If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Thrillbent)   A 'Man Of Steel' review from Mark Waid, a guy who knows a little bit about Superman   (thrillbent.com) divider line 373
    More: Interesting, Mark Waid, Man of Steel, Superman, Zod, Brandon Routh, Jor-El, Infinite Crisis, secret identity  
•       •       •

9938 clicks; posted to Geek » on 14 Jun 2013 at 8:56 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



373 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-14 11:13:12 AM  

burndtdan: If Superman can save the day and still have time to make sure no one is hurt in the process, the threat wasn't that grave.  We've had enough films about him foiling real estate schemes or overcoming his inner-struggle.  This is Superman in a real outer-struggle, which if I"m not mistaken is something a lot of people have been asking to see in the movies.


Abso-damn-lutely. Which is why the reviewers crying about the movie aren't worth shiat. They wanted more of the same emo-Superman that we saw in Superman Returns, when everyone else is already sick of that shiat. You get the feeling they would have loved the movie if it just had a scene of Superman stopping mid-fight scene to shed a single tear for the lives lost during a farking ALIEN INVASION OF EARTH by a RUTHLESS MILITARY DICTATOR.
 
2013-06-14 11:13:53 AM  

thornhill: Rather than come up with interesting villans


Have you seen the movie?
 
2013-06-14 11:19:14 AM  

HST's Dead Carcass: Superman Movies just don't really work! In EVERY single Superman movie (I've not seen this one yet), the only way to beat Superman is to take away his powers. It's because the canon of the comic makes him completely and totally unbeatable.


Superman's biggest weakness is that he is too much of a goody goody. I may have to give this film a pass.
 
2013-06-14 11:19:29 AM  

burndtdan: QT_3.14159: I really liked it. But that review did voice what was bothering me about it. Superman wasn't going out of his way to protect anyone or move fights out of populated areas. While it was mostly just an excuse for destroying more skyscrapers, it did seem wrong.

Overall, though I did really love it. It really honed in on the alien/sci-go aspect of it. And it was really entertaining.

That actually makes me want to see the movie more, especially considering this sentence: "See, everyone else in Zod's army has been beaten and banished, but General Zod lives on and so, of course, he and Superman duke it out in what, to everyone's credit,  is the very best super-hero fight I've ever seen, just a marvel of spectacle."

Not so much for the disaster porn element, but for the fact that this is actually Superman in a super hero fight.  A real, actual challenge.  A real existential threat.  Something that might actually be such a threat to either himself, or the world (I don't know, haven't seen it) that he doesn't have the leisure of worrying at every turn about collateral damage.

If Superman can save the day and still have time to make sure no one is hurt in the process, the threat wasn't that grave.  We've had enough films about him foiling real estate schemes or overcoming his inner-struggle.  This is Superman in a real outer-struggle, which if I"m not mistaken is something a lot of people have been asking to see in the movies.


Yes, I agree. There was just something missing... Like that somehow he didn't even realize that all the buildings crashing down around them meant another 1000 people dead. He freaks out when people with faces are being threatened, but not when the faceless millions are incinerated.

I think if they had managed to show that he was being effected by the destruction, and not just assuming they were empty buildings, I would have been less bothered by it.

As far as Amy Adams goes, she really did better than I expected her to. In the beginning especially, she almost convinced me, but she(as a person) is just a little to soft for the Lois character.
 
2013-06-14 11:20:57 AM  

QT_3.14159: burndtdan: QT_3.14159: I really liked it. But that review did voice what was bothering me about it. Superman wasn't going out of his way to protect anyone or move fights out of populated areas. While it was mostly just an excuse for destroying more skyscrapers, it did seem wrong.

Overall, though I did really love it. It really honed in on the alien/sci-go aspect of it. And it was really entertaining.

That actually makes me want to see the movie more, especially considering this sentence: "See, everyone else in Zod's army has been beaten and banished, but General Zod lives on and so, of course, he and Superman duke it out in what, to everyone's credit,  is the very best super-hero fight I've ever seen, just a marvel of spectacle."

Not so much for the disaster porn element, but for the fact that this is actually Superman in a super hero fight.  A real, actual challenge.  A real existential threat.  Something that might actually be such a threat to either himself, or the world (I don't know, haven't seen it) that he doesn't have the leisure of worrying at every turn about collateral damage.

If Superman can save the day and still have time to make sure no one is hurt in the process, the threat wasn't that grave.  We've had enough films about him foiling real estate schemes or overcoming his inner-struggle.  This is Superman in a real outer-struggle, which if I"m not mistaken is something a lot of people have been asking to see in the movies.

