I take a look at the 2013 Superman reboot Man of Steel and talk about why it doesn’t deserve the negative attention it gets. I go into the most common complaints about the film and offer counterpoints to them.
44 comments on “Exploring Man of Steel – Episode 163”
Jr. on said:
Okay, lets get the crazy Superman fanboy out of the way.
1. LMAO at “Dark-seed” Im sure its pronounced “Darkside” but they way they spell it, you can understand the confusion.
2. Hank Henshaw isnt killed at the end of Superman #82, his consciousness survives, and its understood that Superman knows that. Still, he destroys his physical body. I own those comics so just had to comment.
Thank you, thank you, thank you for this review. I feel like a persecuted minority for loving this movie. I can understand all the criticism that others have about the movie, such as Superman killing and the destruction at the end. I honestly believe that people hold Superman up to some sort of standard that doesnt allow him to evolve as a character. I also understand that Superman is a difficult character to write for but I think Zack Snyder made an incredible job at portraying the birth of Superman.
I believe that if Batman had blatantly killed somebody during the recent Dark Knight Saga, he would get alot more slack than anybody. But if it was with a gun, then the Internet would explode. The double standard infuriates me. As for the destruction, I grew up watching tons of Dragon Ball Z. Entire civilizations get massacred in that show, but when Goku moves the battle to the forest or wasteland, suddenly its given a pass.
Whew, that was a ton. Thanks for the video, Cecil! Keep em coming!
1 – I’ve read Superman on and off over the years and always thought it was Dark-“seed”.
2 – If you say so. I remember him knowingly killing him but also, that was a long time ago that I read those issues. Oh well, he still does murder a bunch of other people.
No problem. I knew I was going to get a bunch of flak for this one but also get some of the people who really enjoy this movie to come out in support. This one was a tough one to do because I knew all the grief I would get in return. I’m glad the majority seem to enjoy it.
I like Batman but I think he has become this sort of perfect thing on the internet. Like, he as a character is held in an almost godlike manner. Look at all the people who flew off the handle anytime someone said they didn’t like Dark Knight Rises.
Exactly. Dark Knight Rises has its own big flaws but gets a pass because how amazing The Dark Knight was. But Man of Steel doesnt because everybody loves to make fun of Superman. This is exactly what Alex Ross was talking about in Kingdom Come about the differences between darker heroes of the 90s versus the older breed represented by Superman but ironically also has Batman.
Nice video you made allot of good points I do not hate this movie but I am not one that big a fan of it either but those points you made really made me rethink this movie but one thing this movie did do wrong was the shaky cam god I hate when people use shaky cam and by the way cod you give me the name of the episode of the 1950s Superman TV series where Superman lets those two people on a mountain to die so that I have something to show some of my friends who do not like this movie and by the way you did not mention this awesome kill that Superman made http://www.redshirt.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/supernazi8.jpg
Thanks but I am curious to know if you are interested in doing a exploring video based on the original Robocop movie from 1987 ? because it would be pretty fitting now that the Robocop remake has come out on DVD and I would also love to see you do a Good Bad Flicks episode based on Robocop 2 and maybe Robocop 3
The only problem I had that people praised was Kevin Costners character that basically told his son to be a push over all his life for fear that if his origin/power was revealed it would scare people that I was so glad when he died.
A big complaint I heard was that the action was over the top and boring that is a complaint I have with modern films especially some of the Marvel comic book films but Man of Steel is an example of it done right.
It was over the top but they were not long lasting about 5-10 minutes and were not continues that was broken up with sections of dialogue between Superman and Faora-Ul/Zog and the action scenes were just awesome.
I also liked the easter eggs in the film that I wish videogame films would include like Lexcorp truck and Wyne Enterprise satellite.
I think Jonathan Kent was trying not so much to make Clark a pushover but trying to make him a better person. Not giving in to bullies and such because, lets be honest, if he was to punch one of them they would probably explode.
After having to edit this whole thing together, I had to watch the action scenes a bunch of times. I never found them boring and often wound up watching them in their entirety because of how amazing they were. So much was going on, I have no idea how people found them boring.
The Easter eggs were great and showed how they really were creating a new “universe” starting here.
A pretty good defense, but… I think what I liked about Superman was the sort of “simpler time” feel. Batman works fine with gritty realism, but not so much Superman.
Hm. You know, next Mainstream May, you should do Sucker Punch. Personally, I enjoyed the hell out of it but not because I viewed it as empowering (I don’t need movies to provide me with personal validation). I viewed it as trolling fanboys by giving them exactly what it says on the tin. It was a sucker punch, and I laughed the whole time. The fact that it was visually stunning (no matter what you think of his movies, Zach has a great eye) was just a bonus.
Although, um… some of those Man of Steel shots are distressingly teal.
My question is, why? Every other superhero, even the likes of Captain America, have been brought into today’s world and they get a pass. Why is Superman the one that isn’t allowed to progress past the feel of “the olden days”? They’ve already tackled Superman in the spirit of the simpler time and when they tried to bring that back with Returns, they failed miserably. I personally don’t see the problem with trying to put a different spin on a classic character.
Originally I was going to do Sucker Punch this year but got so many requests for Man of Steel, I decided to go there instead. I might do it next year, I don’t know.
I think Sucker Punch isn’t so much about giving the women in the audience validation, but more that it is showing women in movies can be intelligent and also kick ass. Often you have the “smart” girl in movies, which is either the gawky, goofy looking girl or you take someone like Denise Richards and give her a pair of glasses. I thought this movie was a way of taking the stereotypical “action” girl and turning it on its head by making it really about the struggle these girls were having internally and not just a live action anime. I have a feeling the majority of the people who hate the film just don’t get it and never will.
I would like to see movies dial back the color correction a tad.
Nice defense, Cecil. We both share the same feelings for “Man Of Steel”, but I would like to add that haters didn’t like the “lack of romance” between Superman and Lois Lane. If there’s one thing that I hated about the Superman mythos, it’s that Lois liked Superman while dismissing Clark. You can’t create a female character like that nowadays, and, if you did, giving it to a now five-time Oscar nominee would be insulting. So, I liked Amy Adams more than usual.
