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  
•       •       •

9937 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
 
2013-06-14 08:43:09 AM
Coincidentally, Mark Waid happened to write one of the best Superman stories ever.

He just had to call it "Irredeemable".
 
2013-06-14 08:58:21 AM
Still hanging out at 58% on rottentomatoes.com
 
2013-06-14 09:01:39 AM
58%?  Wow, that's not good.
 
2013-06-14 09:04:10 AM
Just reading that review made me sad.
 
2013-06-14 09:08:11 AM

PsyLord: 58%?  Wow, that's not good.


Could be. Rt is far from perfect
 
2013-06-14 09:10:10 AM
I can buy Waid's point of view here. But MAYBE since this is a novice Superman, we're seeing the reasons for the "Superman will not kill" creed, and MAYBE we're seeing the failed experience that drives Superman to be so much more protective of civilians in the future.
 
2013-06-14 09:16:16 AM
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.
 
2013-06-14 09:16:35 AM

thecpt: PsyLord: 58%?  Wow, that's not good.

Could be. Rt is far from perfect


No, RT is God.

Say something bad about a movie, people automatically say "But Rotten Tomatoes says it's 99.9999999% fresh! IT'S TEH BESTEST MOVIE EVAR!".

So the new Superman movie must suck.

/I already thought it would suck, but that's because DC generally sucks at movies that don't have Batman in them.
 
2013-06-14 09:17:23 AM
I see Warner Brothers is launching a new marketing campaign today saying the new Superman movie is really about Christianity, and pretty much if you love Jesus, then you should definitely bring out the whole family to see the movie. Actually, organize the church youth group to come see it as well, you know, for Jesus. They currently have the "story" plastered all over Fox News and other various media outlets that attract and instruct the rubes.

"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."
img397.imageshack.us
 
2013-06-14 09:18:32 AM

browser_snake: I can buy Waid's point of view here. But MAYBE since this is a novice Superman, we're seeing the reasons for the "Superman will not kill" creed, and MAYBE we're seeing the failed experience that drives Superman to be so much more protective of civilians in the future.


I think that's what I decided, too. Why I did ultimately enjoy it. And I'd happily go see it again today and ponder it all some more.
 
2013-06-14 09:21:49 AM

REO-Weedwagon: I see Warner Brothers is launching a new marketing campaign today saying the new Superman movie is really about Christianity, and pretty much if you love Jesus, then you should definitely bring out the whole family to see the movie. Actually, organize the church youth group to come see it as well, you know, for Jesus. They currently have the "story" plastered all over Fox News and other various media outlets that attract and instruct the rubes.

"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."


I mentioned all the Christ references in the movie and he basically responded like you just did... Lol. Sorry, they're there. Not saying its the reason to go see it, but damn, they were fairly overt.

Hubby didn't see them, though...
 
2013-06-14 09:23:21 AM
World War Z is rated at 80% and Superman: MOS at 58%.  Did I wake up in Bizarro Earth again?
 
2013-06-14 09:25:03 AM
I genuinely enjoyed it last night. But then, I've had enough with complex character development and emotional dynamics in Superman stories. I just wanted to see him have an epic battle with some superpowered aliens, and in that respect, the movie absolutely owned.

My only regret was the only midnight showing they had was in 3D. I might have to watch it again without that.
 
2013-06-14 09:25:33 AM

PsyLord: World War Z is rated at 80% and Superman: MOS at 58%.  Did I wake up in Bizarro Earth again?


I wonder... is anal sex "normal" sex on Bizarro World?
 
2013-06-14 09:27:21 AM
I'm still deciding on whether or not to go see it this morning.  I just looked at his non-spoiler part.
 
2013-06-14 09:27:37 AM
I saw this last night at a Prescreening and I loved it. It is a Superman movie. He actually gets to show off how powerful he really is.  How badass he can be. Yes, it is a "Batman Begins" of the Superman films but it is very much worth it.