Yes, I agree. There was just something missing... Like that somehow he didn't even realize that all the buildings crashing down around them meant another 1000 people dead. He freaks out when people with faces are being threatened, but not when the faceless millions are incinerated.

I think if they had managed to show that he was being effected by the destruction, and not just assuming they were empty buildings, I would have been less bothered by it.

As far as Amy Adams goes, she really did better than I expected her to. In th ...


Actually, the very first scene with her did a lot to dispel that feeling for me. ("Are we done measuring dicks?")
 
2013-06-14 11:26:19 AM  

Rwa2play: Marvel's movies are made by people who loved the comic/character(s). DC's movies are made by people who just read the comic. There's the difference.


Your comments, in this thread, seem like you're inclined to shiat on the movie, which is ludicrous, as it's brilliant.

The fact that you're doing the "Marvel vs DC" thing is just stupid. The people who made this movie clearly love the character.
 
2013-06-14 11:27:13 AM  

Perlin Noise: Superman's biggest weakness is that he is too much of a goody goody. I may have to give this film a pass.


This is not your dad's Superman. He's not so much the goody goody here.
 
2013-06-14 11:27:25 AM  

un4gvn666: Actually, the very first scene with her did a lot to dispel that feeling for me. ("Are we done measuring dicks?")


I'm sorry but, anybody can say that line.  It's the actor's gravitas when saying it that gives it the necessary "oompf".
 
2013-06-14 11:28:05 AM  
It was far better than the Rotten Tomatoes score suggests. So far this year, I've seen Star Trek, Iron Man, and Man of Steel. Man of Steel is far and away my favorite of the the three.

Spoilers:

As for the author's gripe about Superman killing someone. It was blindingly obvious that Superman had only two choices - the life of Zod or the life of humans. The two had already wrecked havoc upon Metropolis with their fight - do you think Superman was oblivious to the fact? Previous dialogue had set up that Zod was going to essentially make Superman choose between Krypton and Earth, and that there was no compromise for Zod. Zod's entire existence was predicated upon protecting Krypton, and now there was no Krypton. In dialogue, Zod proclaimed that now his entire existence would be to make Earth suffer, and he certainly wasn't talking tough to "scare" Superman. Zod finally gets his chance to force Superman to make a decision with only two options, it's not like Zod was defeated and Superman just did it to ensure everyone's safety. Superman barely had the upper hand at that point, and their stalemate had already destroyed a ton of Metropolis and likely killed hundreds/thousands already. Superman had to make a choice at that very moment. Allow even more innocent people to die and continue fighting, or end the fight right then and there. It was made all the more powerful by Superman's reaction, which I thought was superbly acted.

Also, I could be hallucinating because it was a midnight showing, but didn't Lois Lane actually ask Superman if he would kill Zod? He responded along the lines that he would do what must be done. I could be imagining that part, but if it was actually there, then it only makes the scene even more inevitable.
 
2013-06-14 11:28:44 AM  
Don't care.  I'm seeing it anyways - plus, Waid pretty much admits that he loves a good portion of this movie.  I'm not a superfan so I don't know the details , but I'll be interested to see if everything happens because Superman is on Earth, or if he just happens to be there when Zod shows up.  My opinion on his lack of empathy would ride on that.  But even beyond that, as mentioned before in this thread, if he learns empathy as a result of this movie's events, I'd still be OK with it.  I'm really just skeptical of anyone's ability to make 3 (or more) good movies out of Superman.
 
2013-06-14 11:30:12 AM  

p the boiler: REO-Weedwagon: "By the way, if anyone here is in marketing or advertising...kill yourself. Thank you. Just planting seeds, planting seeds is all I'm doing. No joke here, really. Seriously, kill yourself, you have no rationalisation for what you do, you are Satan's little helpers. Kill yourself, kill yourself, kill yourself now. Now, back to the show. Seriously, I know the marketing people: 'There's gonna be a joke comin' up.' There's no farkin' joke. Suck a tail pipe, hang yourself...borrow a pistol from an NRA buddy, do something...rid the world of your evil f*ckin' presence."

who would you rather have - Bankers and Lawyers? Salespeople? Telemarketers? Politicians? On the scale of bad people we are nowhere near the top.


Marketing facilitates all the evils that those worse people do.
 
2013-06-14 11:34:02 AM  

Nana's Vibrator: I'm really just skeptical of anyone's ability to make 3 (or more) good movies out of Superman.


All my skepticism was blown out the window after I saw it, much in the same way after Batman Begins I had no hope for that franchise.

