Superman 2025 Movie - worst ever!

[Oddball]

There's been a bunch of good stuff on Paramount + lately.
Since you brought up a gangland movie try
Mobland, a UK Corleone family LOL
Sly Stalones Tulsa King is a smash, can't wait for season 3 to start.
Billy Bob Thorton's Landman was great. Demi Moore looks 3 times as good as she should for 63, Season 2 coming up T&A +++

Demi, Scarlett, looks like we start following the pattern - which I can't say is not pleasing . But then there is probably more to the content than just how good it looks. But there are some definitively good looking titles.

Malena (2000) ⭐ 7.4 | Drama, Romance, War

1h 48m | R

www.imdb.com

Brotherhood of the Wolf (2001) ⭐ 7.0 | Action, Adventure, Drama

2h 22m | R

www.imdb.com

 

[Koeitje]

An interesting list. I be looking into some of them, as I'm definitely a fan of "Three Billboards..." But they all fall into the indie/small film category, which I agree seem to be getting easier to produce. But I believe what is being bemoaned here is the shortage of stories (and writing) worthy of a trip to the local picture palace. That is, does the project need (or merit) the big screen, shared with a community treatment?

Almost all of these played in my local cinema (maybe some were streaming only). Also who said it needed to be big blockbusters. The argument was that no good movies are being made anymore. Stop moving the goal posts.

Also you remind me of those who say modern music sucks. Yet those people never seem to listen to anything beyond the pop they hear on the radio.

The great accomplishment of LOTR was convincing someone to fund it. That said, The Godfather Trilogy is far superior, especially if you don't break the shrink-wrap on Godfather III. (Godfather II is, after all 2 stories for the price of one.) I'd also put the Millenium Trilogy ahead of LOTR, which is too bloody earnest, too bloody long, and it doesn't even mention Tom Bombadil and Goldberry. I know 3 is supposed to be a magic number, but John Wick 1-4 are more fun than LOTR and probably shorter - and no one ever says "My Precious." My, how precious.

That's a pretty week argument calling the Godfather II 2 stories for the price of one. That makes The Lord of the Rings a hexalogy (the novels are actually divided in 6 parts). John Wick is nice if you want to watch a well-made dumb action movie, but it has zero emotional load.

The old one or the new one?

I haven't seen the new one, but the first one was pretty shit.

I don't agree that any of these things are relevant to whether a film can be considered good or great.

Direction and acting are dependant on each individual performance, they're no guarantee of future performance.

'A' list just means they are bankable stars, many great actors are not and never will be 'A' list, largely due only to physical appearance.

That the Academy Awards committee considers a film worthy of accolade has no connection to whether I think it is good or not. I'm not going to conclude a film is a stinker and then change my mind about it because it wins an Oscar.

That's not to say the films you listed are not good films. Mostly they are not the sort of films I am interested in watching (I attempted 'Three Billboards' but I could see where it was going after 20 minutes). I'm wanting to be entertained, primarily, if the film has something profound to say, then so much the better, but that should not be the principal focus.

Regrettably sight of the 'entertainment value' of a film - the original purpose of the medium - now seems to be lost entirely when the subject is at all serious.

'Educating' the audience is these days the priority. Film makers seem to think they must have some higher purpose to their work, and that what should essentially be just a pleasant diversion for the ordinary man has now to be a crusade of enlightenment.

Personally, I find that tedious in the extreme. If I want to be educated, I'll read a book.

I think you might have missed the point. @Sal1950 acted like if I listed some obscure picks. I prefer movies that go beyond entertainment value. I like something that isn't just dumb explosions. I can understand you want simple to understand stories without complex themes, but it is not what everyone else wants.

You have to explain educating the audience for me. Does that mean some kind of moral message? If that is the case, I think you just don't agree with the moral message delivered because many great older movies have very heavy moral messaging. I can name some for you if you want?

This is such an annoying, but typical, example of the problems with internet discussion. @Koeitje was responding to folks like @Sal1950 who was asking if the films were well-known - the idea being that if they were super-niche "art house" films, then they wouldn't necessarily count as the kind of high-quality, mass-market movies that you and others have been discussing. And you should know that, except you've now apparently become laser-focused on trying to beat Koeitje in an argument instead of responding to new developments in this discussion.