The only issue, more of a pet peeve, is that there is no Jimmy Olson but a Jamie Olson. I do hate it when Hollywood has to make a change like that. Though in this film, it isn't that big a deal so I did not mind much.
 
2013-06-14 09:29:09 AM
All the people pointing to a Rotten Tomatoes score to determine how good the movie is just reminds me of why I don't give a shiat about Rotten Tomatoes: it's just a giant, navel-gazing feedback loop of bullshiat from people who have a vested interest in making you believe said bullshiat.

If you're curious about whether the movie is good, just go see the damn thing.
 
2013-06-14 09:29:21 AM
The reviewer is correct. In the comics, Superman does not kill.
 
2013-06-14 09:29:46 AM
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."

Hey.... :-(
 
2013-06-14 09:30:31 AM
Mark Waid does not know a lot about Superman. Mark Waid knows a lot about what he thinks Superman should be (insert stop liking things I don't like image here). And his navel-gazing opinioneering aside, the man doesn't know the first thing about writing a coherent movie review.
 
2013-06-14 09:34:09 AM

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.
 
2013-06-14 09:34:54 AM

Pilikia: Mark Waid does not know a lot about Superman. Mark Waid knows a lot about what he thinks Superman should be (insert stop liking things I don't like image here). And his navel-gazing opinioneering aside, the man doesn't know the first thing about writing a coherent movie review.


Yeah, the guy who wrote Kingdom Come and knows comic book history like the back of his hand knows NOTHING about Superman.
 
2013-06-14 09:36:44 AM
It was great. I'm confused by the negative reactions. It's everything you want out of a Superman film.
 
2013-06-14 09:38:44 AM

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


It's definitely just my opinion, but bankers and lawyers do (presumably) provide a service that benefits people: they help you take care of your money or defend yourself in court. Marketing has no real service it provides to humanity. And politicians are only as bad as the morons that elect them, they ideally represent your interests in government. Salespeople and telemarketers are still essentially marketers/advertisers, so they're not really different.
 
2013-06-14 09:40:15 AM

Hebalo: It was great. I'm confused by the negative reactions. It's everything you want out of a Superman film.


The more I read the reviews, the more I think everyone wanted Superman Returns to be this film, and they wanted this film to be Superman Returns, and they're bothered enough to let you know about it by tanking the reviews for this film. And I think that's total bullshiat. I mean, complaining that it's too "sci-fi" and not enough "superhero" doesn't even make any farking sense.
 
2013-06-14 09:40:54 AM

FirstNationalBastard: Pilikia: Mark Waid does not know a lot about Superman. Mark Waid knows a lot about what he thinks Superman should be (insert stop liking things I don't like image here). And his navel-gazing opinioneering aside, the man doesn't know the first thing about writing a coherent movie review.

Yeah, the guy who wrote Kingdom Come and knows comic book history like the back of his hand knows NOTHING about Superman.


Waid's biggest biatch is about a specific action that he feels isn't part of Superman's moral character. While I understand his point of view, I also see that the character hasn't worked in a long time, and this movie changes that. I'll give Nolan and Goyer the benefit of the doubt.
 
2013-06-14 09:42:17 AM
I don't get the hate, it was the quintessential superman movie, not comic...movie. As in actually coherent storyline with developed characters, emotional bends in the plot line, and sustainable action to keep you hooked.

Basically we got 2/3 of development and origin that wasn't boring and then we got the last third with superman being superman, his choice at the end was befitting because he knew he had to do it and really did not want to.

un4gvn666: My only regret was the only midnight showing they had was in 3D. I might have to watch it again without that.


Do this. The movie wasn't filmed in 3D so it was added post production which can fark with how you view some of the actions sequences and fast moving scenes
 
2013-06-14 09:43:59 AM

un4gvn666: I genuinely enjoyed it last night. But then, I've had enough with complex character development and emotional dynamics in Superman stories. I just wanted to see him have an epic battle with some superpowered aliens, and in that respect, the movie absolutely owned.