On the whole, the film has two interesting levels. One: it asks if Superman can exist in a post-Sept 11 world. DEFINITELY NOT the Chris Reeve version because (no slight against the actor) his performance was to pacify greatest generationers and baby boomers who were sick Watergate, Vietnam, political assassinations, urban crime and what-not. I didn’t much care for the 2006 film for being a retread, let alone liked the Blue Boy Scout for being all too unrelatable. The 90s animated series, “Justice League” and “Smallville” changed my mind (the last show’s co-developers, Al Gough and Miles Millar noted the relatability factor on “The Writers’ Room: http://www.sundance.tv/series/the-writers-room/videos/the-writers-room-the-walking-dead-smallville-other-comics-full-episode). So, I like Henry Cavill as a well-meaning wrecking ball.
Second level: “MOS” is a subversive allegory to the comic book industry, being misunderstood and mistreated by those who don’t really know it. You noted that Superman has killed in the comic books he’s been in, but I bet you most of his fans don’t read comic books, let alone went into a comic book speciality store, EVEN before the current cinematic superhero craze (Go watch “My Comic Shop DocumentARy” and thank the director after: http://www.flatsquirrelproductions.com). Ever since that lying asshole, Dr. Frederic Wertham, deemed comic books as dangerous for kids via his book, “Seduction Of The Innocent”, the industry has been struggling to prove itself a valid medium for over half a century. You wouldn’t know if comic books existed, unless you were exposed to them via an older relative or a Saturday morning animated series (Spider-Friends…GO FOR IT!). If there was an ad, it was tied with a toy (YO, JOE!) or something dumb (New Universe?….what the fuck was wrong with the old one?!). I recently saw an ad for the Miracleman GN in the NY Times. About time…
It also didn’t help that award committees like Hugo and Pulitzer changed their rules when works like “Watchmen” (love the 215-minute film version) and “Maus” (I want an animated TV mini-series, Art Spiegelman) win awards.
Now, comic books are cool, but I hope it doesn’t get treated like a disposable fad (HEY, MACARENA!!!). Like Clint Eastwood with jazz, I love comic books for being a hobby, an art form, a storytelling medium and a guidepost for kids to read.
Well, that’s it. “Sucker Punch” should get an explanation review (an $89 mil profit vs. $82 mil is okay, IMO, and the film was deemed the most underrated film of 2011); Zack Snyder doesn’t deserve to be compared to Michael Bay; “The World’s Finest” is a better title for the sequel which will probably be at the same table with “The Empire Strikes Back” and “Aliens”; I hope you’ll handle more films from the 1970s (cheesy!) and remember…BASTARD!!!…BASTARD!!!…(one more time)…BASTARD!!!
P.S. Which review of your masterpiece and why? Also, work with Obscura Lupa again. She’s great. 🙂
Thanks! I’ll give you a bit of a better response when I have more time, I just wanted to let you know Lupa and I are working on a new video. Should be out in June. (figured you would like to hear that) 🙂
Bingo. I think many of the people screaming “Superman doesn’t kill!” are basing that on either the Christopher Reeve movies or some weird idealized version of the character they have in their heads.
I think they were saving more of the Clark/Lois love story for future movies. They had a lot of ground to cover here and since everyone knows they will end up together, it wasn’t really necessary to put too much in here. Besides, if they did I would bet the fanboys would have cried that there was too much of a love story.
Sucker Punch wasn’t a failure but it didn’t pull in the numbers the studio was looking for, especially after he made half a billion with 300. Sucker Punch could be one of the most misunderstood films of all time. Sad thing is, a lot of people are basing their hatred of the film off of what they think it is.
I don’t get what you mean by “review of masterpiece”.
I’m pretty sure I answered this, I just can’t remember where so I’ll answer it again.
I think Blair Witch 2 is probably my favorite. I think it flowed the best and I had a overwhelming amount of info on it. There is still some stuff I would change but overall, it is my high water mark. It’s one of the few episodes I can go back and watch and not cringe.
I really enjoyed Man of Steel…. a lot more than I thought I would. This coming from someone who loves the ’78 Superman. Superman is one of those special movies for me. My dad (who has since passed) took me to see it when it first came out (I was 7). He was born in 1933 and grew up on Superman. I remember him talking about having and probably trading away many, many early Superman comic books when he was a kid. “Why would you want to collect comic books?……read ’em, enjoy ’em, trade ’em for some you haven’t read yet.” He loved the movie and so did I, so every time I watch Superman, something takes me back to 1978, watching the movie with my dad in the Midfield Twin Theater in Birmingham.
That being said and after being incredibly disappointed with Superman Returns (at the climax of the movie, do I really want to see an incapacitated Superman rescued by Lois Lanes fiance???) I was expecting Man of Steel to disappoint again. I was very pleasantly surprised. It took what I thought was a really fresh take on Superman, ran with it, and made it its own. I love the way you defended the nit picking this movie has suffered, Superman not killing, Superman not doing/being able to do this, that, etc. When people say Superman can or can’t do anything, exactly what Superman are they referring to? The pre-radio no Kryptonite (they brought in Kryptonite on the radio so the Superman actor could actually take time off) Superman, or the pre-Fleischer Bros. cartoons couldn’t actually fly (the animators wanted to make him fly ’cause just having him hop around looked really stupid) Superman, or the many, many, comic book takes on Superman. I guess my point is, Superman, like most comic superheroes, doesn’t have much ‘canon’ outside of a basic origin story. So I very much agree with the point that it’s ok for Man of Steel to do it’s own take on Superman, like many others have done.
I also love that they acknowledged the alien aspect of Superman. People would not just immediately trust this guy from another planet. Heck, Lex Luthor could probably run for President and win on an anti- “illegal alien Superman” platform (I think that actually may have been done in one of the comics). I love how that contrasts to the scene in Superman IV (Superman is one of my favorite movies, Superman IV is one of my favorite bad movies) where Superman goes before the U.N. and says he getting rid of everybody’s nukes and everyone cheers…….yeah right!
Thinking about Superman gives me an idea for a suggestion. You’ve done videos on the slipping quality of movie trailers and posters. How about a video on the lost art of opening credits? I seems with movies now you’re lucky to even get a title before the movie, anything that might resemble a classic opening credits sequence is relegated to between the last shot and the credit crawl. Superman has one of if not the best opening credits sequences ever.
Thanks for sharing, sorry about your dad. My dad had a bit more of an understanding of the value of comics because one of my uncles is a big comic collector. (although he was perplexed by my love of video games)
Returns was one of those movies where I walked out of the theater angry. I didn’t like it at all.