This....actually makes me think that they've learned their lesson when it comes to characters
 
2013-06-14 11:35:25 AM  

Rwa2play: un4gvn666: Actually, the very first scene with her did a lot to dispel that feeling for me. ("Are we done measuring dicks?")

I'm sorry but, anybody can say that line.  It's the actor's gravitas when saying it that gives it the necessary "oompf".


She did a really good job with it though! Like I said, I almost bought it. And almost is the wrong word here. I did buy it, but someone a little grittier would have been a little better.
 
2013-06-14 11:37:06 AM  

QT_3.14159: She did a really good job with it though! Like I said, I almost bought it. And almost is the wrong word here. I did buy it, but someone a little grittier would have been a little better.


Same way I felt, she was good just not great when stacked against everyone else. To be fair though, she sorta had the cards stacked against given the acting chops around her.
 
2013-06-14 11:38:07 AM  

RexTalionis: Solon Isonomia: From what we're hearing, Supes doesn't have that same growth in MoS.

Then, in that sense, how is that inconsistent with Superman in the comic books? Isn't he often remembered as America's biggest boy scout for 60-70 some odd years?


That's my point - the big Boy Scout of DC comics doesn't kill - thus inconsistency, both in the movie and the Zod plot.

stupid hearing delaying my ability to post and slack off with Rex...
 
2013-06-14 11:38:28 AM  

Dimensio: The reviewer is correct. In the comics, Superman does not kill.


Superman, defender of Earth, does not kill.   Kal-El,  last citizen of Krypton, acting as defacto head of state on the other hand..    This is the subtlety of the character that most people miss, and is hard to portray.   He's got different responsibilities to different cultures.   On Earth, he obeys the local laws (mostly).   I recall a Spiderman/Superman team up at one point where Supes bursts into the Latverian embassy to confront Dr. Doom, who points out 'Here I am the lawful monarch--please lock yourself in a cell downstairs since you are sworn to obey the laws of Earth...." (Supes flies off, unwilling to overthrow the tyrant.    Good stuff.

I would love to see a movie where Superman is barely on Earth, and spends the film fighting space wars, mediating treaties, and doing cool spacey stuff.   Maybe even boffing the inevitable hot alien chicks.
 
2013-06-14 11:43:05 AM  

Rhypskallion: I would love to see a movie where Superman is barely on Earth, and spends the film fighting space wars, mediating treaties, and doing cool spacey stuff. Maybe even boffing the inevitable hot alien chicks.


SO you want Superman to be James T. Kirk... Got it!

/I kid of course.
 
2013-06-14 11:45:21 AM  

Hebalo: Rwa2play: Marvel's movies are made by people who loved the comic/character(s). DC's movies are made by people who just read the comic. There's the difference.

Your comments, in this thread, seem like you're inclined to shiat on the movie, which is ludicrous, as it's brilliant.

The fact that you're doing the "Marvel vs DC" thing is just stupid. The people who made this movie clearly love the character.


I have just as much a right to shiat on a DC movie as you would on a Marvel one when something looks awry. Solon Insomnia said it best for me: "I get "re-imagining" and "updating," but altering a fundamental element of a character is a valid target of criticism."

So yeah, I don't have a problem when a director re-imagines and/or updates the main character so long as they keep the ethos of the character and their motivations.  Especially when it's worked for Nolan's Batman and Iron Man as well as the "Star Trek" reboot.

When you alter that ethos just because you want to fit it into your narrative, you've thrown the whole story into the crapper.

That's why a lot of Hollywood's remakes/reboots aren't worth the film they're printed on.  That's why a lot of comic book fans dump on certain writers (I'm looking at you Geoff Johns~!) when they do something that fundamentally alters the character.  That's also why "Daredevil" still can sell with Marvel and "Batman" does the same with DC; because the people involved do not fark with the character's ethos.  Otherwise, you might as well start call that character by another name.
 
2013-06-14 11:46:46 AM  

Solon Isonomia: That's my point - the big Boy Scout of DC comics doesn't kill - thus inconsistency, both in the movie and the Zod plot.


By that logic, Tim Drake was Robin for over thirty years, so any film with Dick Grayson as Robin is immediately inaccurate.

Man of Steel Superman isn't ruled by your concept of what he used to be. His actions in the film are logical, justifiable, and completely in keeping with the themes and struggles of the film. He certainly doesn't enjoy it.
 
2013-06-14 11:48:09 AM  
Why the fark did I read this? Goddamn it so much. I haven't looked forward to a movie like this since I was 7 and Star Wars was coming out. I've been farking moved to tears when Jonathan Kent says to Clark, "You ARE my son."

