• 113 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#51 Posted by 14NC3 (1760 posts) - - Show Bio

The only thing MOS has over Avengers is action. Besides that it is inferior to Avengers in every way.

This.

#52 Posted by Pokeysteve (8304 posts) - - Show Bio

@pokeysteve said:

Man of Steel was better in almost every way (minus humor). The flaws people talk about don't really exist.

This is well-worded. As it's been discussed ad nauseum I won't go into detail (or this thread will turn into a flame-war.) This isn't to say MOS was flawless, but neither was The Avengers...or TDK....or Iron Man I.

I agree with everything. In my opinion though MoS had less flaws than Avengers. You're welcome to PM me. Talking to someone about how awesome Man of Steel was is way better than defending it from idiots who I don't even think were paying attention.

#53 Posted by FlashKnight (451 posts) - - Show Bio

Man of Steel by a little bit. Loved them both though.

#54 Posted by lykopis (10746 posts) - - Show Bio

@xanni15 said:

@manwhohaseverything said:

MOS. I will never like Avengers that much because the villain wasn't a real threat. I've said so about a million times. What I don't understand is how little that bothered everyone else. For all it's flaws, MOS had very menacing villains. I honestly think Avengers was a B-/C+. MOS was a solid B. Throw in that it actually had people discussing philosophical issues afterwards, about what constitutes a hero (something Avengers could have never done, it wasn't deep enough.) and MOS gets an A for me. It boggles my mind how anyone can think Avengers was better...but in the court of public opinion, it always will be.

It's interesting you say that when who exactly was a threat to Supergod in MoS? Nobody. The people of Earth were used to weaken and capture him. Supergod had little to no fighting ability (or experience if you prefer that) and for all intents and purposes slaughtered the best fighters among his own race (though to be fair his scientist father did too), those bred and created to fight, all the while being slightly outnumbered. In all of the fights he owned, probably because he had no weaknesses but that's another point entirely.

Avengers were threatened, they faced overwhelming numbers, IM's suit was badly damaged, Hulk getting pounded by the airships, Thor being stabbed by Loki, Cap running on fumes, SHIELD wanting to detonate a nuke. This is of course due to Marvel not writing their characters to be all powerful. We all know how weak movie Thor is compared to his comic version, same with Cap, IM, Hulk, etc.

As for the philosophical debates it spawned, okay if that's what you went to it to see good for you. Personally I go to movies to be entertained, and Avengers did that much better than MoS.

That's a pretty good rundown. And as for philosophical debates, I didn't get that at all from MoS. I appreciated the effort, but it didn't ring true. Hopefully the next film will do better.

Until then, it's The Avengers.

#55 Posted by Binski (647 posts) - - Show Bio

I liked them both a lot so the only deciding factor for me was I'm a DC guy so I'll go with MoS but god damn was that Avengers pretty good.

#56 Posted by Moonchilde (1601 posts) - - Show Bio

Avengers was a much MUCH better movie.

#57 Posted by lightsout (1829 posts) - - Show Bio

Supes is my MAN....but I think Avengers was the better/more-enjoyable movie (and I swear it's not because I'm a huge Supes fan & am picker about it b/c I know the material/character so well.....though will admit it plays some part).

#58 Edited by RulerOfThisUniverse (6340 posts) - - Show Bio

Man of Steel.

#59 Posted by mike5555 (55 posts) - - Show Bio

I agree that Marvel's Hulk & Thor could have won this fight solo just like Superman did w/ out any fighting training against people just like Him. However, Zod was the only one who reach Superman's power level at the end. In comics, we know Superman, Hulk, Thor have all fought each other in close crossover fights. Meaning, MARVEL has to let Hulk & Thor go solo educate movie goers on how powerful they are in comics. Avengers has been presented as IRON w/ sidekicks show. MOS is best Superman film I've seen & I remember the 80's Superman films. Avengers having more characters is more exciting & new! Im also happy that Superman movies didnt have Luthor in them, Im tired of that same old character. Luthor will only be good movie w/ a superpowers or team up supervillan like Metallo or parasite Brainiac. But next Avengers' villian is Thanos would is like DC's DARKSIED. Wouldn't it be off the chain to Superman vs DARKSIED on screen?

