they headed with the new Batman series. This film is what I always wanted to see in Superman.....let completely loose and we finally got to see him unleash his full strength!............which was bloody insanely awesome!!!. Watched this twice at the cinema and enjoyed it even more the 2nd time around. I also loved the fact that there was no Kryptonite or Lex Luther who I find to be one of the most boring villains of all time.

Ive been reading comments on here regarding the old superman movies are the best. Well i loved those movies as a kid and decided I would chuck it on and re watch it!............sorry guys but the old superman movies had some cringe worthy moments and the acting was just pretty **** *dont shoot me and just go and watch it lol*.......even the witty jokes that Gene Hackman who played Lex Luther was just plain stupid and lame...............GREAT WHEN WE WERE KIDS BUT NOT FOR ME NOW AS AN ADULT. Superman with Christopher Reeves was a good movie at the time.........but just because it's a classic or because it's the original superman does not make it better, sorry!.

If they bring in Doomsday as the villain is MOS 2 or 3...or even Justice League....it's gonna be freaking brilliant!
post #711 of 1022
I 2nd his opinion. After hearing all of the mixed opinions, I really didn't know what to expect. Suffice it to say I absolutely and thoroughly enjoyed MOS.The 2 1/2 hours flew by. I also have seen the originals again recently. Heck, I was 2nd online for the opening show that momentus Friday nite back in 1978. I had been reading newspaper ads for weeks leading up to the opening saying in "2 wks you will believe a man can fly", in 3 days, etc. When we actually saw the film both me and my roommate loved it and I have seen it countless times since then. It is silly, popcorn entertainment. As a kid growing up in the early 60's and watching George Reeves on TV, first in B&W, then finally in color, seeing the colorful majestic Superman finally appearing on screen midway thru the film was a major rush. The whole audience erupted. But that was then, this is now. Yes Superman has big time nostalgic appeal for those of us from the 60's. But man, a lot has changed. We lost sight that this guy was an alien transplanted here. If you watch the pilot episode of the original TV show, it is Jor-el and lara putting baby Kal in a space ship in the 1950's for bloody sake. Pure sci fi for it's day. The scifi in MOS in my opinion has far more appeal than Prometheus. And that was clearly the direction Zach Snyder was going for, albeit with infinite more action. You either like that stuff or not. The production was superb. The acting outstanding. What more can you ask for, for an evening of bubblegum entertainment. It's time to move on. Enjoy the new ride. In 20 years this too will be nostalgia.
post #712 of 1022
These comparisons between the 1978 version vs this year's Man of Steel don't seem to be pricing in and allowing for the passage of time and changing styles vs what is new and hot and hyped to high heaven today.

Intentional or not, if the comment is that the 1978 version is "dated and hokey", that it wouldn't be worth paying money for today or that the 1978 version was a "good movie at the time", does that mean that Man of Steel won't ever be considered "dated and hokey" and that it just might be a "good move for ALL time"? Seriously? Is that the message here? Because if that is the message, put Man of Steel in the toy box for, oh, not as long as the first one has been in that toy box, not 35 years...no...put it back in the toy box for just 10 years and haul it out. Then play BOTH the 1978 version (which will by then be 45 years old) and Man of Steel in a decent theatrical environment for a relatively untapped audience and get back to me on which one does a better job of eliciting a chuckle or two when it clearly intended to do so, which one does a better job of generating at least a modicum of rooting interest in the hero, which one provides a more noticeable emotional response, which one works better on a whole host of factors having nothing to do with what is new, hot, hyped, and racing to beat the blowed things up real good record.

I am assuming (hoping?) this trend of movies racing each other to beat the blowed things up real good record will have died a natural death in 10 years. And when it does, WHOOOBOY, you ain't seen "dated and hokey" until you haul out half the movies that get a theatrical release today and try to suffer through even 30 minutes of them.
post #713 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitchfan View Post

put it back in the toy box for just 10 years and haul it out. Then play BOTH the 1978 version (which will by then be 45 years old) and Man of Steel in a decent theatrical environment for a relatively untapped audience and get back to me on which one does a better job of eliciting a chuckle or two when it clearly intended to do so, which one does a better job of generating at least a modicum of rooting interest in the hero, which one provides a more noticeable emotional response, which one works better on a whole host of factors having nothing to do with what is new, hot, hyped, and racing to beat the blowed things up real good record.

So...you really think the Donner film is a timeless masterpiece? eek.gif

I think the only "message" here is that the older version doesn't hold up very well on certain levels, and Man Of Steel most likely won't hold up very well 30 years from now, on certain levels. For now I'm having more fun watching Man Of Steel than Superman circa 1978. That's NOT to say it wasn't a good film.

Both films approach the character differently. Both films are good. Why is it even an issue?
post #714 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitchfan View Post

These comparisons between the 1978 version vs this year's Man of Steel don't seem to be pricing in and allowing for the passage of time and changing styles vs what is new and hot and hyped to high heaven today.

Intentional or not, if the comment is that the 1978 version is "dated and hokey", that it wouldn't be worth paying money for today or that the 1978 version was a "good movie at the time", does that mean that Man of Steel won't ever be considered "dated and hokey" and that it just might be a "good move for ALL time"? Seriously? Is that the message here? Because if that is the message, put Man of Steel in the toy box for, oh, not as long as the first one has been in that toy box, not 35 years...no...put it back in the toy box for just 10 years and haul it out. Then play BOTH the 1978 version (which will by then be 45 years old) and Man of Steel in a decent theatrical environment for a relatively untapped audience and get back to me on which one does a better job of eliciting a chuckle or two when it clearly intended to do so, which one does a better job of generating at least a modicum of rooting interest in the hero, which one provides a more noticeable emotional response, which one works better on a whole host of factors having nothing to do with what is new, hot, hyped, and racing to beat the blowed things up real good record.