My only regret was the only midnight showing they had was in 3D. I might have to watch it again without that.


I hope that's where the bad reviews are coming from. Not everything has to be dark and gritty! If there's no real Superman story, then there's nothing for dark and gritty to contrast itself with!
 
2013-06-14 09:47:21 AM

Hebalo: FirstNationalBastard: Pilikia: Mark Waid does not know a lot about Superman. Mark Waid knows a lot about what he thinks Superman should be (insert stop liking things I don't like image here). And his navel-gazing opinioneering aside, the man doesn't know the first thing about writing a coherent movie review.

Yeah, the guy who wrote Kingdom Come and knows comic book history like the back of his hand knows NOTHING about Superman.

Waid's biggest biatch is about a specific action that he feels isn't part of Superman's moral character. While I understand his point of view, I also see that the character hasn't worked in a long time, and this movie changes that. I'll give Nolan and Goyer the benefit of the doubt.


yeah the interesting thing about a lot of the "oh, that's not how superman would be!" responses is that unlike other recent reboots, we actually got to see what would happen if you went and just did a modern updated sequel to the donner films... and it kind of sucked. complaining that it went in a different direction from those films seems silly, in light of seeing what happens when you try and copy them.
 
2013-06-14 09:47:59 AM

un4gvn666: All the people pointing to a Rotten Tomatoes score to determine how good the movie is just reminds me of why I don't give a shiat about Rotten Tomatoes: it's just a giant, navel-gazing feedback loop of bullshiat from people who have a vested interest in making you believe said bullshiat.

If you're curious about whether the movie is good, just go see the damn thing.


So you see every movie made, since you can't rely on anyone else's opinion? Hollywood loves people like that, it means they don't have to make any effort in making a movie good, since people will buy a ticket anyway.
 
2013-06-14 09:49:05 AM

jonny_q: I hope that's where the bad reviews are coming from. Not everything has to be dark and gritty! If there's no real Superman story, then there's nothing for dark and gritty to contrast itself with!



It's much closer in tone to Batman Begins than The Avengers. But there's a shiatton of action in there. Some people on Twitter were biatching that there's too much action. I'd say the film felt about 10 mins too long, but it's a solid 8.5 or 9 out of 10.
 
2013-06-14 09:54:33 AM

Tyrone Slothrop: un4gvn666: All the people pointing to a Rotten Tomatoes score to determine how good the movie is just reminds me of why I don't give a shiat about Rotten Tomatoes: it's just a giant, navel-gazing feedback loop of bullshiat from people who have a vested interest in making you believe said bullshiat.

If you're curious about whether the movie is good, just go see the damn thing.

So you see every movie made, since you can't rely on anyone else's opinion? Hollywood loves people like that, it means they don't have to make any effort in making a movie good, since people will buy a ticket anyway.


No, I can't afford it. I only go to the theaters when I'm sufficiently interested in a movie. I happen to be a fan of DC Comics, so I was at the midnight screening for MoS. But relying on someone's shiatty opinion that I've never even met to determine if I'll see a movie just isn't gonna happen. To hear some of the reasons for why they rated MoS poorly from some of the reviews I've seen is just infuriating. People are just looking for something to hate about this movie.
 
2013-06-14 09:55:07 AM

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.


Maybe it's because it IS novice Superman. He doesn't know how to fight AND keep from hurting other people. It's all he can do to survive.

Also comic book Superman only ever killed once when he felt he had no choice fighting against 3 other Kryptonians, and only then because they were his equals and second against Doomsday.
 
2013-06-14 09:57:47 AM

Hebalo: It was great. I'm confused by the negative reactions. It's everything you want out of a Superman film.


It's not what I want out of a Superman film.  The reviews I have read and seen confirm what I thought from the trailers.  The tone reminds me of Batman Begins and the action reminds me of Transformers.  The parts with Ma and Pa Kent actually looked pretty good.  But I thought the whole Deadliest Catch: Superman bit looked pretty silly.
 