#60 Edited by Manchine (4169 posts) - - Show Bio

Easily the avengers.

#61 Posted by Fallschirmjager (17564 posts) - - Show Bio

Avengers overall was a better movie IMO. It had 4 years and 5 movies before it to build it up though, so I don't see how Man of Steel could have been a better movie. Especially because the latter was facing such an uphill climb because Superman hadn't had a good movie since Superman 2 back in 1981 (imo).

I will say though, than Man of Steel, did 1 thing better than any Superhero movie before it and that was the superpowered combat. No other movie even comes close IMO. The way Superman and the Kryptonians did battle just made my inner nerd do back flips. It was like the cartoons and comic books we've all grown up with was finally realized on the big screen. Finally we have a superhero movie where the super powered badass....fights like a super-powered badass. Especially Faora! Faora was kind-of more badass than Supes was.

Don't get my wrong, I loved the "Battle of New York" in the Avengers as much as the next guy, but that battle was less about individual Superheroes showing off their awesome powers, than it was diverse team action (and it was great). But Thor for example (in the comic books) probably could have fought that entire army himself. He even wipes out a huge portion of it by himself with a huge Lightning bolt...and then never does that move again. Because obviously even though Thor is a god, you can't have him at full strength because it would make the other characters redundant - trust me, I get it.

But still, I am so glad Man Of Steel showed Superman...being Superman. I'm sorry, but just lifting varying levels of heavy things (I'm looking at you Superman Returns)...does not cut it. You shouldn't sacrifice story for action...but that doesn't mean your hero has to be a wimp.

#62 Posted by cfrehse (1004 posts) - - Show Bio

both good movies. I give it to avengers though

#63 Edited by FlashDamn (947 posts) - - Show Bio

@ccraft said:

@manwhohaseverything said:

MOS. I will never like Avengers that much because the villain wasn't a real threat. I've said so about a million times. What I don't understand is how little that bothered everyone else. For all it's flaws, MOS had very menacing villains. I honestly think Avengers was a B-/C+. MOS was a solid B. Throw in that it actually had people discussing philosophical issues afterwards, about what constitutes a hero (something Avengers could have never done, it wasn't deep enough.) and MOS gets an A for me. It boggles my mind how anyone can think Avengers was better...but in the court of public opinion, it always will be.

Agreed

Loki < Zod

I honestly don't see how they became such an awesome team, they never worked together before, but you have Hulk & Thor and then Cap & IM working together pretty well. Don't make sense to me.

And then after Tony blew up the mother-ship every other monster soldier just fell to the ground *facepalm*

I mean imagine if those Illuminati members didn't decide to level half of NY, the mother-ship would have came in and took control of the world. So were they right in trying to blow up NY?

DOUBLE AGREED

and 1 more point is that avengers was BASICALLY IM,CAP,THOR AND OTHER GLORIFIED CAMEOS while MOS strictly hit the spot on focus on superman and story while making the wise decison of leaving the Superman and lois relationship for another time while on the other hand clint and natasha plus hulk were never really given true focus in avengers movie

#64 Posted by TheFirstLantern (1505 posts) - - Show Bio

I think that they were both great movies, I don't really care which one was better because they both are the start or continuation of something bigger. Each movie had flaws, and some really good scenes/action sequences. Both are my fav.

#65 Posted by patrat18 (9773 posts) - - Show Bio

Both were good,Bothered me how they kept trying crack wise jokes that weren't even funny in Avengers but it was a average movie.

this is like my 5th time quoting you, so much cheesy wack kids jokes it's not even funny from iron man 2 and on all marvel movies has become a comedy. which is why i hope fox never gives back the rights to spiderman,spiderman is the jokester but yet he has less jokes in his movie than ironman???

#66 Posted by unBREAKable_Fs4 (1740 posts) - - Show Bio

As much as I now love Superman and enjoyed Man of Steel, Avengers was better. I can't really explain why but the feel of watching The Avengers was much better especially the ending with Thanos. You should've seen the frenzy that took place when Thanos gave that evil smile at the end. The whole theater went wild with questions.