To put it more simply, Koeitje's point is not that these movies are good because they won Oscars and have A-list celebrities - he was just noting those facts to help explain to Sal and others that these are in fact major movies seen by a lot of people, just like the movies you and others love from the "good old days." The reason Koeitje thinks these movies are good is because, well, they're good! In other words, he feels they have precisely the qualities you admire in films.

You also appear to be substituting your own personal preferences for what you find entertaining with what other people might find entertaining. I found Three Billboards immensely entertaining. Was it "fun"? Not in the way Superman 1978 or, say, the Fifth Element was fun - but yes, it was a lot of fun in the sense that I enjoyed it. And to be even clearer - because I am 99% sure you need to have this explained to you - I did not enjoy Three Billboards because I was sitting there in the theater feeling self-satisfied that it had the "right" politics or that I was a good person because I was watching it. No - I actually enjoyed it in the sense that I was drawn into it, I found myself caring about the characters, absorbed by the dialogue and the direction and cinematography, and emotionally invested in the story and the outcome. It pushed different buttons than the Fifth Element did for me, but it still pushed buttons.

So if you find too many of today's movies to be unentertaining, fair enough - we all are entitled to our preferences. But that's not at all the same argument you entered this thread making.

Exactly. I was naming these movies because they are good movies and are very well known among film lovers. I named the Oscar nominations, directors and actors to point out how these are not just small obscure indie movies.

Plus there's also fun modern movies. Everything Everywhere all at Once is a great fun ride with a strong emotional basis

 

[Mart68]

I think you might have missed the point. @Sal1950 acted like if I listed some obscure picks.

Yes I did, apologies.

I prefer movies that go beyond entertainment value. I like something that isn't just dumb explosions. I can understand you want simple to understand stories without complex themes, but it is not what everyone else wants.

I don't object to films going beyond mere entertainment providing the entertainment aspect is not lost in the process. I'm happy to watch a film that is 'simple' - I like the 'Die Hard' and 'Lethal Weapon' films, for example. But such films can be done badly.

If it's just 'dumb explosions' - and there's plenty of films that are just that - then I'm not interested. They've got to be done with some class. There's still got to be good characters, good dialogue, a level of suspense and involvement.

You have to explain educating the audience for me. Does that mean some kind of moral message? If that is the case, I think you just don't agree with the moral message delivered because many great older movies have very heavy moral messaging. I can name some for you if you want?

A moral message is fine but it depends on how it is done. If it is subtext I'm fine with that. More overt and I'm not. It's not that I don't agree with morality.

If the message is political as opposed to moral, then I'm out. In some cases that can be a fine line.

Please do name a couple of older films with 'heavy moral messaging' - lets see if we are on the same page.

 

[kemmler3D]

Seriously I'm not.
I'm not a huge movie guy with personal tastes in SciFi, Action-Adventure, Westerns, some Horror.
That said I don't live under a rock and still never heard of the films on Koeitje's list.
None couldn't have been very popular.
OTOH
I'm also sure there's tons of recording artists from the Rap and Hip Hop genre I've never heard of.
How bout you?


Oh gee, what a snappy crack.
Like what, porn?

A lot of those were big deals and got a lot of Oscar buzz, most are firmly mainstream IMO if not to the degree of Marvel, DC, or the latest toy advertisement they call Jurassic Park.

 

[Koeitje]

Yes I did, apologies.

I don't object to films going beyond mere entertainment providing the entertainment aspect is not lost in the process. I'm happy to watch a film that is 'simple' - I like the 'Die Hard' and 'Lethal Weapon' films, for example. But such films can be done badly.

If it's just 'dumb explosions' - and there's plenty of films that are just that - then I'm not interested. They've got to be done with some class. There's still got to be good characters, good dialogue, a level of suspense and involvement.

A moral message is fine but it depends on how it is done. If it is subtext I'm fine with that. More overt and I'm not. It's not that I don't agree with morality.

If the message is political as opposed to moral, then I'm out. In some cases that can be a fine line.

Please do name a couple of older films with 'heavy moral messaging' - lets see if we are on the same page.