2013-06-14 09:59:15 AM

un4gvn666: Tyrone Slothrop: un4gvn666: All the people pointing to a Rotten Tomatoes score to determine how good the movie is just reminds me of why I don't give a shiat about Rotten Tomatoes: it's just a giant, navel-gazing feedback loop of bullshiat from people who have a vested interest in making you believe said bullshiat.

If you're curious about whether the movie is good, just go see the damn thing.

So you see every movie made, since you can't rely on anyone else's opinion? Hollywood loves people like that, it means they don't have to make any effort in making a movie good, since people will buy a ticket anyway.

No, I can't afford it. I only go to the theaters when I'm sufficiently interested in a movie. I happen to be a fan of DC Comics, so I was at the midnight screening for MoS. But relying on someone's shiatty opinion that I've never even met to determine if I'll see a movie just isn't gonna happen. To hear some of the reasons for why they rated MoS poorly from some of the reviews I've seen is just infuriating. People are just looking for something to hate about this movie.


So how can something get your interest? I've watched so many movies not in my demographic comfort zone due to rt scores and I'm happy for doing it. After all it's an aggregator that shouldn't be trusted the morning after the movie premiered
 
2013-06-14 10:00:22 AM

Electric_Banana: Hebalo: It was great. I'm confused by the negative reactions. It's everything you want out of a Superman film.

It's not what I want out of a Superman film.  The reviews I have read and seen confirm what I thought from the trailers.  The tone reminds me of Batman Begins and the action reminds me of Transformers.  The parts with Ma and Pa Kent actually looked pretty good.  But I thought the whole Deadliest Catch: Superman bit looked pretty silly.


So you haven't seen it, but you KNOW it's not what you want? You have skills. The part you think is silly is all of 8 minutes long, and useful for establishing where the character is when we meet him. But hey, what do I know, I've only actually seen it, you're better off slagging it blind.
 
2013-06-14 10:00:44 AM
I liked his review and it's one of few negative ones who make sense. Seriously, RT is full of idiotic reviews. Especially Rex Reeds...

They wanted Superman Returns II.

We got Holy shiatballs: The Origin.

And while I respect Waid, I agree with another FARKer that he's too navelgazing about what Superman is. Plus it's not as if Superman hadn't done in the Donner movies what he did here. Except he did it in a more sadistic way and with ZERO emotional development and feeback:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUORL-bvwA0 (Don't watch the video if you don't want spoilers)
 
2013-06-14 10:01:28 AM

bulok: 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.

Maybe it's because it IS novice Superman. He doesn't know how to fight AND keep from hurting other people. It's all he can do to survive.

Also comic book Superman only ever killed once when he felt he had no choice fighting against 3 other Kryptonians, and only then because they were his equals and second against Doomsday.


A fundamental difference between that story and Man of Steel is that the comic incarnation executed defeated opponents for fear of what harm they may have potentially caused in the future, and not because it was the only immediate method to prevent the death of innocent people.

Which actually makes the comic incarnation's killing worse, now that I consider the matter.
 
2013-06-14 10:02:04 AM

thecpt: So how can something get your interest?


Be about superheroes, have really good actors, be made by someone I trust to make good movies.

Anything else, I just can't afford it.

/kinda circles back to the whole "marketers are worthless" topic
 
2013-06-14 10:02:45 AM
Gah, Fark. Here's the video link:

http://youtu.be/jUORL-bvwA0

Again, spoilers.

Regarding the movie. Go see it. Can't be worse than a 7/10. I personally rank it at 8-8.5/10.

Everybody's biatching because they wanted the Second Coming of Christ.
 
2013-06-14 10:04:20 AM

Electric_Banana: The tone reminds me of Batman Begins and the action reminds me of Transformers.  The parts with Ma and Pa Kent actually looked pretty good.


They already made a movie for you, filled with complex character interaction and emotional unrest. It was called Superman Returns.