Please, it can't suck. It just can't.
 
2013-06-14 11:48:59 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: QT_3.14159: She did a really good job with it though! Like I said, I almost bought it. And almost is the wrong word here. I did buy it, but someone a little grittier would have been a little better.

Same way I felt, she was good just not great when stacked against everyone else. To be fair though, she sorta had the cards stacked against given the acting chops around her.


Wait, you're trying to say that the four-time Oscar nominee in this movie is the WEAK actor?

That's some heavy trolling.
 
2013-06-14 11:50:00 AM  

Rwa2play: Hebalo: Rwa2play: Marvel's movies are made by people who loved the comic/character(s). DC's movies are made by people who just read the comic. There's the difference.

Your comments, in this thread, seem like you're inclined to shiat on the movie, which is ludicrous, as it's brilliant.

The fact that you're doing the "Marvel vs DC" thing is just stupid. The people who made this movie clearly love the character.

I have just as much a right to shiat on a DC movie as you would on a Marvel one when something looks awry. Solon Insomnia said it best for me: "I get "re-imagining" and "updating," but altering a fundamental element of a character is a valid target of criticism."

So yeah, I don't have a problem when a director re-imagines and/or updates the main character so long as they keep the ethos of the character and their motivations.  Especially when it's worked for Nolan's Batman and Iron Man as well as the "Star Trek" reboot.

When you alter that ethos just because you want to fit it into your narrative, you've thrown the whole story into the crapper.

That's why a lot of Hollywood's remakes/reboots aren't worth the film they're printed on.  That's why a lot of comic book fans dump on certain writers (I'm looking at you Geoff Johns~!) when they do something that fundamentally alters the character.  That's also why "Daredevil" still can sell with Marvel and "Batman" does the same with DC; because the people involved do not fark with the character's ethos.  Otherwise, you might as well start call that character by another name.


What's wrong with an evolution of the character. People (especially those who haven't seen the damn thing) get on this high horse about how he's "not what I believe the character is about", or not what he's traditionally been.

The villains aren't acting in the fashion those historical villains acted. The stakes are different, the era is different. Change isn't a crime. People like you bray and biatch about how bad the previous Superman films were. This one removes a lot of the handcuffs the other film had, gives us a new take on the character.
 
2013-06-14 11:50:21 AM  

JerkStore: Why the fark did I read this? Goddamn it so much. I haven't looked forward to a movie like this since I was 7 and Star Wars was coming out. I've been farking moved to tears when Jonathan Kent says to Clark, "You ARE my son."

Please, it can't suck. It just can't.


It most certainly does not suck.
 
2013-06-14 11:51:12 AM  

JerkStore: Why the fark did I read this? Goddamn it so much. I haven't looked forward to a movie like this since I was 7 and Star Wars was coming out. I've been farking moved to tears when Jonathan Kent says to Clark, "You ARE my son."

Please, it can't suck. It just can't.


It doesn't. You'll love it.

"What if a child dreamed of becoming something other than what society had intended? What if a child aspired to something greater? Every person can be a force for good, free to forge his own destiny."
 
2013-06-14 11:51:30 AM  

Truman Burbank: Wait, you're trying to say that the four-time Oscar nominee in this movie is the WEAK actor?


No, I'm saying that the four time Oscar nom looked weaker than those around her which doesn't in way denigrate her acting ability, she was good just not as shiny as the rest of the stars around her.
 
2013-06-14 11:51:34 AM  

Hebalo: Solon Isonomia: That's my point - the big Boy Scout of DC comics doesn't kill - thus inconsistency, both in the movie and the Zod plot.

By that logic, Tim Drake was Robin for over thirty years, so any film with Dick Grayson as Robin is immediately inaccurate.

Man of Steel Superman isn't ruled by your concept of what he used to be. His actions in the film are logical, justifiable, and completely in keeping with the themes and struggles of the film. He certainly doesn't enjoy it.


I know that when a certain part happened. My response was "Holy Sh-t!!!" And the afterwards consequences really made me feel for him. It really did nail what they were talking about what the film would be. Supes struggling to be Superman in several different ways. I see it as him fighting his Alien DNA, his moral code, and his feelings towards humanity.
 
2013-06-14 11:51:40 AM  

Rhypskallion: Maybe even boffing the inevitable hot alien chicks.


Or just boffing everyone.
 