Given more time I could have come up with even more examples of the changes Superman has gone through over the years. I find it funny how many people are saying that a lot of the things I listed from the comic are not “in canon” but guess what, they were canon when they happened! You telling me that Superman #1 wasn’t the “real” Superman? lol
I think Lex may have done that in the comics but really, what hasn’t that guy done?
Hmmm…credits. I’ll look into that. Sometimes I think they go overboard but in the case of the 78 Superman, they were outstanding.
I was thinking some more about credits. It’s not so much that great credit sequences aren’t done anymore, it’s that they are usually slapped at the end of the movie and as such don’t really have any effect on the movie. Regardless of the quality, they really are an afterthought. A recent example that comes to mind is the credits at the end of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. The blood dripping and eventually forming the outline of the states is one of the coolest credit ideas I’ve seen. Whether or not you like that movie depends, very much I think, on the attitude you watch it with. If you watch it with a certain attitude you will enjoy, watch it with another and you will probably hate it. Putting that credit sequence at the beginning would have gone a long way, I think, towards setting the right tone in the audiences mind to view the movie. (That is of course, if they actually pay attention to the credits. I’m sure the reason the sequences go at the end now is because of film makers listening to the people complaining about sitting through “boring” credits…..Nevermind that it could go a long way towards setting up the movie.)
Back to Superman. Yeah, credits don’t get much better. Not only do you have the great visuals and John Williams incredible score, but they actually serve a purpose beyond saying who made the movie. It starts off with the sound of a projector and a small black and white screen surrounded by curtains. On the small screen is a Superman comic, the camera zooms in on a frame with the Daily Planet building, fades to live action and then pans up and heads off into space. The curtains fly back, we’re in color, widescreen, the credits fly by and we’re on our way to Krypton. That’s awesome!!!…… and it subtly just covered the franchise history in about 20 seconds. Comic book, to small screen (TV or movie serial), and now, a MOVIE.
Ever see a movie called Desperate Measures? The movie isn’t very good (although Micheal Keaton is an awesome villain, the movie is just dumb) but the intro credits are very cool. They are going through these areas of the hospital and light is reflecting off various surfaces to reveal the credits.
Some movies, I understand the need to get right into it. Others, I can understand not having the budget to put into getting a proper intro sequence. (having to pay for the score for the segment, plus trying to make it something memorable or at the very least, competent) I don’t mind them ditching the intro titles for a smaller horror films but something like Spider-man or a big action movie should really have some slam bang awesome intro. Although with the attention span of most audience members these days, I’m sure they would be tweeting how boring the intro is and how the movie isn’t holding their attention. OMG #longestintroever #gettothemovie
You’ve defended this movie even more than you defend other movies on your site.
The “he’s still learning to use his powers” excuse seems kind of weak. He’s not learning karate, he’s learning things that should be a part of his physiology, like me learning to walk.
Also, I don’t know why the eye beams would burn his hands. If that were true they’d have burned Zod’s eye lids.
You’re right that not liking a movie doesn’t mean going out of one’s way to bash it, but I think your video is an example of the opposite.
As for “Sucker Punch”, the whole “she’s taking control of her body fore empowering herself” gibberish is straight out of Woman Studies 101. It’s garbage there and it’s garbage here. It’s like a black man who, to combat the stereotype of blacks as violent, actually goes out and commits violence; he’s “owning his violence”.
I dont think Clark ever had a chance to explore his other powers, with the whole “hiding his powers” thing going on. Also, early in the movies, you see heat vision actually bother Clark a bit after he turns it off. Cecil’s explanation of the frying pan is pretty solid when talking about that scene.
I do like the guy’s work but I was trying more to showcase how much the internet turned on the guy. I defended this movie a bit more because of how much hate was being spewed at it unreasonably. (I also wanted to try something a little different)
I disagree, I think the point is totally valid. His Kryptonian biological makeup is enhanced by earth’s yellow sun. He was raised by humans who have no idea what he can do or how to teach him how to do it. Sure, he has these latent abilities but he doesn’t know what to do with them until his real father explains them to him. While there are things you know how to do, there are still things that you need to be taught.
At one point Superman hits (I think it was Faora…I don’t remember) with his heat vision and it clearly does damage. Zod doesn’t burn his eyelids because he is the one using them, kind of like how Cyclops doesn’t burn his eyelids in the X-men. However, when used against someone else it does damage.
This video was just a counterpoint to some of the biggest complaints I’ve seen against the film.
I caught Man of Steel about a month after the movie came out. I had heard the bad reviews and that audiences were not responding that well to it. So I saw it anyway, and while I can be quite critical of movies, especially more mainstream movies, I was shocked at how great the movie is. The story is well-crafted and had a lot of depth, and Henry Cavil was perfectly cast. I thought that maybe audiences were just getting super-saturated with the super hero genre and maybe this was the one they decided to be overly critical. Well, 2014, has proven that is not the case. So, I think your review is spot on and I think there are other good things that can be said about it. The only thing I disagreed with was that it seemed that you were favorable toward Superman Returns. I personally thought it it was horrid. I thought Kate Bosworth was a terrible Lois Lane. I wasn’t even convinced that she was a smoker when she would take a drag off a cigarette. However, Brandon Routh for me has the distinction of the only actor I know to give two bad performances in one movie. I still have a hard time figuring out which was less convincing, Superman or Clark Kent. Oh and I skipped Sucker Punch when it was out, so I shall catch up on it based on your perspective.
Oh no, I hated Superman Returns. I thought it was the worst of the Superman movies. I liked Brandon Routh and I’m glad he was able to salvage his career after that but the movie was just awful. I actually left the theater angry and ranted for quite a while on it. Bryan Singer is a solid director (as he proved with the new X-men) but he dropped the ball with this one big time.
I hope you enjoy Sucker Punch, just go in knowing that it is not an action movie. (despite what the trailers made it look like)
Ok, so we both hated Superman Returns, but I just make the extra step in also hating Brandon Routh in it. I know the games that studios play when it comes to the trailers we see, so I mostly disregard them when I see the actual movie. The studios always amp up the action and tell the best jokes in their trailers. Since Sucker Punch has been out for a while, I don’t even remember the trailer.
A lot of old comics were really dark. The world was a different place and it often is showcased in media such as this. I could have gone on even longer with some of the stuff I had on Superman but I wanted to try to keep it to a reasonable length. 🙂
There’s a website out there called Superdickery.com that showcased all the old comic covers where Superman just did horrible things to his friends. Im not sure if its still out there though.