And what a surprise, critics loved it (75% "fresh" rating) while everyone else thought it was crap.

Electric_Banana: But I thought the whole Deadliest Catch: Superman bit looked pretty silly.


That is literally less than 5 minutes of the whole film.
 
2013-06-14 10:04:29 AM

Electric_Banana: Hebalo: It was great. I'm confused by the negative reactions. It's everything you want out of a Superman film.

It's not what I want out of a Superman film.  The reviews I have read and seen confirm what I thought from the trailers.  The tone reminds me of Batman Begins and the action reminds me of Transformers.  The parts with Ma and Pa Kent actually looked pretty good.  But I thought the whole Deadliest Catch: Superman bit looked pretty silly.


Deadliest Catch: Superman was like 5 minutes long and gets put into perspective while you watch the movie. And it is not a bad thing for it to take a tone like Batman Begins and use it for Superman. We actually get to see a Superman that is not explored in motion pictures of any kind. A conflicted Clark searching for who he really is. Most of the Superman series and movies I have seen is that of Clark knowing who he is and what hes going to do. Smallville might be the only other one I can think of that does not have a Superman that knows he's Superman. But I never really watched Smallville.
 
2013-06-14 10:04:36 AM
FYI:  The director of MOS directed 300, which has a 60 on RT.   So, if you've seen 300, there is your benchmark.
 
2013-06-14 10:05:59 AM

rocky_howard: And while I respect Waid, I agree with another FARKer that he's too navelgazing about what Superman is. Plus it's not as if Superman hadn't done in the Donner movies what he did here. Except he did it in a more sadistic way and with ZERO emotional development and feeback:


Don't forget the follow up in the third where he loses his power, gets beaten up, gets his power and then GOES BACK to kick that same guys ass

Superman in this movie is ten times more empathetic than the dick in the originals

Dimensio: Which actually makes the comic incarnation's killing worse, now that I consider the matter.


Exactly
 
2013-06-14 10:06:13 AM

Dimensio: bulok: 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.

Maybe it's because it IS novice Superman. He doesn't know how to fight AND keep from hurting other people. It's all he can do to survive.

Also comic book Superman only ever killed once when he felt he had no choice fighting against 3 other Kryptonians, and only then because they were his equals and second against Doomsday.

A fundamental difference between that story and Man of Steel is that the comic incarnation executed defeated opponents for fear of what harm they may have potentially caused in the future, and not because it was the only immediate method to prevent the death of innocent people.

Which actually makes the comic incarnation's killing worse, now that I consider the matter.


Not to mention that one of the themes of the film is the concept of whether two worlds can co-exist, and Supes is the embodiment of that.
 
2013-06-14 10:07:04 AM

rocky_howard: I liked his review and it's one of few negative ones who make sense. Seriously, RT is full of idiotic reviews. Especially Rex Reeds...

They wanted Superman Returns II.

We got Holy shiatballs: The Origin.

And while I respect Waid, I agree with another FARKer that he's too navelgazing about what Superman is. Plus it's not as if Superman hadn't done in the Donner movies what he did here. Except he did it in a more sadistic way and with ZERO emotional development and feeback:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUORL-bvwA0 (Don't watch the video if you don't want spoilers)


A deleted scene (sometimes retained on television showings) reveals the depowered Kryptonian villains to be alive and taken into custody by the "arctic police". That scene explains why the repercussions of killing the villains is not explored in the movie; even if the final explanation is that the villains were killed, the actors behaved as though the villains were nonlethally subdued.
 
2013-06-14 10:07:28 AM

Rhypskallion: The director of MOS directed 300, which has a 60 on RT


Even more confirmation that RT is worthless. 300 was farking awesome.

/not sure about the sequel, but I'm intrigued
 
2013-06-14 10:07:32 AM

un4gvn666: Be about superheroes, have really good actors, be made by someone I trust to make good movies.


Newsflash, this fills all those roles
 
2013-06-14 10:10:39 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: un4gvn666: Be about superheroes, have really good actors, be made by someone I trust to make good movies.