2013-06-14 11:57:43 AM  
Seriously, back in Metropolis, entire skyscrapers are toppling in slo-mo and the city is a smoking, gray ruin for miles in every direction, it's Hiroshima, and Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich are somewhere muttering "Too far, man, too far"...

ouch
 
2013-06-14 11:58:29 AM  

JerkStore: Why the fark did I read this? Goddamn it so much. I haven't looked forward to a movie like this since I was 7 and Star Wars was coming out. I've been farking moved to tears when Jonathan Kent says to Clark, "You ARE my son."

Please, it can't suck. It just can't.


I feel you...JerkStore.   Superman Returns broke my inner-little-boy's heart.
 
2013-06-14 11:58:35 AM  

QT_3.14159: As far as Amy Adams goes, she really did better than I expected her to. In the beginning especially, she almost convinced me, but she(as a person) is just a little to soft for the Lois character.


Ever see The Master?
 
2013-06-14 12:14:53 PM  
Because he's the hero Metropolis deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we'll give him bad reviews. Because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector. A dark boy-scout.
 
2013-06-14 12:25:32 PM  

Dimensio: The reviewer is correct. In the comics, Superman does not kill.


RexTalionis: [static.comicvine.com image 400x379]

Remember when Superman literally executed Zod and his lieutenants in the comics?


Do keep in mind that this was an alternate-earth storyline where Zod and his cronies had killed off literally the  entire human race. IIRC, there were a few hundred survivors left at the start of the story, and they were all dead except Supergirl (who was badly hurt) by the end of the story. Superman was literally the last man standing, the only representative of law and order left (as he mentions). And he had no phantom zone tech in that universe. This was literally the only thing he could do, it was as thoroughly justified an execution as it's possible to imagine, and it was still the hardest thing he'd ever done. It was also done with deliberation, after considering the consequences and ramifications. It was not a hot blood instinctive response in the middle of a fight.

The fact that Superman can bend enough to face a horrible but necessary reality, but that only such a horrible but necessary reality is enough to make him bend, makes the character and his moral code stronger, not weaker. He's not holding to his code in unthinking ideological absolutist fashion. He's holding to it having considered the ramifications and limits of his code. He knows what the edge case is where he is willing to step beyond it. Considering that the edge case is literally the genocide of billions by an overwhelmingly powerful foe with no other recourse at all, I think it is consistent, and I think that Waid's criticism holds true.
 
2013-06-14 12:32:57 PM  

Hebalo: Rwa2play: Hebalo: Rwa2play: Marvel's movies are made by people who loved the comic/character(s). DC's movies are made by people who just read the comic. There's the difference.

Your comments, in this thread, seem like you're inclined to shiat on the movie, which is ludicrous, as it's brilliant.

The fact that you're doing the "Marvel vs DC" thing is just stupid. The people who made this movie clearly love the character.

I have just as much a right to shiat on a DC movie as you would on a Marvel one when something looks awry. Solon Insomnia said it best for me: "I get "re-imagining" and "updating," but altering a fundamental element of a character is a valid target of criticism."

So yeah, I don't have a problem when a director re-imagines and/or updates the main character so long as they keep the ethos of the character and their motivations.  Especially when it's worked for Nolan's Batman and Iron Man as well as the "Star Trek" reboot.

When you alter that ethos just because you want to fit it into your narrative, you've thrown the whole story into the crapper.

That's why a lot of Hollywood's remakes/reboots aren't worth the film they're printed on.  That's why a lot of comic book fans dump on certain writers (I'm looking at you Geoff Johns~!) when they do something that fundamentally alters the character.  That's also why "Daredevil" still can sell with Marvel and "Batman" does the same with DC; because the people involved do not fark with the character's ethos.  Otherwise, you might as well start call that character by another name.

What's wrong with an evolution of the character.


Nothing at all...if you're not farking with who the character's always been and what they've stood for.  Again, for example: Nolan's Batman.

People (especially those who haven't seen the damn thing) get on this high horse about how he's "not what I believe the character is about", or not what he's traditionally been.

And yet, we get Miller and Quitely's "All Star Superman", which is one of the best Superman stories ever told; or an Iron Man where you weren't seeing Robert Downey Jr. playing a character, you're seeing Tony Stark.

Again, I don't have a problem when you want to update/re-imagine a character, but don't lose what makes that character compelling.  Otherwise, you might as well have called this a remake of "Hancock".

The villains aren't acting in the fashion those historical villains acted. The stakes are different, the era is different. Change isn't a crime. People like you bray and biatch about how bad the previous Superman films were.

That's because...they were that bad or, at the least, mediocre?

This one removes a lot of the handcuffs the other film had, gives us a new take on the character.

That's why I want to see this movie.  Are we talking the type of take that Geoff Johns hit on perfectly when he wrote the "Green Lantern: Rebirth" story or are we talking type of take "Elektra" bombed on?
 