I am assuming (hoping?) this trend of movies racing each other to beat the blowed things up real good record will have died a natural death in 10 years. And when it does, WHOOOBOY, you ain't seen "dated and hokey" until you haul out half the movies that get a theatrical release today and try to suffer through even 30 minutes of them.

First of all, I said Superman 1 & 2 were good for their time but when I watched it recently I didnt feel anything you described, infact I was getting very bored watching it and finished it underwhelmed and didnt have the same feeling I had when I was a kid....I guess thats what it means to grow up lol smile.gif. I had the same feeling when I watched an episode of the old Transformers cartoon as a kid and it was awesome as a kid but now I cant even bare to watch it.

....If a new Superman movie comes out 10-20-30yrs from now maybe I will think MOS is a piece of ****!!....I couldn't care less, Im here for entertainment not hold a sentimental value for an old movie that doesn't do squat for me anymore smile.gif lol. The other five people I went to see this movie with absolutely loved it and all have seen the old Superman movies, so go figure smile.gif

Sorry but I think this Reboot of Superman wins in my book, I enjoyed the old movies when I was kid but it doesn't hold well in this time for me. It may for you so be it smile.gif....everyone has their own opinion! smile.gif.
post #715 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

So...you really think the Donner film is a timeless masterpiece? eek.gif

I think the only "message" here is that the older version doesn't hold up very well on certain levels, and Man Of Steel most likely won't hold up very well 30 years from now, on certain levels. For now I'm having more fun watching Man Of Steel than Superman circa 1978. That's NOT to say it wasn't a good film.

Both films approach the character differently. Both films are good. Why is it even an issue?

Couldn't agree more with this statement! smile.gif

Donner film was a great movie for it's time, but I would hardly call it a masterpiece lmao!
post #716 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

So...you really think the Donner film is a timeless masterpiece? eek.gif

No, I never said anything of the kind. However, to assert that its qualities are trumped by Man of Steel since the 1978 version was "a good movie at the time" does suggest that this year's Man of Steel is a timeless masterpiece, which is what I was questioning.

The last time I saw the 1978 Superman movie was about 5 years ago. I thought then pretty much what I thought of it in 1978, that it was an impressive, even epic super hero movie...until the entrance of Ned Beatty. Nothing against the actor Ned Beatty. But, for me, the movie turns into something less epic and more stylistically trivial after he makes his entrance. It was still fun after that, but I didn't think the rest of the movie matched the strengths of the first part. By contrast, I think Man of Steel is not a "good movie at the time", or any time. I think it is a narrative and cinematic train wreck of trendy, pointless shaky-cam, blowed things up real good conventions destined to lose whatever fleeting, hyped up powers they might have within months, not even years, after the Blu-ray release.
post #717 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

So...you really think the Donner film is a timeless masterpiece? eek.gif

The fact that you're comparing a movie in 2013 to one from 1978 answers that question pretty clearly.
post #718 of 1022
Papai2011 -- I couldn't agree more with your assessment of Superman Returns. I have long thought that it was the very best Superman film of all, 10 Stars out of 10. Although I readily concede that you and I are in a distinct minority, I can't help but continue to love the film. I didn't see the religious overtones in Superman Returns that you did but I still thought it worked almost perfectly. I even thought the young Kate Bosworth was very good as Lois Lane. The first two-thirds of Man of Steel made me think it was on on course to become the finest Superman movie of all. Unfortunately, the final third of the film spent so much time on bangs, booms, big fights, and gee whiz special effects that it forget to do much storytelling. At the end of the day I thought that Man of Steel was an above average Superman film but not much more and not in the same world with Superman Returns.
post #719 of 1022
Ok you see, I'm not the only one who had a hard time watching Sup 2 some 30 yrs later.

And HELL yes, 30 yrs from now when and if there's another re-boot with a sexier, better looking Clark Kent with a better body, exponentially improved SFX with probably 12K HDTV with a gazillion:1 contrast ratio on 120" screen standard size for most house holds it will too make MoS look dated and out of time. That's just inevitable clear as night and day and if you can't wrap your head around that.

Everything from the entertainment aspect will follow this route..Atari 30+ yrs ago > Xbox one/Ps4. And it will be the same 30 yrs from now too.
post #720 of 1022
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

Ok you see, I'm not the only one who had a hard time watching Sup 2 some 30 yrs later.

And HELL yes, 30 yrs from now when and if there's another re-boot with a sexier, better looking Clark Kent with a better body, exponentially improved SFX with probably 12K HDTV with a gazillion:1 contrast ratio on 120" screen standard size for most house holds it will too make MoS look dated and out of time. That's just inevitable clear as night and day and if you can't wrap your head around that.

Everything from the entertainment aspect will follow this route..Atari 30+ yrs ago > Xbox one/Ps4. And it will be the same 30 yrs from now too.
A good point.

To me, "classic" movies hold up over time because of their stories and characters, not wiz-bang AV.

Like most of us here, I love the old classics too.
I never get tired of watching 'em.wink.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion › Zack Snyder to direct next Superman movie: Man of Steel