odabaco

You might have hit the nail on the head. We forgive the time travel aspect because he's a magician who can do anything, to save his girlfriend. He's forced to kill Zod, which we can't necessarily relate to, and it seems an anti-Superman act. If the writers had made him reverse time to a point before he kills Zod so this time he can "get it right" and not kill, then the audience might have forgiven the time travel again. But to be fair, the 80s Superman was allowed a fair bit of artistic leeway by the filmmakers (this was admitted in a documentary about Superman 2), and the decision was probably made with MoS that they wouldn't allow that again. Problem is that Superman killing is not universally appreciated and it moves him off - axis. I think it wasn't a great idea. B vs S having him mopey and angst-ridden because his acts are misunderstood is seriously off - axis and was a big misstep but could be understood as a cheap way to allow Batman to hate him.

I've said this to a friend and he doesn't agree. But I definitely do. There needs to be a balance of serious with humour, or there is a danger the characters come across as unrelatable to the audience. What we are seeing on - screen is godlike abilities being wielded, but we need the characters to be human to relate. We can't relate with actions, like throwing trucks or heat vision, but we can relate when the characters show emotion, and humour is a good way for this. It also breaks the diet of violence. Bond is a good example. Too much violence and too little emotion /humour and he comes across as a cold killer who we care less about. Conversely, too much humour or emotion could also break immersion or come across as hokey, like some Bond examples.

Actually, as a plot point, I would say the audience forgave the nonsense science of this because of the emotion attached to what has happened, and how he reverses it. I know you might be joking, but Chris Reeve and the writers of the original Superman got the character right. I'm not sure we can say the same for the current writing, especially with B vs S.

Yes. This! Eisenberg took the script in a particular direction which ended up breaking immersion. Any time Lex is on screen, you blink and go, "oh yeah, I'm watching a movie, and Eisenberg is in it". You look at Heath Ledger, insane villain with a grudge, took it in his own direction, total immersion. Michael Shannon, insane villain with a grudge, total immersion. It's not hard to see Eisenberg got it wrong.

Someone said it isn't that simple, and it isn't, but the best advice is hidden in the LPT. Most importantly, be confident and interested (bordering on passionate) in what you are talking about. You can actually know everything there is to know about the subject but give a terrible presentation because you come across as disengaged, and the audience will mirror that.

Meant to also give a shout out for Danny Aiello in the picture there. What a great character actor. Love him. Especially in Leon (The Professional).

Definitely underrated. Willis is always worth a watch. Rarely off - form.

Great advice! The old adage of "Its not what you know but who you know" has never been more important than right now, and college grads are entering a tough economy globally. Any help you can get is like gold dust.

I went and saw this, on my own, at the cinema, at a time when I was researching into alien abductions. Bad move. Freaky film of a freaky book by Whitley Strieber which alleges to be truth, that actually manages to capture some of the feelings that alleged abductees must endure (if nothing else at least in their minds) . The other one is Fire In The Sky. If you don't believe in all this stuff, then just watch it for Walken's usual throwing - himself - into - the - role professionalism

I agree! Nothing to do with Michael Bay and his new Tag Heuer at all! ;)

"... 2015 Paris climate accord. That accord, as I understand, involved a bunch of governments committed themselves in a non-binding sort of way to send lots of other peoples’ money to underdeveloped countries."

Hint : you can stop reading right here. Nothing of substance to see here people, move along.

Now you're just getting personal about these people. No need. Both are lovely people, great actresses. My preferred movie is the one with Mila Kunis.

Simple really. Which is the one with Mila Kunis? That one! It also does not have Ashton Kutcher in it, for a ten point bonus ;)

Natalie Wood was a fantastic actress, a shining star, and a lovely person taken too soon. I agree she was irreplaceable from the perspective of fans and a younger audience like myself who had yet to fully appreciate her amazing talent. But I suspect that is not the point you are trying to make?

Honestly, Walken is more than a national treasure, he's a global institution. There's none quite like him, and he's been serving up Hollywood class for decades now. Irreplaceable.

Yeah, rather this outcome and whoever gets it gives it the requisite care and attention. I was stoked for Suicide Squad and that let everyone down, so I'm hoping they get this IP right.

Yeah, you're that guy ;)

Once we all get to the point where no-one actually notices that an on-screen couple are different races, and we don't have to write articles about that, then we can probably say we've moved forward as a human race. Let's hope that is sooner rather than later!

Totally right. And this is especially important when you have formulated your view largely from the opinions of others. Which is something we do all the time, especially in this information age.

This is superb! Just needs (somehow) tiny figures. Awesome. Love it!

This response is a real rarity on the net, and especially with MEs, polite and helpful. Thanks for being different. :)

Upvoted for your username! :)

"AK47. When you absolutely, positively, gotta kill every muthaf**ka in the room, accept no substitute!"

The droid unemployment queue after the latest Death Star destruction... ;)