These are some absolutely excellent points. I am a ginormous fan of Supes and “Superman: The Movie” is my all time favorite superhero movie. I very much enjoyed “Man of Steel” and it was my most anticipated movie of 2013, I thought it was fantastic but that does not mean that I didn’t have issues with it, most glaringly the 3rd act. I see it as a fantastic film, but to me it really was one act away from greatness. I don’t know if I can pin-point exactly why, but I feel like they went way to big in the end. The destruction just seemed too much for what is supposed to be the beginning of a movie series. You compared it to the destruction of New York in “The Avengers” but I feel that Marvel’s climax felt a bit different. It could have been that The Avengers themselves did seem to have a plan of action, including containment and evacuation and that there were consequences (shown briefly) in the end. Something about the destruction in Metropolis just feels gratuitous, like maybe an impatient Warner Bros. (who are definitely playing a desperate game of catch-up) was trying to one-up Marvel Studios or something by making a bigger boomier finale without really grasping the concept of escalation and pacing required to earn that kind of damage.
With the Avengers, there was 5 of them…3 being battle hardened military folks, one genius, and one unstoppable machine. They all have had lots of experience with fights where the odds were against them. They also had SHIELD there, that no doubt had evacuation plans in place to help lessen the casualties. In MoS, this was the first time Clark ever had to fight, let alone the fact that he was fighting 3 people that were as strong as he was. He was a guy raised on a farm, he’s not going to have the best ideas for how to lessen the damage to the city around him.
The other thing is the was an introduction to the new “universe” so to speak. Humans in this line haven’t seen superheros/supervillains before, so they really had no plan of how to react to this sort of thing.
I actually didn’t have a problem with MOST of what you are defending against here. You made some valid points and I agree with many of them. I think you are wrong on some of them and I still don’t like this movie, but not for most of those reasons.
Look, this movie was just bad. Even on the most basic level, making us care about the characters, it fails utterly. When you don’t care whether or not Superman wins or whether or not any of the human characters survives, you’ve done something wrong. The only bright spot for me was Michael Shannon as Zod. Shannon played the character well in spite of a script that tried to make him a cross between a mustache twirling cartoon and a mad emperor. I actually found myself kind of cheering for THE BAD GUY because everyone else was so passionless and boring. At least he had a goal, a plan, a heartfelt drive. Superman seemed to be doing everything he did because…script. In all it was boring and the characters were one dimensional cardboard cutouts playing at being “deep.”
I’ve said this (in other places) and so I’ll say it here. This movie splits people right down the middle. There are those who love it and those who hate it. Those who say it is exciting and those who say it is boring.
When “Superman Returns” came out, I saw it in Harrisburg, PA, in IMAX (with the three sequences in 3D). I felt so thrilled during the opening credits with John Williams’ theme played. The rest of the movie wasn’t so good.
I watched “Man of Steel” in 3D, and was expecting something special.
Almost a one year ago exactly, I am writing about it.
The problem I had with the movie was… the first time we see Superman he gets tackled by a fat man–“so much for him being the man of steel”. Then we have him told–“you stay with the women” and he does just that, while a senior citizen plays the hero. When I shared this at work, the response was like, “What!”.
Finally, it was boring. Superman should be light and fun. It was way too somber (“why so serious?” comes to mind). His costume is made of bright colors, yet the whole movie seemed to be muted and desaturated. It was tonally wrong. That was one of the biggest problems with it… the tone would work for other movies, but a Superman picture?
Sadly the only good thing about it was the action was well done.
It should have been a warning when samples of the score were released early and sounded so inferior to John Williams’ score.
People reacted to the end of the climatic fight. That was not what bothered me… rather it was the fact that we had the “world’s slowest laser” and a family who just stayed put. It made for a weak climax. A simple solution would have been to have them pinned by debris and couldn’t escape. It does seem strange, however, that if all it took was the breaking of a neck, why didn’t that happen earlier with all the punching and crashing through buildings.
The site whatculture pointed out flaws, and I agree with this one… the sequence in Alaska, where Lois is warned not to go out at night because of the potentially fatal temperatures, and then is shown doing just that and is fine.
See, that is your perception of what Superman should be. Why exactly should Superman be “light and fun”? If you’ve read the comics over the years you would see that the tone has shifted numerous times. Sometimes lighter hearted, sometimes serious…even sometimes really serious. Like, even more serious than Man of Steel.
The breaking of the neck happened then because there wasn’t a point before hand where he had a hold of Zod. You seem to miss the point that it was Superman who did the break. A building falling on him was going to be the equivalent of being hit by balsa wood.
As far as Lois going out at night, eh, I chalk that up to movie dumbness. Every movie, even the most cherishes classic, sometimes does stupid things within it. It just seems that this one is put under a microscope way more than others. Its also funny that in a movie where a superhuman alien from another planet comes to earth and is chased by other superhumans who want to transform earth into a new version of their destroyed home planet…that what gets pointed out as silly is the reporter going outside without warmer clothes.
While you argue it was boring, there are plenty of other people who would argue the opposite. Not saying you are wrong but you have to take in perspective. You didn’t enjoy it and that is your right. Doesn’t mean it was a bad movie, it just means that you didn’t it.
Been binge watching your stuff for a while now, and you usually defend some actual bad films. This, luckily, wasn’t one of them. I went into Man of Steel with all the hate that I read on the internet, and seeing a good film with the mindset that it’s a bad film makes it so much better. Man of Steel was a good superhero movie, and the best Superman movie I’ve seen, although I hated the character and every other movie in the past. But one thing I have to mention: in Pacific Rim, the buildings were empty, and in Avengers they at least showed the effort to save people. Not so much in this one. And I’m not overly fond of the “gritty” DC movies, other than Batman, but that’s his character anyway. I’m a Marvel guy anyway, so that doesn’t bother me that much. Anyway, good work!
follow:
Okay, lets get the crazy Superman fanboy out of the way.
1. LMAO at “Dark-seed” Im sure its pronounced “Darkside” but they way they spell it, you can understand the confusion.
2. Hank Henshaw isnt killed at the end of Superman #82, his consciousness survives, and its understood that Superman knows that. Still, he destroys his physical body. I own those comics so just had to comment.