2013-06-14 12:35:18 PM  

KiltedBastich: Dimensio: The reviewer is correct. In the comics, Superman does not kill.

RexTalionis: [static.comicvine.com image 400x379]

Remember when Superman literally executed Zod and his lieutenants in the comics?

Do keep in mind that this was an alternate-earth storyline where Zod and his cronies had killed off literally the  entire human race. IIRC, there were a few hundred survivors left at the start of the story, and they were all dead except Supergirl (who was badly hurt) by the end of the story. Superman was literally the last man standing, the only representative of law and order left (as he mentions). And he had no phantom zone tech in that universe. This was literally the only thing he could do, it was as thoroughly justified an execution as it's possible to imagine, and it was still the hardest thing he'd ever done. It was also done with deliberation, after considering the consequences and ramifications. It was not a hot blood instinctive response in the middle of a fight.

The fact that Superman can bend enough to face a horrible but necessary reality, but that only such a horrible but necessary reality is enough to make him bend, makes the character and his moral code stronger, not weaker. He's not holding to his code in unthinking ideological absolutist fashion. He's holding to it having considered the ramifications and limits of his code. He knows what the edge case is where he is willing to step beyond it. Considering that the edge case is literally the genocide of billions by an overwhelmingly powerful foe with no other recourse at all, I think it is consistent, and I think that Waid's criticism holds true.


In "Man of Steel", what other recourse does Superman have? Given only the elements presented in the movie, how is he to contain Zod & Company?
 
2013-06-14 12:39:04 PM  

give me doughnuts: In "Man of Steel", what other recourse does Superman have? Given only the elements presented in the movie, how is he to contain Zod & Company?


You mean as in:  Jor-El tells his son about a device that sends people to the Negative Zone; only for Zod to somehow acquire it because, after he beats Supes to within an inch of his life, he'll send him there.  Except he somehow farks up, sends himself and his crew there and Supes destroys the device?

*shrugs*
 
2013-06-14 12:40:41 PM  

yves0010: Rhypskallion: I would love to see a movie where Superman is barely on Earth, and spends the film fighting space wars, mediating treaties, and doing cool spacey stuff. Maybe even boffing the inevitable hot alien chicks.

SO you want Superman to be James T. Kirk... Got it!

/I kid of course.


No he just doesn't want Supes stuck in a world of cardboard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etPYl1OQoqk
 
2013-06-14 12:42:13 PM  

KiltedBastich: The fact that Superman can bend enough to face a horrible but necessary reality, but that only such a horrible but necessary reality is enough to make him bend, makes the character and his moral code stronger, not weaker.


Which is why the Superman in Man of Steel is excellent, because he perfectly exemplifies this idea (particularly in the climax of the film).
 
2013-06-14 12:43:40 PM  
OK, so let's go with the premise that they were heavy-handed on showing a lot of destruction and damage and death from all this super-fighting. I haven't seen it yet.

Keep in mind they do this because it's a movie, and there's not a lot of time for subtlety in a Superman movie. (even if that's an invalid premise, pretend it works for the moment)

All that is a great framework for setting up Lex Luthor as a guy that hates and wants to end Superman because he's  bad for Earth and humanity, and not as another guy with real estate problems. Set him up in that premise, then let him fall into villainy as he goes too far, and grant Supes the moral high ground.
 
2013-06-14 12:43:54 PM  

KiltedBastich: Dimensio: The reviewer is correct. In the comics, Superman does not kill.

RexTalionis: [static.comicvine.com image 400x379]

Remember when Superman literally executed Zod and his lieutenants in the comics?

Do keep in mind that this was an alternate-earth storyline where Zod and his cronies had killed off literally the  entire human race. IIRC, there were a few hundred survivors left at the start of the story, and they were all dead except Supergirl (who was badly hurt) by the end of the story. Superman was literally the last man standing, the only representative of law and order left (as he mentions). And he had no phantom zone tech in that universe. This was literally the only thing he could do, it was as thoroughly justified an execution as it's possible to imagine, and it was still the hardest thing he'd ever done. It was also done with deliberation, after considering the consequences and ramifications. It was not a hot blood instinctive response in the middle of a fight.

The fact that Superman can bend enough to face a horrible but necessary reality, but that only such a horrible but necessary reality is enough to make him bend, makes the character and his moral code stronger, not weaker. He's not holding to his code in unthinking ideological absolutist fashion. He's holding to it having considered the ramifications and limits of his code. He knows what the edge case is where he is willing to step beyond it. Considering that the edge case is literally the genocide of billions by an overwhelmingly powerful foe with no other recourse at all, I think it is consistent, and I think that Waid's criticism holds true.