Online
#67 Edited by Sylvain (1640 posts) - - Show Bio

@mike5555 said:

It's close! But I say Avengers is an A+ & Man of Steel is an A. Avengers could have been better if they let Hulk & Thor go instead of containing them as a Iron Man w/ sidekicks show. DC let Superman unleash his full power.

In my opinion if Superman didnt lets his dad&Zod died its would have been normal.....than again in my opinion Clark looked like an silly boy in the movie.Avengers have tons of default,Hulk looks like an gorilla,Iron man was the main guy and all the other guy was ''shytty'',the ennemies was kinda weak,Loki was threated like shyt,Hulk was threated like Batman ''I'm the strongest man and i can kick anyone ass so lets show trashy moments,the silly fanboys wont see it'',The iron man armor war shytty(Doesnt realy count),

So i'll say Man of steel won it evan if i prefer the Avengers movie.This said Man of steel 2 have more potential than Avengers 2 since Ant-man didnt create Ultron(Will it be an huge BS&sucky movie?)

#68 Posted by Sylvain (1640 posts) - - Show Bio

@manchine said:

Easily the avengers.

i dont agree this is an close one.

#69 Edited by HumanRocket (8174 posts) - - Show Bio

Avenges hands down I still get goosebumps when I Watch it. Didn't feel nothing during MoS sorry sups.

#70 Edited by jumpstart55 (2278 posts) - - Show Bio

Both.

Although Man of Steel was much more cinematically compelling.

Avengers was good, but it was a bit to watered down if you catch my drift.i.e not gritty enough. Something it was lacking compared to films like Iron man and Captain America first Avenger, after the seeing the marvel line up that precluded the Avengers, The film wasn't quite what i was expecting, but it was still good. The cinematography was a bit to dull imo.

Zack Snyder is definitely a superior director to Joss Whedon by afar.

#71 Posted by RustyRoy (12769 posts) - - Show Bio

Avengers.

#72 Edited by PrinceAragorn1 (17465 posts) - - Show Bio

Avengers was a bit better.. Even if superman is a team in himself, it was fun to see the heroes interacting, arguing, becoming friends.. (And banner showing up on that two wheeler lol)

#73 Posted by flameboy298 (1907 posts) - - Show Bio

@patrat18: Did you see the humour they tried to place in Iron Man 3?It was ridiculous some stupid kittys joke every other 30mins

#74 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

@sandman_ said:

Its not really fair, don't you think?

Avengers in not as good as everyone paints it to be.

it is.

#75 Edited by kgb725 (6440 posts) - - Show Bio

Loki was more than just brawn he wasn't supposed to be that physically imposing that's What the chitauri were for he outsmarts and tricks his enemies I only saw the end of Mos so I don't know much about it except word of mouth but each has its flaws

#76 Edited by ssejllenrad (12847 posts) - - Show Bio

Love both. Doesn't matter what others preferred or hated. I enjoyed both and the haters and fanatics on both sides just takes the fun out of it.

#77 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

Ok, I will say this for the last Goddamn time because frankly i'm tired of people Giving Avengers sh*t for no good reason. Lets narrow it down to expectations and movie genre in general. People Compare avengers to The Dark Knight rises and Mos which in my opinion is stupid and pointless, both Movies knew what they were and they delivered their full potential to the fullest.

When you Go to see a movie, you always expect something. For example, i've heard numerous people, my friends included, Choose Expendables 2 over undisputed 2 and 3 and have called it a good movie, but what is expendables in reality? when we take everything always it's just a bunch of buff guys shooting and killing each other, thats all that movie really is, while undisputed actually has a character arc where the main protagonist always evolves into something greater. Does that mean That Undisputed is better Than expendables 2? Not even close. Sure i personally prefer it, but Expendables 2 knows what it is, and no one in the right mind would go to see that movie expecting a deep story about the cast of characters. We expected a bunch of Guys shooting and killing each other, and thats what we got.
The Exact same could very well be said for MOS , TDKR and Avengers. When i went to see the avengers i expected a bunch of heroes uniting to fight a common foe, with some kind hearted humor and action, and they did not disappoint, in fact it did an excellent job, and avengers is my favorite superhero movie

While The DKR and Mos was meant to be much more serious in tone, and Both managed to deliver. ( Batman batter than Supes though). The REASON why Avengers is considered better is because it did an AWESOME job of delivering what it had promised, MOS did a great Jon. There is a difference.
thous who look at Avengers as another Michael Bay Movie are dead wrong, Avengers had substance, wine-liners too but they didn't take away the serious moments like it happened in Iron Man 3.