Newsflash, this fills all those roles


Exactly. That's why I went to the theaters for the first time in about 6 months to watch it at midnight yesterday. And I would have done that regardless of whatever silly bullshiat was posted by the snobs over at RT. Thankfully, the movie was incredible. Easily one of the top 5 superhero movies ever made.
 
2013-06-14 10:10:49 AM
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.

They should just move on and do Red Son. I know they need to do Justice League first, but truthfully, we've seen all facets of the American Superman we can. It's become a rote and tired. Having not seen this new movie, I can only guess he's a conflicted youth that grows up to be flawed. That's the trend for the movies these days. Add in Zod (he needs someone on his own power level to fight) and it's gonna be fight sequences that make Michael Bay cum immediately.

I'll go see it, I know I will. Now to read the review.
 
2013-06-14 10:13:35 AM
static.comicvine.com

Remember when Superman literally executed Zod and his lieutenants in the comics?
 
2013-06-14 10:15:54 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.


I'm actually glad that they don't do something like this in the film. It's pretty played out already.
 
2013-06-14 10:16:57 AM

un4gvn666: Exactly. That's why I went to the theaters for the first time in about 6 months to watch it at midnight yesterday. And I would have done that regardless of whatever silly bullshiat was posted by the snobs over at RT. Thankfully, the movie was incredible. Easily one of the top 5 superhero movies ever made.


I'd put it up there easily with Dark Knight

I really am flabergasted at the hate this movie is generating, it's like people who biatch about flying. You're just trying to find a reason to hate something.
 
2013-06-14 10:17:24 AM

yves0010: Electric_Banana: Hebalo: It was great. I'm confused by the negative reactions. It's everything you want out of a Superman film.

It's not what I want out of a Superman film.  The reviews I have read and seen confirm what I thought from the trailers.  The tone reminds me of Batman Begins and the action reminds me of Transformers.  The parts with Ma and Pa Kent actually looked pretty good.  But I thought the whole Deadliest Catch: Superman bit looked pretty silly.

Deadliest Catch: Superman was like 5 minutes long and gets put into perspective while you watch the movie. And it is not a bad thing for it to take a tone like Batman Begins and use it for Superman. We actually get to see a Superman that is not explored in motion pictures of any kind. A conflicted Clark searching for who he really is. Most of the Superman series and movies I have seen is that of Clark knowing who he is and what hes going to do. Smallville might be the only other one I can think of that does not have a Superman that knows he's Superman. But I never really watched Smallville.


Smallville essentially became "Superman without the costume or flight" no later than season 8. By the final episode of season 10, Clark had fought Doomsday, Brainiac, Zod, a clone of Zod, a merger of Zod and the clone of Zod, Metallo, the Toyman, an ersatz Vandal Savage. He had also met a Flash (Bart Allen), Cyborg, Aquaman, Green Arrow, his cousin Kara, members of the League of Super Heroes in the future (whom Kara eventually joined in the future), Conner Kent (who was presented as a clone of Lex Luthor who only later was discovered to have received half of his DNA from Clark), Booster Gold and Blue Beetle (Jaime Reyes, before he became a doctor at UNATCO). He was also engaged to marry Lois Lane and had revealed his identity to her (though she had learned the truth without her realising it before he told her the truth).

A Superman origin story evidently can only run for so long before he essentially becomes Superman, no matter how much the writers attempt to deny it.
 
2013-06-14 10:17:45 AM

un4gvn666: Rhypskallion: The director of MOS directed 300, which has a 60 on RT

Even more confirmation that RT is worthless. 300 was farking awesome.

/not sure about the sequel, but I'm intrigued


RT is kind of crap for genre movies, because critics often don't give them a fair shake. they compare them to whatever indie melancholic movie is playing at sundance and not to their peer group.
 
2013-06-14 10:17:54 AM

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

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


Holy shiat. MoS Superman is actually more relatable than comic Superman. That's just weird.
 