Some heavy moral messaging:

• 12 Angry Men
• Paths of Glory
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• A Raisin in the Sun
• Sounder
• The Grapes of Wrath
• In the Heat of the Night
• Robocop
• Gattaca
• The Matrix
• Dirty Harry
• The Wild Bunch

Also surprised you don't watch movies with a strong political message. You are missing out on a great bunch of classics such as these (there is some overlap with the earlier list of course).

• Apocalypse Now
• The Deer Hunter
• Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
• 12 Angry Men
• Paths of Glory
• The Great Dictator
• Brazil
• Starship Troopers
• The Killing Fields
• Robocop
• Children of Men
• On the Waterfront
• Metropolis
• They Live
• The China Syndrome
• Koyaanisqatsi (ok, not really a movie)
• Philadelphia
• The Battle of Algiers
• Mississippi Burning
• A Time to Kill

 

[Oddball]

I think there is definitively some great content in this thread - but it's not really related to the Superman 2025. I generally like to digress but not pollute OP's thread, and seems like we are collectively going that way.

Should we split and create a new thread called whatever it should be called? There are several, so we should arguably note why this one is different, which should not be so difficult.

 

[mhardy6647]

Should we split and create a new thread called whatever it should be called? There are several, so we should arguably note why this one is different, which should not be so difficult.

go for it!

 

[Oddball]

I think the new thread would fly better with the more established members @mhardy6647 starting them. My threads tend to go nowhere - a proven fact, so would not want to jinx this one, but would love to contribute.

 

[Oddball]

Well, then let's go wild on Superman. The cast is what it is. Who would be a better Superman is obviously highly questionable. I would see no reason to introduce a new actor. Henry Cavill is a powerhouse, and might have been the best one to carry the suit. Not too old to do the role either. But he is likely quite expensive.

Lois - hmm they should have not been so cheap as with Superman. Elle is a terrific actress, although might not come cheap any more. Elle has been up and coming and she would have nailed Lois in any way they wanted.

Ella Purnell | Actress, Producer, Director

Known for: Fallout, Yellowjackets, Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children

www.imdb.com

 

[kemmler3D]

Elle has been up and coming and she would have nailed Lois in any way they wanted.

Probably been busy with Fallout Season 2...

 

[Oddball]

Probably been busy with Fallout Season 2...

From what I heard she also to extended for Sweetpea season 2, so definitively getting more busy. Looking forward to seeing more of Ella in the future. Can't think of a younger and more promising star than she is.

 

[tmtomh]

Some heavy moral messaging:

• 12 Angry Men
• Paths of Glory
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• A Raisin in the Sun
• Sounder
• The Grapes of Wrath
• In the Heat of the Night
• Robocop
• Gattaca
• The Matrix
• Dirty Harry
• The Wild Bunch

Also surprised you don't watch movies with a strong political message. You are missing out on a great bunch of classics such as these (there is some overlap with the earlier list of course).

• Apocalypse Now
• The Deer Hunter
• Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
• 12 Angry Men
• Paths of Glory
• The Great Dictator
• Brazil
• Starship Troopers
• The Killing Fields
• Robocop
• Children of Men
• On the Waterfront
• Metropolis
• They Live
• The China Syndrome
• Koyaanisqatsi (ok, not really a movie)
• Philadelphia
• The Battle of Algiers
• Mississippi Burning
• A Time to Kill

Yes, 100%. Not to mention, arguably the most politically-infused era in mass-market US films was the 1970s (Apocalypse Now, Deer Hunter, Three Days of the Condor, All the President's Men, Dog Day Afternoon, and so on) - and this is often referred to as a golden age of Hollywood cinema. It's ironic because so many of the "good old days" movies some folks are citing here are from the 1990s (give or take), and people who were big fans of the 1970s golden age films trashed those 1990s movies in more or less the same terms that some folks here are trashing today's movies.

 

[raif71]

Just fresh coming back from seeing this year's Superman movie. I thought it was great. Good to see some takes of Krypton, Metropolis and Smallville. Brings back memories of reading the 80s comics of John Byrne's reboot of Superman. I would say all the casts are on the spot. I'm rating this movie 8/10.

 

[Mart68]

Some heavy moral messaging:

• 12 Angry Men
• Paths of Glory
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• A Raisin in the Sun
• Sounder
• The Grapes of Wrath
• In the Heat of the Night
• Robocop
• Gattaca
• The Matrix
• Dirty Harry
• The Wild Bunch

Also surprised you don't watch movies with a strong political message. You are missing out on a great bunch of classics such as these (there is some overlap with the earlier list of course).