Thank you, thank you, thank you for this review. I feel like a persecuted minority for loving this movie. I can understand all the criticism that others have about the movie, such as Superman killing and the destruction at the end. I honestly believe that people hold Superman up to some sort of standard that doesnt allow him to evolve as a character. I also understand that Superman is a difficult character to write for but I think Zack Snyder made an incredible job at portraying the birth of Superman.
I believe that if Batman had blatantly killed somebody during the recent Dark Knight Saga, he would get alot more slack than anybody. But if it was with a gun, then the Internet would explode. The double standard infuriates me. As for the destruction, I grew up watching tons of Dragon Ball Z. Entire civilizations get massacred in that show, but when Goku moves the battle to the forest or wasteland, suddenly its given a pass.
Whew, that was a ton. Thanks for the video, Cecil! Keep em coming!
1 – I’ve read Superman on and off over the years and always thought it was Dark-“seed”.
2 – If you say so. I remember him knowingly killing him but also, that was a long time ago that I read those issues. Oh well, he still does murder a bunch of other people.
No problem. I knew I was going to get a bunch of flak for this one but also get some of the people who really enjoy this movie to come out in support. This one was a tough one to do because I knew all the grief I would get in return. I’m glad the majority seem to enjoy it.
I like Batman but I think he has become this sort of perfect thing on the internet. Like, he as a character is held in an almost godlike manner. Look at all the people who flew off the handle anytime someone said they didn’t like Dark Knight Rises.
Exactly. Dark Knight Rises has its own big flaws but gets a pass because how amazing The Dark Knight was. But Man of Steel doesnt because everybody loves to make fun of Superman. This is exactly what Alex Ross was talking about in Kingdom Come about the differences between darker heroes of the 90s versus the older breed represented by Superman but ironically also has Batman.
Dark Knight Rises I thought was bloated. I liked Bane and thought the way the ended it was good but oh my god did it need a tighter edit.
Nice video you made allot of good points I do not hate this movie but I am not one that big a fan of it either but those points you made really made me rethink this movie but one thing this movie did do wrong was the shaky cam god I hate when people use shaky cam and by the way cod you give me the name of the episode of the 1950s Superman TV series where Superman lets those two people on a mountain to die so that I have something to show some of my friends who do not like this movie and by the way you did not mention this awesome kill that Superman made http://www.redshirt.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/supernazi8.jpg
Thanks!
I felt like the shaky cam was used effectively here. Sure, I would have preferred it not be there at all but it didn’t ruin anything for me.
The Superman episode is “The Stolen Costume”. You can find it on youtube.
LOL, well, I’m sure I missed a few others.
Thanks but I am curious to know if you are interested in doing a exploring video based on the original Robocop movie from 1987 ? because it would be pretty fitting now that the Robocop remake has come out on DVD and I would also love to see you do a Good Bad Flicks episode based on Robocop 2 and maybe Robocop 3
I want to do something with Robocop. After talking to Fred Dekker I was thinking I would do something for Robocop 3.
The only problem I had that people praised was Kevin Costners character that basically told his son to be a push over all his life for fear that if his origin/power was revealed it would scare people that I was so glad when he died.
A big complaint I heard was that the action was over the top and boring that is a complaint I have with modern films especially some of the Marvel comic book films but Man of Steel is an example of it done right.
It was over the top but they were not long lasting about 5-10 minutes and were not continues that was broken up with sections of dialogue between Superman and Faora-Ul/Zog and the action scenes were just awesome.
I also liked the easter eggs in the film that I wish videogame films would include like Lexcorp truck and Wyne Enterprise satellite.
I think Jonathan Kent was trying not so much to make Clark a pushover but trying to make him a better person. Not giving in to bullies and such because, lets be honest, if he was to punch one of them they would probably explode.
After having to edit this whole thing together, I had to watch the action scenes a bunch of times. I never found them boring and often wound up watching them in their entirety because of how amazing they were. So much was going on, I have no idea how people found them boring.
The Easter eggs were great and showed how they really were creating a new “universe” starting here.
A pretty good defense, but… I think what I liked about Superman was the sort of “simpler time” feel. Batman works fine with gritty realism, but not so much Superman.
Hm. You know, next Mainstream May, you should do Sucker Punch. Personally, I enjoyed the hell out of it but not because I viewed it as empowering (I don’t need movies to provide me with personal validation). I viewed it as trolling fanboys by giving them exactly what it says on the tin. It was a sucker punch, and I laughed the whole time. The fact that it was visually stunning (no matter what you think of his movies, Zach has a great eye) was just a bonus.
Although, um… some of those Man of Steel shots are distressingly teal.
My question is, why? Every other superhero, even the likes of Captain America, have been brought into today’s world and they get a pass. Why is Superman the one that isn’t allowed to progress past the feel of “the olden days”? They’ve already tackled Superman in the spirit of the simpler time and when they tried to bring that back with Returns, they failed miserably. I personally don’t see the problem with trying to put a different spin on a classic character.
Originally I was going to do Sucker Punch this year but got so many requests for Man of Steel, I decided to go there instead. I might do it next year, I don’t know.
I think Sucker Punch isn’t so much about giving the women in the audience validation, but more that it is showing women in movies can be intelligent and also kick ass. Often you have the “smart” girl in movies, which is either the gawky, goofy looking girl or you take someone like Denise Richards and give her a pair of glasses. I thought this movie was a way of taking the stereotypical “action” girl and turning it on its head by making it really about the struggle these girls were having internally and not just a live action anime. I have a feeling the majority of the people who hate the film just don’t get it and never will.
I would like to see movies dial back the color correction a tad.
Nice defense, Cecil. We both share the same feelings for “Man Of Steel”, but I would like to add that haters didn’t like the “lack of romance” between Superman and Lois Lane. If there’s one thing that I hated about the Superman mythos, it’s that Lois liked Superman while dismissing Clark. You can’t create a female character like that nowadays, and, if you did, giving it to a now five-time Oscar nominee would be insulting. So, I liked Amy Adams more than usual.
On the whole, the film has two interesting levels. One: it asks if Superman can exist in a post-Sept 11 world. DEFINITELY NOT the Chris Reeve version because (no slight against the actor) his performance was to pacify greatest generationers and baby boomers who were sick Watergate, Vietnam, political assassinations, urban crime and what-not. I didn’t much care for the 2006 film for being a retread, let alone liked the Blue Boy Scout for being all too unrelatable. The 90s animated series, “Justice League” and “Smallville” changed my mind (the last show’s co-developers, Al Gough and Miles Millar noted the relatability factor on “The Writers’ Room:
http://www.sundance.tv/series/the-writers-room/videos/the-writers-room-the-walking-dead-smallville-other-comics-full-episode). So, I like Henry Cavill as a well-meaning wrecking ball.