2013-06-14 10:18:02 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: un4gvn666: Exactly. That's why I went to the theaters for the first time in about 6 months to watch it at midnight yesterday. And I would have done that regardless of whatever silly bullshiat was posted by the snobs over at RT. Thankfully, the movie was incredible. Easily one of the top 5 superhero movies ever made.

I'd put it up there easily with Dark Knight

I really am flabergasted at the hate this movie is generating, it's like people who biatch about flying. You're just trying to find a reason to hate something.


Agreed. Seriously don't understand the negative. It was brilliant.
 
2013-06-14 10:19:00 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: un4gvn666: Exactly. That's why I went to the theaters for the first time in about 6 months to watch it at midnight yesterday. And I would have done that regardless of whatever silly bullshiat was posted by the snobs over at RT. Thankfully, the movie was incredible. Easily one of the top 5 superhero movies ever made.

I'd put it up there easily with Dark Knight

I really am flabergasted at the hate this movie is generating, it's like people who biatch about flying. You're just trying to find a reason to hate something.


I am still disappointed by the absence of a giant spider battle in the third act.
 
2013-06-14 10:19:22 AM

PsyLord: 58%?  Wow, that's not good.


Dman~! Posted this on the wrong thread but:

Oh yeah...this movie's gonna suck BIG TIME~!  With a few changes tailored towards a story about Wonder Woman, it seems this could've been a great vehicle for her.  Not Superman acting more like Batman.

/back to the drawing board DC/WB.
//Jesus, you guys farking suck
 
2013-06-14 10:22:48 AM

Dimensio: I am still disappointed by the absence of a giant spider battle in the third act.


There is a joke here that involves the movie but I can't put out there because it has a spoiler

GAH
 
2013-06-14 10:24:52 AM

thecpt: PsyLord: 58%?  Wow, that's not good.

Could be. Rt is far from perfect


I saw it last night.  It wasn't a perfect movie, but easily better than Superman Returns (RT 75%, wt Fark?!?)

The problem here is that expectations are higher.  There was a lot of good things, but the middle sagged quite a bit.  But we did actually get to see what happens when Kryptonians fight on our planet. That alone was worth price of admission.   And thankfully, no "real estate Lex".
 
2013-06-14 10:26:18 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Dimensio: I am still disappointed by the absence of a giant spider battle in the third act.

There is a joke here that involves the movie but I can't put out there because it has a spoiler

GAH


I actually couldn't figured out how the hell to post the white text that people sometimes use to put spoilers, but couldn't figure it out. If anyone knows, that might be useful to know in threads like this.
 
2013-06-14 10:27:03 AM

un4gvn666: I actually couldn't figured out how the hell to post the white text that people sometimes use to put spoilers, but couldn't figure it out.


Yeah, I think I'm getting too old for these midnight screenings.
 
2013-06-14 10:28:00 AM

Dimensio: IdBeCrazyIf: un4gvn666: Exactly. That's why I went to the theaters for the first time in about 6 months to watch it at midnight yesterday. And I would have done that regardless of whatever silly bullshiat was posted by the snobs over at RT. Thankfully, the movie was incredible. Easily one of the top 5 superhero movies ever made.

I'd put it up there easily with Dark Knight

I really am flabergasted at the hate this movie is generating, it's like people who biatch about flying. You're just trying to find a reason to hate something.

I am still disappointed by the absence of a giant spider battle in the third act.


I forget which Farker said the following, so forgive me if I don't give you the proper credit.

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.

Exhibit A: The Punisher mini-movie.  Exhibit B:  The Batgirl web series.
 
2013-06-14 10:28:16 AM

RyansPrivates: The problem here is that expectations are higher. There was a lot of good things, but the middle sagged quite a bit. But we did actually get to see what happens when Kryptonians fight on our planet. That alone was worth price of admission. And thankfully, no "real estate Lex".


