Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How was the new Lois Lane?

Great as the Marvelous Mrs. Maisel. Not so great in this. I would have preferred someone else.

100%

Anonymous wrote:We just saw it and all thought it was really good. Hadn’t seen a movie in the theater in ages and this one was worth it.

100%

Saw this movie last weekend and thought it was painfully bad.

Way too many characters who were supposed to be clever but weren't too many layers of the story that didn't make a lot of sense (the portal - what the hell was the point of that) and though it should get credit for trying to have a plot it fell into the trap all of these superhero movies are in now of just having layer after layer of characters and battles etc as if these movies can't be succesfull without inane levels of multi-verse types of confusion.

And the interpersonal relationships between none of the characters were interesting or believable and the big narrative twist from the other movies that Superman was not sent to earth to do good but instead evil also wasn't developed in any meaningful way.

And the super dog and robots were just dumb as was the appearance of Supergirl or whatever it was at the end.

It did finish ok but the first half of the movie was really hard to sit thru.

But this guy has a much better review:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWpbv4hsZaI

We just saw it and all thought it was really good. Hadn’t seen a movie in the theater in ages and this one was worth it.

It was OK.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sad to see that this movie basically revolves around anti-israeli and antisemitic tropes.

The movie features two fictional nations, one is a nation of heavily armed white people, hellbent on genocide, represented by anonymous soldiers and an evil, old, white leader. The other, poor brown people, are represented by innocent children, literally just waiting around to be mowed down by tanks. They raise their homemade flag of hope... the superman emblem. But you will see a glimpse of their watermelon-colored flag in the background.

Uh... no

+1

They used fictional countries that were supposed make clear that they were not real and not referencing any real countries or real conflicts. The one country was speaking a fictional language that was linguistically similar to Russian, fyi, and was vaguely Eastern European while the other country wasn't really sketched out at all, besides being really poor, and vaguely Indian. No anti-Semitic reference at all. Two totally fictitious countries that are not evocative of any current or past conflict or situation.