Second level: “MOS” is a subversive allegory to the comic book industry, being misunderstood and mistreated by those who don’t really know it. You noted that Superman has killed in the comic books he’s been in, but I bet you most of his fans don’t read comic books, let alone went into a comic book speciality store, EVEN before the current cinematic superhero craze (Go watch “My Comic Shop DocumentARy” and thank the director after:
http://www.flatsquirrelproductions.com). Ever since that lying asshole, Dr. Frederic Wertham, deemed comic books as dangerous for kids via his book, “Seduction Of The Innocent”, the industry has been struggling to prove itself a valid medium for over half a century. You wouldn’t know if comic books existed, unless you were exposed to them via an older relative or a Saturday morning animated series (Spider-Friends…GO FOR IT!). If there was an ad, it was tied with a toy (YO, JOE!) or something dumb (New Universe?….what the fuck was wrong with the old one?!). I recently saw an ad for the Miracleman GN in the NY Times. About time…
It also didn’t help that award committees like Hugo and Pulitzer changed their rules when works like “Watchmen” (love the 215-minute film version) and “Maus” (I want an animated TV mini-series, Art Spiegelman) win awards.
Now, comic books are cool, but I hope it doesn’t get treated like a disposable fad (HEY, MACARENA!!!). Like Clint Eastwood with jazz, I love comic books for being a hobby, an art form, a storytelling medium and a guidepost for kids to read.
Well, that’s it. “Sucker Punch” should get an explanation review (an $89 mil profit vs. $82 mil is okay, IMO, and the film was deemed the most underrated film of 2011); Zack Snyder doesn’t deserve to be compared to Michael Bay; “The World’s Finest” is a better title for the sequel which will probably be at the same table with “The Empire Strikes Back” and “Aliens”; I hope you’ll handle more films from the 1970s (cheesy!) and remember…BASTARD!!!…BASTARD!!!…(one more time)…BASTARD!!!
P.S. Which review of your masterpiece and why? Also, work with Obscura Lupa again. She’s great. 🙂
Thanks! I’ll give you a bit of a better response when I have more time, I just wanted to let you know Lupa and I are working on a new video. Should be out in June. (figured you would like to hear that) 🙂
“Slammin!” -Dick Clark
Sorry about the missing words like “sick OF Watergate…” and bad grammar like “comic books are cool, but I hope THEY DON’T get treated like…”
its all good 🙂
Bingo. I think many of the people screaming “Superman doesn’t kill!” are basing that on either the Christopher Reeve movies or some weird idealized version of the character they have in their heads.
I think they were saving more of the Clark/Lois love story for future movies. They had a lot of ground to cover here and since everyone knows they will end up together, it wasn’t really necessary to put too much in here. Besides, if they did I would bet the fanboys would have cried that there was too much of a love story.
Sucker Punch wasn’t a failure but it didn’t pull in the numbers the studio was looking for, especially after he made half a billion with 300. Sucker Punch could be one of the most misunderstood films of all time. Sad thing is, a lot of people are basing their hatred of the film off of what they think it is.
I don’t get what you mean by “review of masterpiece”.
What’s your favorite review of yours and why? That’s what I meant. Hope that helps.
I’m pretty sure I answered this, I just can’t remember where so I’ll answer it again.
I think Blair Witch 2 is probably my favorite. I think it flowed the best and I had a overwhelming amount of info on it. There is still some stuff I would change but overall, it is my high water mark. It’s one of the few episodes I can go back and watch and not cringe.
Another great video Cecil!!
I really enjoyed Man of Steel…. a lot more than I thought I would. This coming from someone who loves the ’78 Superman. Superman is one of those special movies for me. My dad (who has since passed) took me to see it when it first came out (I was 7). He was born in 1933 and grew up on Superman. I remember him talking about having and probably trading away many, many early Superman comic books when he was a kid. “Why would you want to collect comic books?……read ’em, enjoy ’em, trade ’em for some you haven’t read yet.” He loved the movie and so did I, so every time I watch Superman, something takes me back to 1978, watching the movie with my dad in the Midfield Twin Theater in Birmingham.
That being said and after being incredibly disappointed with Superman Returns (at the climax of the movie, do I really want to see an incapacitated Superman rescued by Lois Lanes fiance???) I was expecting Man of Steel to disappoint again. I was very pleasantly surprised. It took what I thought was a really fresh take on Superman, ran with it, and made it its own. I love the way you defended the nit picking this movie has suffered, Superman not killing, Superman not doing/being able to do this, that, etc. When people say Superman can or can’t do anything, exactly what Superman are they referring to? The pre-radio no Kryptonite (they brought in Kryptonite on the radio so the Superman actor could actually take time off) Superman, or the pre-Fleischer Bros. cartoons couldn’t actually fly (the animators wanted to make him fly ’cause just having him hop around looked really stupid) Superman, or the many, many, comic book takes on Superman. I guess my point is, Superman, like most comic superheroes, doesn’t have much ‘canon’ outside of a basic origin story. So I very much agree with the point that it’s ok for Man of Steel to do it’s own take on Superman, like many others have done.
I also love that they acknowledged the alien aspect of Superman. People would not just immediately trust this guy from another planet. Heck, Lex Luthor could probably run for President and win on an anti- “illegal alien Superman” platform (I think that actually may have been done in one of the comics). I love how that contrasts to the scene in Superman IV (Superman is one of my favorite movies, Superman IV is one of my favorite bad movies) where Superman goes before the U.N. and says he getting rid of everybody’s nukes and everyone cheers…….yeah right!
Thinking about Superman gives me an idea for a suggestion. You’ve done videos on the slipping quality of movie trailers and posters. How about a video on the lost art of opening credits? I seems with movies now you’re lucky to even get a title before the movie, anything that might resemble a classic opening credits sequence is relegated to between the last shot and the credit crawl. Superman has one of if not the best opening credits sequences ever.
Thanks!
Thanks for sharing, sorry about your dad. My dad had a bit more of an understanding of the value of comics because one of my uncles is a big comic collector. (although he was perplexed by my love of video games)
Returns was one of those movies where I walked out of the theater angry. I didn’t like it at all.