• Apocalypse Now
• The Deer Hunter
• Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
• 12 Angry Men
• Paths of Glory
• The Great Dictator
• Brazil
• Starship Troopers
• The Killing Fields
• Robocop
• Children of Men
• On the Waterfront
• Metropolis
• They Live
• The China Syndrome
• Koyaanisqatsi (ok, not really a movie)
• Philadelphia
• The Battle of Algiers
• Mississippi Burning
• A Time to Kill

'12 Angry Men' was on my list too. Not sure I agree with some of the other picks. That works despite the crude moralising, probably because all the other aspects are well done.

'The Great Dictator' is a good example of the sort of film I don't like due to the overt moralising.

'Apocalypse Now' is political? I like that film as it's one of the few anti-war films that depicts the insanity of war rather than just the horror of it.

'Starship Troopers' is an interesting one. The dimmer critics thought it was fascist propaganda despite it being an obvious satire. Opinions since revised as with many films they didn't like at first now regarded as classics.

'The Killing Fields' was tedious. Worthy cause, boring film. Exactly what I'm talking about.

 

[Mart68]

The western statement is absolutely hilarious. Here are some great westerns from the past 15 years:

• Django Unchained
• True Grit (granted, its a remake but it still excellent)
• The Hateful Eight
• Hell or High Water
• Hostiles
• The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (a little older)

Just for the record I didn't state that westerns are no longer made. My point was that there used to be a production line of westerns the same as there is now for superhero films.

Now only a few westerns get made, probably not even one a year when it used to be 20 odd per year. I think there's quite a few parallels between westerns and superhero films.

 

[Liberal Democracy]

Superman was a reflection of the time it was released in a way more profound than maybe the norm , this version seems to have some backing from certain comics and could it be a similar reflection of our times ? So valid ..

Masculinity is in the toilet, id argue both the feminine and masculine are in a mutual downwards spiral , to the detriment of most human beings .

I didn't mind Mobland , dose lean heavily on the novelty of seeing Dame Helen saying fuck a lot and James Bond walking about with mild dementia. Still ....

 

[Koeitje]

If that's your personal argument, my answer would be;

The talent might be out there, but it doesn't seem interested in mining played out veins.

or

The IP owners wouldn't be willing to risk a couple of hundred million dollars on a production team whose best known work is about lunch box delivery in Mumbai (An excellent film BTW), even if they did (and probably would) have an interesting spin on the story.

What is my personal argument? It wasn't mine. Respond to the original posters.

Yes, 100%. Not to mention, arguably the most politically-infused era in mass-market US films was the 1970s (Apocalypse Now, Deer Hunter, Three Days of the Condor, All the President's Men, Dog Day Afternoon, and so on) - and this is often referred to as a golden age of Hollywood cinema. It's ironic because so many of the "good old days" movies some folks are citing here are from the 1990s (give or take), and people who were big fans of the 1970s golden age films trashed those 1990s movies in more or less the same terms that some folks here are trashing today's movies.

Yeah, it always make the laugh when people say media has become so political. That's what I meant by media illiteracy in one of my earlier posts in this thread. People are just somehow blind to the themes in the media they consume. For example, there were many complains about The Boys last season about it being to political. Like, buddy, have we been watching the same series? Because that has been the case since the very first episode.

'12 Angry Men' was on my list too. Not sure I agree with some of the other picks. That works despite the crude moralising, probably because all the other aspects are well done.

'The Great Dictator' is a good example of the sort of film I don't like due to the overt moralising.

'Apocalypse Now' is political? I like that film as it's one of the few anti-war films that depicts the insanity of war rather than just the horror of it.

'Starship Troopers' is an interesting one. The dimmer critics thought it was fascist propaganda despite it being an obvious satire. Opinions since revised as with many films they didn't like at first now regarded as classics.

'The Killing Fields' was tedious. Worthy cause, boring film. Exactly what I'm talking about.

It doesn't matter if you like these specifically, the general consensus from both critics and the public on all of these is that they are top tier cinema.