#78 Posted by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

Speaking as someone who actually enjoyed MoS, I prefer Avengers. But both are very entertaining superhero films, no doubt.

#79 Posted by TheManInTheShoe (3878 posts) - - Show Bio

Loved Man of steel in the theatre, hated it afterwards. Though Avengers was mediocre in the theatres, now it's the best movie I've seen. Avengers any day of the week.

#80 Posted by PowerHerc (84035 posts) - - Show Bio
#81 Posted by The_Tree (7481 posts) - - Show Bio

Man of Steel.

Avengers lost a lot of its shine after the first watching.

#82 Edited by patrat18 (9773 posts) - - Show Bio

@flameboy298: exactly i won't be surprised when cap2,and thor 2, comes out with more jokes than 21 jump street. i get that they want a new kind of audience, but did they really need to take away the mandarin's origins and turn him into a joke.

#83 Posted by FearTheLiving (3137 posts) - - Show Bio
#84 Posted by ccraft (5279 posts) - - Show Bio

@flashdamn: Thats a good point about MoS and Avengers, I think a lot of ppl who hated MoS will love the sequel. I think the sequel won't focus on action very much, and will focus on Clark and Lois more.

#85 Posted by Havenless (1341 posts) - - Show Bio

Make a poll so we can see how badly MoS is getting creamed.

#86 Posted by Lone_Wolf_and_Cub (5061 posts) - - Show Bio

Critically and financially this isn't even close. Avengers for obvious reasons is by far the better film.

#87 Posted by entropy_aegis (15324 posts) - - Show Bio

@xanni15 said:

@manwhohaseverything said:

MOS. I will never like Avengers that much because the villain wasn't a real threat. I've said so about a million times. What I don't understand is how little that bothered everyone else. For all it's flaws, MOS had very menacing villains. I honestly think Avengers was a B-/C+. MOS was a solid B. Throw in that it actually had people discussing philosophical issues afterwards, about what constitutes a hero (something Avengers could have never done, it wasn't deep enough.) and MOS gets an A for me. It boggles my mind how anyone can think Avengers was better...but in the court of public opinion, it always will be.

It's interesting you say that when who exactly was a threat to Supergod in MoS? Nobody. The people of Earth were used to weaken and capture him. Supergod had little to no fighting ability (or experience if you prefer that) and for all intents and purposes slaughtered the best fighters among his own race (though to be fair his scientist father did too), those bred and created to fight, all the while being slightly outnumbered. In all of the fights he owned, probably because he had no weaknesses but that's another point entirely.

Avengers were threatened, they faced overwhelming numbers, IM's suit was badly damaged, Hulk getting pounded by the airships, Thor being stabbed by Loki, Cap running on fumes, SHIELD wanting to detonate a nuke. This is of course due to Marvel not writing their characters to be all powerful. We all know how weak movie Thor is compared to his comic version, same with Cap, IM, Hulk, etc.

As for the philosophical debates it spawned, okay if that's what you went to it to see good for you. Personally I go to movies to be entertained, and Avengers did that much better than MoS.

He wasn't talking about the power levels of the characters,you completely missed the point.

#88 Edited by hart7668 (2294 posts) - - Show Bio

When I first watched the Avengers and Man of Steel, I was in awe of both. But as I rewatched Avengers, I liked it less and less. As I watched MoS I loved it more and more.

Man of Steel by a Kansas mile.

#89 Posted by MonsterStomp (18064 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull: I guess that's it though. See when the Avengers hit the big screen I actually held off for a good while too. Then after hearing how "awesome" it was, over and over and over again I finally saw it. See I was expecting a group of heroes joining forces to stop a threat.... That is all it was for me. Just people teaming up to defeat an army of aliens who could be harmed by human weapons. As you can tell I was a little disappointed. Ironman stole the movie for me. Thor wasn't much of a God. Captain America wasn't much of a captain. The film sucked!