Given more time I could have come up with even more examples of the changes Superman has gone through over the years. I find it funny how many people are saying that a lot of the things I listed from the comic are not “in canon” but guess what, they were canon when they happened! You telling me that Superman #1 wasn’t the “real” Superman? lol
I think Lex may have done that in the comics but really, what hasn’t that guy done?
Hmmm…credits. I’ll look into that. Sometimes I think they go overboard but in the case of the 78 Superman, they were outstanding.
I was thinking some more about credits. It’s not so much that great credit sequences aren’t done anymore, it’s that they are usually slapped at the end of the movie and as such don’t really have any effect on the movie. Regardless of the quality, they really are an afterthought. A recent example that comes to mind is the credits at the end of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. The blood dripping and eventually forming the outline of the states is one of the coolest credit ideas I’ve seen. Whether or not you like that movie depends, very much I think, on the attitude you watch it with. If you watch it with a certain attitude you will enjoy, watch it with another and you will probably hate it. Putting that credit sequence at the beginning would have gone a long way, I think, towards setting the right tone in the audiences mind to view the movie. (That is of course, if they actually pay attention to the credits. I’m sure the reason the sequences go at the end now is because of film makers listening to the people complaining about sitting through “boring” credits…..Nevermind that it could go a long way towards setting up the movie.)
Back to Superman. Yeah, credits don’t get much better. Not only do you have the great visuals and John Williams incredible score, but they actually serve a purpose beyond saying who made the movie. It starts off with the sound of a projector and a small black and white screen surrounded by curtains. On the small screen is a Superman comic, the camera zooms in on a frame with the Daily Planet building, fades to live action and then pans up and heads off into space. The curtains fly back, we’re in color, widescreen, the credits fly by and we’re on our way to Krypton. That’s awesome!!!…… and it subtly just covered the franchise history in about 20 seconds. Comic book, to small screen (TV or movie serial), and now, a MOVIE.
Ever see a movie called Desperate Measures? The movie isn’t very good (although Micheal Keaton is an awesome villain, the movie is just dumb) but the intro credits are very cool. They are going through these areas of the hospital and light is reflecting off various surfaces to reveal the credits.
Some movies, I understand the need to get right into it. Others, I can understand not having the budget to put into getting a proper intro sequence. (having to pay for the score for the segment, plus trying to make it something memorable or at the very least, competent) I don’t mind them ditching the intro titles for a smaller horror films but something like Spider-man or a big action movie should really have some slam bang awesome intro. Although with the attention span of most audience members these days, I’m sure they would be tweeting how boring the intro is and how the movie isn’t holding their attention. OMG #longestintroever #gettothemovie
Wow, somebody REALLY likes Zach Snyder.
You’ve defended this movie even more than you defend other movies on your site.
The “he’s still learning to use his powers” excuse seems kind of weak. He’s not learning karate, he’s learning things that should be a part of his physiology, like me learning to walk.
Also, I don’t know why the eye beams would burn his hands. If that were true they’d have burned Zod’s eye lids.
You’re right that not liking a movie doesn’t mean going out of one’s way to bash it, but I think your video is an example of the opposite.
As for “Sucker Punch”, the whole “she’s taking control of her body fore empowering herself” gibberish is straight out of Woman Studies 101. It’s garbage there and it’s garbage here. It’s like a black man who, to combat the stereotype of blacks as violent, actually goes out and commits violence; he’s “owning his violence”.
I dont think Clark ever had a chance to explore his other powers, with the whole “hiding his powers” thing going on. Also, early in the movies, you see heat vision actually bother Clark a bit after he turns it off. Cecil’s explanation of the frying pan is pretty solid when talking about that scene.
Exactly. Thank you.
I do like the guy’s work but I was trying more to showcase how much the internet turned on the guy. I defended this movie a bit more because of how much hate was being spewed at it unreasonably. (I also wanted to try something a little different)
I disagree, I think the point is totally valid. His Kryptonian biological makeup is enhanced by earth’s yellow sun. He was raised by humans who have no idea what he can do or how to teach him how to do it. Sure, he has these latent abilities but he doesn’t know what to do with them until his real father explains them to him. While there are things you know how to do, there are still things that you need to be taught.
At one point Superman hits (I think it was Faora…I don’t remember) with his heat vision and it clearly does damage. Zod doesn’t burn his eyelids because he is the one using them, kind of like how Cyclops doesn’t burn his eyelids in the X-men. However, when used against someone else it does damage.
This video was just a counterpoint to some of the biggest complaints I’ve seen against the film.
Have you seen Sucker Punch?
I caught Man of Steel about a month after the movie came out. I had heard the bad reviews and that audiences were not responding that well to it. So I saw it anyway, and while I can be quite critical of movies, especially more mainstream movies, I was shocked at how great the movie is. The story is well-crafted and had a lot of depth, and Henry Cavil was perfectly cast. I thought that maybe audiences were just getting super-saturated with the super hero genre and maybe this was the one they decided to be overly critical. Well, 2014, has proven that is not the case. So, I think your review is spot on and I think there are other good things that can be said about it. The only thing I disagreed with was that it seemed that you were favorable toward Superman Returns. I personally thought it it was horrid. I thought Kate Bosworth was a terrible Lois Lane. I wasn’t even convinced that she was a smoker when she would take a drag off a cigarette. However, Brandon Routh for me has the distinction of the only actor I know to give two bad performances in one movie. I still have a hard time figuring out which was less convincing, Superman or Clark Kent. Oh and I skipped Sucker Punch when it was out, so I shall catch up on it based on your perspective.
Oh no, I hated Superman Returns. I thought it was the worst of the Superman movies. I liked Brandon Routh and I’m glad he was able to salvage his career after that but the movie was just awful. I actually left the theater angry and ranted for quite a while on it. Bryan Singer is a solid director (as he proved with the new X-men) but he dropped the ball with this one big time.
I hope you enjoy Sucker Punch, just go in knowing that it is not an action movie. (despite what the trailers made it look like)
Ok, so we both hated Superman Returns, but I just make the extra step in also hating Brandon Routh in it. I know the games that studios play when it comes to the trailers we see, so I mostly disregard them when I see the actual movie. The studios always amp up the action and tell the best jokes in their trailers. Since Sucker Punch has been out for a while, I don’t even remember the trailer.