Which is why I stated this would've been a better story if it were about Wonder Woman.
 
2013-06-14 12:44:25 PM  

Rwa2play: Negative Zone


Phantom Zone, goddamnit (sorry, nerdrage)

Rwa2play: only for Zod to somehow acquire it because, after he beats Supes to within an inch of his life, he'll send him there.  Except he somehow farks up, sends himself and his crew there and Supes destroys the device?


So instead of having Superman beat Zod, you would rather Zod loses by accident?

That is just terrible. Just. Terrible.
 
2013-06-14 12:47:20 PM  

give me doughnuts: In "Man of Steel", what other recourse does Superman have? Given only the elements presented in the movie, how is he to contain Zod & Company?


In that context? Beat Zod into unconsciousness, imprison him in total darkness (no sunlight to recharge Zod) and keep beating on him for a while to drain his powers, then let the US government and legal system make the call about execution vs. imprisonment. Granted that is a much less cinematically appealing and dramatic resolution, but it's far more in keeping with how Superman would do things according to existing canon. Take note that in "All-Star Superman", Luthor was sentenced to execution, and Superman was fine with that because it was the verdict of the authorized legal system.
 
2013-06-14 12:48:08 PM  

Rwa2play: give me doughnuts: In "Man of Steel", what other recourse does Superman have? Given only the elements presented in the movie, how is he to contain Zod & Company?

You mean as in:  Jor-El tells his son about a device that sends people to the Negative Zone; only for Zod to somehow acquire it because, after he beats Supes to within an inch of his life, he'll send him there.  Except he somehow farks up, sends himself and his crew there and Supes destroys the device?

*shrugs*


So, a deus ex machine combined with idiot villain. That's your great idea for protecting Superman from having reality ensue, the villain doesn't get defeated, he just pushes the wrong switch.

It's a genius idea, we could have had the whole movie without Superman! Little Kal's capsule never makes it to Earth, we skip all that character development, just have Zod and crew turn up, broadcast their message, and then flip the wrong switch and go "poof!"

I'll take Man of Steel. It keeps true to Superman's origin and ideals without making it blatant that the writers are on his side.
 
2013-06-14 12:49:42 PM  

KiltedBastich: Granted that is a much less cinematically appealing and dramatic resolution


Same thing here. You would rather the movie suffer to stick to a comic book canon that is not only constantly changing, but at times isn't even internally consistent. That is a recipe for a terrible movie, and I'm glad comic book movies mostly don't get made that way. The Batman films were great in many respects because they were willing to change major things in comic book canon (Joker's disfigurement, for example). The ending you suggest wouldn't even make sense in the film, since Zod and Superman were evenly matched, and it wasn't clear Superman could even beat Zod the way things were going.
 
2013-06-14 12:50:45 PM  

un4gvn666: Which is why the Superman in Man of Steel is excellent, because he perfectly exemplifies this idea (particularly in the climax of the film).


I disagree. Killing someone in the middle of a fight like that is out of character. What I described in my last post is much more in keeping.

Keep in mind that in another version of this character, Joker killed Lois Lane, another super (Magog) summarily killed Joker for this, then got acquitted at trial, and it was the acquittal that made Superman turn his back on humanity for decades.

This is a character that takes killing seriously.
 
2013-06-14 12:51:20 PM  

ShadowKamui: yves0010: Rhypskallion: I would love to see a movie where Superman is barely on Earth, and spends the film fighting space wars, mediating treaties, and doing cool spacey stuff. Maybe even boffing the inevitable hot alien chicks.

SO you want Superman to be James T. Kirk... Got it!

/I kid of course.

No he just doesn't want Supes stuck in a world of cardboard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etPYl1OQoqk



A Challenger Appears!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLGRkYYmJgQ
 
2013-06-14 12:53:49 PM  

KiltedBastich: In that context? Beat Zod into unconsciousness


Most of what was left of Metropolis was lost trying to "beat Zod into unconsciousness." It hadn't worked yet. But good job condemning that family to die so Zod could live.

Oh, and after Zod is somehow brought through a trial and conviction, with the inevitable death sentence applied, who has to kill him in cold blood then? After the destruction of Metropolis, nobody on Earth will want Zod held in some prison trying to escape and eventually succeeding.
 
2013-06-14 12:56:04 PM  

ShadowKamui: yves0010: Rhypskallion: I would love to see a movie where Superman is barely on Earth, and spends the film fighting space wars, mediating treaties, and doing cool spacey stuff. Maybe even boffing the inevitable hot alien chicks.