Your statement about Apocalypse now is objectively wrong though. Here's some movies that deal with the insanity of war:

• Paths of Glory
• The Bridge on the River Kwai
• Come and See
• Catch-22
• Full Metal Jacket
• The Deerhunter
• Platoon
• Dr. Strangelove

Just for the record I didn't state that westerns are no longer made. My point was that there used to be a production line of westerns the same as there is now for superhero films.

Now only a few westerns get made, probably not even one a year when it used to be 20 odd per year. I think there's quite a few parallels between westerns and superhero films.

Factually wrong again. You really should fact check before you post.

Advanced search

www.imdb.com

Since 2020-01-01 there have been 429 westerns release, which comes down to a little over 70 a year. Even if you just stick to ones with a big action component you end up at over 10 year. Which is well compensated by the amount of western tv series.

Superman was a reflection of the time it was released in a way more profound than maybe the norm , this version seems to have some backing from certain comics and could it be a similar reflection of our times ? So valid ..

Masculinity is in the toilet, id argue both the feminine and masculine are in a mutual downwards spiral , to the detriment of most human beings .

I didn't mind Mobland , dose lean heavily on the novelty of seeing Dame Helen saying fuck a lot and James Bond walking about with mild dementia. Still ....

He has become less political over the years. He used to beat up Nazis and the KKK.

Masculinity being down the toilet is a wild statement though. Masculinity is simply changing, just like it has always been (for example in ancient Rome it was no problem to have sex with men, just as long as you were the top). I understand some people want to go back to the misogyny (like hitting your wife being legal) or the mental health issues of the good ol' days, but a large portion of the world doesn't want that anymore. And that's a good thing, just look at the domestic abuse numbers. The same goes for the child physical abuse.

 

[Mart68]

It doesn't matter if you like these specifically, the general consensus from both critics and the public on all of these is that they are top tier cinema.

'I subscribe to the law of opposite public opinion. If everyone says one thing I say bet the other way' ('Glengarry Glenross')

Your statement about Apocalypse now is objectively wrong though. Here's some movies that deal with the insanity of war:

• Paths of Glory
• The Bridge on the River Kwai
• Come and See
• Catch-22
• Full Metal Jacket
• The Deerhunter
• Platoon
• Dr. Strangelove

Objectively wrong? You really don't see how 'Apocalypse Now' depicts war differently to those other films? Okay, fair enough. Just opinion though.

Factually wrong again. You really should fact check before you post.

Advanced search

www.imdb.com

Since 2020-01-01 there have been 429 westerns release, which comes down to a little over 70 a year. Even if you just stick to ones with a big action component you end up at over 10 year. Which is well compensated by the amount of western tv series.

Okay more than I thought. Point conceded - I can't be arsed to check them all but I note at least one is set in Australia - that's not a western. I don't know how many more don't qualify. But yeah, still lots.

I understand some people want to go back to the misogyny (like hitting your wife being legal) or the mental health issues of the good ol' days, but a large portion of the world doesn't want that anymore. And that's a good thing, just look at the domestic abuse numbers. The same goes for the child physical abuse.

Hitting your wife or any woman was never considered 'masculine.' Are you quite young? Although largely agree with this point.

 

[Koeitje]

'I subscribe to the law of opposite public opinion. If everyone says one thing I say bet the other way' ('Glengarry Glenross')

Wow, not often people admit to being fans of Rebecca Black's Friday and Cats (the movie). I think you get my point? This is not really an argument, unless you just like being a contrarian. Also I hope this just refers to media, because otherwise it will lead to some pretty vile stances.

Objectively wrong? You really don't see how 'Apocalypse Now' depicts war differently to those other films? Okay, fair enough. Just opinion though.

All these movies show the insanity of war. That was what made Apocalypse Now special according to you. If you didn't meant it that way you have to be more clear with your arguments.

Hitting your wife or any woman was never considered 'masculine.' Are you quite young? Although largely agree with this point.

No, it just was an often tolerated practice and considered a "family matter" with little to no legal repercussions. You are quite old aren't you?

 

[JSmith]

War, itself, is not insane.

Ah... yes it is, completely, but applied to the true attacker and those that supply the means. I digress, this is way off topic... shall we get back to comic book Superman and everyone just chill for a bit?


JSmith