I wish you made a whole episode about the forgotten dark side of Superman from comics and other media. That would’ve been hilarious. 🙂
A lot of old comics were really dark. The world was a different place and it often is showcased in media such as this. I could have gone on even longer with some of the stuff I had on Superman but I wanted to try to keep it to a reasonable length. 🙂
There’s a website out there called Superdickery.com that showcased all the old comic covers where Superman just did horrible things to his friends. Im not sure if its still out there though.
That’s where I got the pictures of Superman spanking Lois lol. Hilarious site, so many of those covers are just awful.
These are some absolutely excellent points. I am a ginormous fan of Supes and “Superman: The Movie” is my all time favorite superhero movie. I very much enjoyed “Man of Steel” and it was my most anticipated movie of 2013, I thought it was fantastic but that does not mean that I didn’t have issues with it, most glaringly the 3rd act. I see it as a fantastic film, but to me it really was one act away from greatness. I don’t know if I can pin-point exactly why, but I feel like they went way to big in the end. The destruction just seemed too much for what is supposed to be the beginning of a movie series. You compared it to the destruction of New York in “The Avengers” but I feel that Marvel’s climax felt a bit different. It could have been that The Avengers themselves did seem to have a plan of action, including containment and evacuation and that there were consequences (shown briefly) in the end. Something about the destruction in Metropolis just feels gratuitous, like maybe an impatient Warner Bros. (who are definitely playing a desperate game of catch-up) was trying to one-up Marvel Studios or something by making a bigger boomier finale without really grasping the concept of escalation and pacing required to earn that kind of damage.
Thanks!
With the Avengers, there was 5 of them…3 being battle hardened military folks, one genius, and one unstoppable machine. They all have had lots of experience with fights where the odds were against them. They also had SHIELD there, that no doubt had evacuation plans in place to help lessen the casualties. In MoS, this was the first time Clark ever had to fight, let alone the fact that he was fighting 3 people that were as strong as he was. He was a guy raised on a farm, he’s not going to have the best ideas for how to lessen the damage to the city around him.
The other thing is the was an introduction to the new “universe” so to speak. Humans in this line haven’t seen superheros/supervillains before, so they really had no plan of how to react to this sort of thing.
I actually didn’t have a problem with MOST of what you are defending against here. You made some valid points and I agree with many of them. I think you are wrong on some of them and I still don’t like this movie, but not for most of those reasons.
Look, this movie was just bad. Even on the most basic level, making us care about the characters, it fails utterly. When you don’t care whether or not Superman wins or whether or not any of the human characters survives, you’ve done something wrong. The only bright spot for me was Michael Shannon as Zod. Shannon played the character well in spite of a script that tried to make him a cross between a mustache twirling cartoon and a mad emperor. I actually found myself kind of cheering for THE BAD GUY because everyone else was so passionless and boring. At least he had a goal, a plan, a heartfelt drive. Superman seemed to be doing everything he did because…script. In all it was boring and the characters were one dimensional cardboard cutouts playing at being “deep.”
I’ve said this (in other places) and so I’ll say it here. This movie splits people right down the middle. There are those who love it and those who hate it. Those who say it is exciting and those who say it is boring.
When “Superman Returns” came out, I saw it in Harrisburg, PA, in IMAX (with the three sequences in 3D). I felt so thrilled during the opening credits with John Williams’ theme played. The rest of the movie wasn’t so good.
I watched “Man of Steel” in 3D, and was expecting something special.
Almost a one year ago exactly, I am writing about it.
The problem I had with the movie was… the first time we see Superman he gets tackled by a fat man–“so much for him being the man of steel”. Then we have him told–“you stay with the women” and he does just that, while a senior citizen plays the hero. When I shared this at work, the response was like, “What!”.
Finally, it was boring. Superman should be light and fun. It was way too somber (“why so serious?” comes to mind). His costume is made of bright colors, yet the whole movie seemed to be muted and desaturated. It was tonally wrong. That was one of the biggest problems with it… the tone would work for other movies, but a Superman picture?
Sadly the only good thing about it was the action was well done.
It should have been a warning when samples of the score were released early and sounded so inferior to John Williams’ score.
People reacted to the end of the climatic fight. That was not what bothered me… rather it was the fact that we had the “world’s slowest laser” and a family who just stayed put. It made for a weak climax. A simple solution would have been to have them pinned by debris and couldn’t escape. It does seem strange, however, that if all it took was the breaking of a neck, why didn’t that happen earlier with all the punching and crashing through buildings.
The site whatculture pointed out flaws, and I agree with this one… the sequence in Alaska, where Lois is warned not to go out at night because of the potentially fatal temperatures, and then is shown doing just that and is fine.
See, that is your perception of what Superman should be. Why exactly should Superman be “light and fun”? If you’ve read the comics over the years you would see that the tone has shifted numerous times. Sometimes lighter hearted, sometimes serious…even sometimes really serious. Like, even more serious than Man of Steel.
The breaking of the neck happened then because there wasn’t a point before hand where he had a hold of Zod. You seem to miss the point that it was Superman who did the break. A building falling on him was going to be the equivalent of being hit by balsa wood.
As far as Lois going out at night, eh, I chalk that up to movie dumbness. Every movie, even the most cherishes classic, sometimes does stupid things within it. It just seems that this one is put under a microscope way more than others. Its also funny that in a movie where a superhuman alien from another planet comes to earth and is chased by other superhumans who want to transform earth into a new version of their destroyed home planet…that what gets pointed out as silly is the reporter going outside without warmer clothes.
While you argue it was boring, there are plenty of other people who would argue the opposite. Not saying you are wrong but you have to take in perspective. You didn’t enjoy it and that is your right. Doesn’t mean it was a bad movie, it just means that you didn’t it.
Anyway, lets just agree to disagree.
Been binge watching your stuff for a while now, and you usually defend some actual bad films. This, luckily, wasn’t one of them. I went into Man of Steel with all the hate that I read on the internet, and seeing a good film with the mindset that it’s a bad film makes it so much better. Man of Steel was a good superhero movie, and the best Superman movie I’ve seen, although I hated the character and every other movie in the past. But one thing I have to mention: in Pacific Rim, the buildings were empty, and in Avengers they at least showed the effort to save people. Not so much in this one. And I’m not overly fond of the “gritty” DC movies, other than Batman, but that’s his character anyway. I’m a Marvel guy anyway, so that doesn’t bother me that much. Anyway, good work!
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it 🙂
the blockbuster buster should really watch this video