SO you want Superman to be James T. Kirk... Got it!

/I kid of course.

No he just doesn't want Supes stuck in a world of cardboard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etPYl1OQoqk


I know about that. And that is one reason I love this movie. He literally gets to be Superman and use his full power.
 
2013-06-14 12:58:16 PM  

un4gvn666: Same thing here. You would rather the movie suffer to stick to a comic book canon that is not only constantly changing, but at times isn't even internally consistent. That is a recipe for a terrible movie, and I'm glad comic book movies mostly don't get made that way. The Batman films were great in many respects because they were willing to change major things in comic book canon (Joker's disfigurement, for example). The ending you suggest wouldn't even make sense in the film, since Zod and Superman were evenly matched, and it wasn't clear Superman could even beat Zod the way things were going.


And yet he can manage to snap his neck. This is what's called a "plot device". They could just as easily have portrayed an enraged Superman with more experience with his abilities and longer exposure to a yellow sun suddenly letting go of the learned restraint he needs to exist safely in a tissue paper world and beating the everloving snot out of Zod, then turning to the American military, telling them how to imprison Zod, and telling them "If you decide you need to execute him, I will help you do it, but this is your world, that decision should be made by humans."

Or some other such resolution that would have preserved one of the fundamental points that make this character what he is. There are plenty of musclebound strongmen characters out there. What makes Superman interesting is the restraints he places on himself, as others have pointed out. Take that away, and then you have to start asking why Superman hasn't left a trail of bodies. Many of his opponents are genocidal monsters. Look at Darkside or Mongol, just for a couple of examples. Take away his code against killing, and you have to ask why he hasn't simply executed half of his foes.
 
2013-06-14 01:01:10 PM  

KiltedBastich: un4gvn666: Same thing here. You would rather the movie suffer to stick to a comic book canon that is not only constantly changing, but at times isn't even internally consistent. That is a recipe for a terrible movie, and I'm glad comic book movies mostly don't get made that way. The Batman films were great in many respects because they were willing to change major things in comic book canon (Joker's disfigurement, for example). The ending you suggest wouldn't even make sense in the film, since Zod and Superman were evenly matched, and it wasn't clear Superman could even beat Zod the way things were going.

And yet he can manage to snap his neck. This is what's called a "plot device". They could just as easily have portrayed an enraged Superman with more experience with his abilities and longer exposure to a yellow sun suddenly letting go of the learned restraint he needs to exist safely in a tissue paper world and beating the everloving snot out of Zod, then turning to the American military, telling them how to imprison Zod, and telling them "If you decide you need to execute him, I will help you do it, but this is your world, that decision should be made by humans."

Or some other such resolution that would have preserved one of the fundamental points that make this character what he is. There are plenty of musclebound strongmen characters out there. What makes Superman interesting is the restraints he places on himself, as others have pointed out. Take that away, and then you have to start asking why Superman hasn't left a trail of bodies. Many of his opponents are genocidal monsters. Look at Darkside or Mongol, just for a couple of examples. Take away his code against killing, and you have to ask why he hasn't simply executed half of his foes.



Superman vs The Elite Ending
Superman takes killing and his morals seriously.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPpZbEx_mh8
 
2013-06-14 01:03:30 PM  
How about Supes takes him into a Red Sun generating Chamber ala Superman: Armageddon from the DC Animated universe. Superman dies, Lex clones him and to keep him in line, he kicks his ass repeatedly in a room generating Red Sun energy, effecting stripping Superman of his powers.... oh, that's the same old trick they've used in every other Superman movie.

There in lies my issue with any and all Superman movies. He is a walking, talking god amongst men. He's the strongest man in the galaxy (according to DC he can benchpress the moon!!), he's the fastest man in the galaxy (he is faster than the Flash, believe it or not), he's the smartest man in the galaxy (his super intellect is like his laser eyes or freezing breath, he simply has to activate it)... simply told, he is more powerful than everyone else in the Justice League, and could take them all on in a fight and whoop them. So, how exactly do you write a movie where he can thwart anything effortlessly. In fact it has to be effortless for if he puts any effort into it, he'll utterly atomize whatever he's going up against.

Superman's power level makes it impossible to create a proper foe AND keep human casualties down. In order to keep the audience interested in the film, it needs to be in recognizable locales, and anytime Superman is letting lose, it's going to destroy everything around him. Hell, the shockwave from a full force punch would be akin to a nuclear warhead erupting because of it's speed and force.
 
Displayed 50 of 373 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report