When I walked into Man of Steel. I was expecting a reboot of the first film, but not like this, which was over the top surprising. It actually showed Superman trying to fit in with his adopted home, something the first film failed to do. It had next to no plot holes, and the action was not how I expected. Seriously, if Thor and Loki can't fight like gods, that sh*t just isn't worth watching.

Online
#90 Edited by Eternal19 (2076 posts) - - Show Bio

@xanni15 said:

@manwhohaseverything said:

MOS. I will never like Avengers that much because the villain wasn't a real threat. I've said so about a million times. What I don't understand is how little that bothered everyone else. For all it's flaws, MOS had very menacing villains. I honestly think Avengers was a B-/C+. MOS was a solid B. Throw in that it actually had people discussing philosophical issues afterwards, about what constitutes a hero (something Avengers could have never done, it wasn't deep enough.) and MOS gets an A for me. It boggles my mind how anyone can think Avengers was better...but in the court of public opinion, it always will be.

It's interesting you say that when who exactly was a threat to Supergod in MoS? Nobody. The people of Earth were used to weaken and capture him. Supergod had little to no fighting ability (or experience if you prefer that) and for all intents and purposes slaughtered the best fighters among his own race (though to be fair his scientist father did too), those bred and created to fight, all the while being slightly outnumbered. In all of the fights he owned, probably because he had no weaknesses but that's another point entirely.

Avengers were threatened, they faced overwhelming numbers, IM's suit was badly damaged, Hulk getting pounded by the airships, Thor being stabbed by Loki, Cap running on fumes, SHIELD wanting to detonate a nuke. This is of course due to Marvel not writing their characters to be all powerful. We all know how weak movie Thor is compared to his comic version, same with Cap, IM, Hulk, etc.

As for the philosophical debates it spawned, okay if that's what you went to it to see good for you. Personally I go to movies to be entertained, and Avengers did that much better than MoS.

He did not "Slaughter" them Superman was just stronger then them because he's been absorbing solar energy all his life and even then Faora still kicked his A**. Superman barely stood a chance against Faora even with his higher power And Zod still gave Superman a good fight, even though Superman was more powerful. So your "Supergod" argument is irrelevant

#91 Posted by spidermanandsuperman (283 posts) - - Show Bio

@the_tree: I know right! I've realized that I like it less and less every time I watch it

#92 Posted by FlashKnight (451 posts) - - Show Bio

Anyone who says Avengers not even close is delusional. They were both great movies.

#93 Posted by Strider92 (16496 posts) - - Show Bio

Avengers by miles. MoS wasn't that good.

#94 Posted by Abhi471990 (64 posts) - - Show Bio

let us see Avengers made more than 1.3billions and how much had Mos mad 500million which is not even half of what Iron man 3 made. It bet WB had no other option to bring in thr trump card "Batman"

#95 Posted by Manwhohaseverything (1909 posts) - - Show Bio

@abhi471990: Actually..MOS is up to 620 mill, and will easily hit 700 mill. But the question is which did you like better, not what made more money. MOS will never make more $ than Avengers, but was still a profitable movie for WB.

#96 Posted by Night Thrasher (3689 posts) - - Show Bio

MoS was a good movie

Avengers was a great movie

#97 Posted by ImagineMan16 (466 posts) - - Show Bio

Definitely Man of Steel for me. I know its the most popular opinion, but I think MoS might be my favorite superhero movie.

#98 Posted by z1co80 (177 posts) - - Show Bio

Avengers for me

That's not to say Man of Steel wasn't brilliant because it was but at this moment in time i have it behind Avengers and The Dark Knight in my top 3.

#99 Edited by TDK_1997 (14896 posts) - - Show Bio

Man of Steel.I didn't like Avengers as much as everyone else.

#100 Edited by JamesKM716 (1992 posts) - - Show Bio

Avengers is probably the better movie, and better executed, but not by much. Man of Steel has a few problems, but it was still fantastic.