The Man of Steel.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gilgamesh

Gilgamesh

ThatNickGuy said:
I doubt he intended to kill them and don't think he actually did, as I said about the deleted scene. Who the hell knows what throwing them into the pit did. Like I said, for all we know, there's a giant net down there or something. But given the portrayal that Donner and Reeve were giving us, I don't think his intention was to kill.
Click to expand...
stienman just won't let it go Nick. He doesn't understand (or doesn't want to) that Superman was well aware that they weren't going to die, hence the Donner cut has the footage of the arrest (which clearly shows that the director had every intention of showing that Superman was aware he wasn't killing). It was his intent that if they fell, they wouldn't die and would be available for capture.
 
BananaHands

BananaHands

Staff member
Covar said:
The major sins of Man of Steel are that Zod is right all along and Superman proves his point for him, and that Earth would have been better off if the rocket had never landed on Earth. The issue is not so much the what happened as what it means.
Click to expand...
I can certainly see Lex's point of view from the destruction Supes caused.
 
BananaHands

BananaHands

Staff member
GasBandit said:
Does the US actually have police jurisdiction of the North Pole?
Click to expand...
I just imagined the chief in metropolis getting a call from Superman.

"Uh, yeah? No, that's not reall--- Look, we don't even have the equipme--- I don't care if Lex is there, it's still no--- Look, Supes, we have this thing on planet Earth with juris---. Okay, fine. Whatever."[DOUBLEPOST=1372102311][/DOUBLEPOST]
GasBandit said:
Even the man of steel would be helpless against Baby-Armor-Man!

Click to expand...
 
figmentPez

figmentPez

Staff member
Bowielee said:
As for Hank Henshaw. Yes, that is one villain that Superman had to destroy to stop him. Henshaw was literally about to destroy the entire planet and there was literally no way to contain him. Warworld was essentially an entire planet of technology for him to escape into. I've said this already, it's not that Superman killed at all, it's that he did it when there were other options available, like moving his body a little bit. That's hardly him being forced into killing.
Click to expand...
So, if Superman killing Zod in the movie had been set up better, you'd be okay with that?

If the answer is "no, there's never a situation where Superman can't stop a small army of opponents with power levels equal to his own; and stop them quickly enough to prevent the destruction of Metropolis in the process (as that video suggests that Superman allowing the city to be destroyed is even worse than killing)" then you've created a very boring character. If Superman is so perfect that even when faced with forces greater than himself, that he can still protect everyone and be everything without being forced to take extreme measures, then there's no tension. Superman just wins, there are no consequences and you're just pulling a deus ex machina to allow Superman to be impossibly perfect.

Superman is a character liked by everyone (except the villains, and even most of those respect him), is charismatic, handsome, super-powerful, morally upright, accomplished at his job, kind to animals, etc. This has the potential to be a Mary Sue character if not handled correctly. The tension comes form "Can Superman connect to humanity, and save them without becoming an evil despot?" and if the answer is "Yes, unequivocally, and easily, in any situation, with no hesitation, duh!" Then he is just a Mary Sue. If there isn't a situation where Superman can fail to live up to the perfection he strives for, then he's an incredibly boring character.

That's not to say that Superman has to be forced to kill every villain in order to be a good character. Personally I like it when heroes outsmart the villains, and come up with the creative solution to win. (That's what I want to see in a Flash movie). However, I think there's a big difference between "I think Superman is at his best when he finds a way to avoid killing, and the writing shows Superman being better than anyone has to be, finding a solution that saves the day, and protects his ideals as well." and "Superman just doesn't kill, okay, never ever, never, duh!" I find it much better to point out that Superman is at his best when he's a source of optimism and hope, rather than pointing to some absolute that's never existed in comics and leads to Superman acting dumb as a brick and failing to protect people in some comics (Superman Vs Aliens).
 
HCGLNS

HCGLNS

ThatNickGuy if you're in town in July and still haven't seen the movie, I'll go with you and I promise to scream "I can't believe this guy is fucking Gina Carano!" during inappropriate times throughout the show.

As to the whole Superman killing thing, to me when he is being sold to children he never kills, when sold to adults he kills boatloads.
 
mikerc

mikerc

Covar said:
The major sins of Man of Steel are that Zod is right all along and Superman proves his point for him, and that Earth would have been better off if the rocket had never landed on Earth. The issue is not so much the what happened as what it means.
Click to expand...
Er, how was Zod right all along? That Earth would have been better off if Superman wasn't there? Nope. Earth would have been better off if Zod had never attacked. Supes isn't responsible for Zod's actions, only Zod is.

On a (hopefully) less controversial note did anyone else like that
Lois Lane worked out that the mysterious superpowered alien was Clark Kent based off 1 encounter with him & then tracking back all the stories about him to find out who he is. It really sold that she was a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter as opposed to other adaptations which just told you she was & expected you to take their word for it.
 
Espy

Espy

mroosc1979 said:
Er, how was Zod right all along? That Earth would have been better off if Superman wasn't there? Nope. Earth would have been better off if Zod had never attacked. Supes isn't responsible for Zod's actions, only Zod is.

On a (hopefully) less controversial note did anyone else like that
Lois Lane worked out that the mysterious superpowered alien was Clark Kent based off 1 encounter with him & then tracking back all the stories about him to find out who he is. It really sold that she was a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter as opposed to other adaptations which just told you she was & expected you to take their word for it.
Click to expand...
Also it totally got rid of any issues with the audience having to believe that she couldn't figure out who Clark was because of GLASSES. I loved that they just dealt with it and showed us how brilliant she is.
 
Bowielee

Bowielee

Zach Snyder said:
If there were more adventures for our Superman to go on, you’re given this thing where, you don’t know 100 percent what he’s going to do. When you put in stone the concept that he won’t kill, and it’s totally in stone, it really erases an option in the viewer’s mind…you’ll always have in the back of your mind, ‘How far can you push him?’ If he sees Lois get hurt, or his mother get killed, you just made a really mad Superman that we know is capable of some really horrible stuff, if he wants to be. That’s the thing that’s cool about him, in some ways. The idea that he has the frailties of a human emotionally. But you don’t want to get that guy mad
Click to expand...
He just described the origin of every evil alternate version of Superman existence.
 
HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Would a neck snap even kill a Kryptonian? I personally would have gone with punching the engine block of a BF-109 Messerschmitt through his spine.
 
bhamv3

bhamv3

Personally I believe Superman would sooner stick his hand into Zod's heat beam and try to physically stop the beam than take a life with his own bare hands.

The idea that Superman would kill his opponent if there's no choice is not anathema to me. It can happen, and having Superman make that choice is an interesting direction to take the character. However, the execution of that scene was poor. If you're going to make Superman break his no-killing rule, you'd better make it worthwhile. Zach Snyder didn't, in this case.
 
Gilgamesh

Gilgamesh

Oh and for all of those saying that maybe this is the downward spiral of great movies where he becomes the greater Superman? Yeah like 5 minutes later they show him joking with the military to leave him alone. Smirking and making jokes the whole time.

Yeah he's really emotionally wrecked there. :rolleyes:
 
strawman

strawman

Well, PTSD isn't instantaneous, and people in shock immediately after traumatic events do sometimes flip through a number of emotional states that seem to contrast sharply with what you, the viewer, might think they should be experiencing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top