And thankfully enough Lex references that its obvious what the next one is going to have and my guess will be the take will be.

un4gvn666: I actually couldn't figured out how the hell to post the white text that people sometimes use to put spoilers, but couldn't figure it out. If anyone knows, that might be useful to know in threads like this.


Exactly
 
2013-06-14 10:29:10 AM

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


So? That was one writer's take for one particular story - the overwhelming majority of Superman stories gives him the "does not kill" character trait. Boiled down, Supes wants to avoid any intentional or accidental death and is willing to sacrifice himself to reach that end because he believes he isn't more valuable than everyone else. He's the guy who instinctually steps in between danger and the victim - he's just lucky enough to be nigh invincible. Avoiding others dying is priority number one for Supes - thus having him kill is extremely out of character.
 
2013-06-14 10:31:48 AM

Solon Isonomia: That was one writer's take for one particular story


And incidentally, this movie is another writer's take for another particular story.
 
2013-06-14 10:32:37 AM
Never really read Waid's Superman stuff (I was a Batman kid), but his run on The Flash was excellent.
 
2013-06-14 10:33:14 AM

Solon Isonomia: Avoiding others dying is priority number one for Supes - thus having him kill is extremely out of character.


You know how I know you haven't seen the movie
 
2013-06-14 10:33:30 AM

Solon Isonomia: the overwhelming majority of Superman stories gives him the "does not kill" character trait. Boiled down, Supes wants to avoid any intentional or accidental death and is willing to sacrifice himself to reach that end because he believes he isn't more valuable than everyone else.


You can argue both ways, but I think the climax of the film exemplifies this pretty well, especially his emotional distress after its all over.
 
2013-06-14 10:38:31 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Solon Isonomia: Avoiding others dying is priority number one for Supes - thus having him kill is extremely out of character.

You know how I know you haven't seen the movie


From Waid's review, I'm more annoyed with him trying to destroy a giant machine in the middle of nowhere instead of trying to destroy same giant machine wrecking Metropolis.
 
2013-06-14 10:39:52 AM

Rwa2play: From Waid's review, I'm more annoyed with him trying to destroy a giant machine in the middle of nowhere instead of trying to destroy same giant machine wrecking Metropolis.


There is a reason behind it, Waid missed it

Seen it twice now and even I missed it the first time
 
2013-06-14 10:41:48 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Rwa2play: From Waid's review, I'm more annoyed with him trying to destroy a giant machine in the middle of nowhere instead of trying to destroy same giant machine wrecking Metropolis.

There is a reason behind it, Waid missed it

Seen it twice now and even I missed it the first time


I would understand it if it was akin to how Supes in the '78 movie promised Miss Tessmacher that he'd take out the missile heading for NJ first.
 
2013-06-14 10:44:28 AM
Superman kills. Really now? Because there was no other way? It occurs to me Superman always found an alternative way than killing, otherwise he'd just super punch every villain and exlaim: "Sorry, no other way to do it, he woulda kept going if we tried to lock him up." Lex Luthor would be a greasy stain across 3 states if this were the case.

That just seems sl wrong that Batman wouldn't kill, but Superman would. Like I said, they gotta make him edgy and flawed.

But, the flip side of this is would they had made a Superman movie true to himself, I'd be sitting here biatching about how they've done nothing to advance the character or give us anything that hasn't been done before.

I may be an asshole, but I know myself too well.
 
2013-06-14 10:45:26 AM

Rwa2play: From Waid's review, I'm more annoyed with him trying to destroy a giant machine in the middle of nowhere instead of trying to destroy same giant machine wrecking Metropolis.


1.- Nobody could go to the other side of the world as fast as Superman, so it was a no-brainer he took the farther one.

2.- Nobody would have done anything to that thing except Superman. So anyone going there would have been slaughtered.

3.- If Superman had stayed in Metropolis he wouldn't have done anything since all the Kryptonians would jump him anyway.

IdBeCrazyIf: There is a reason behind it, Waid missed it

Seen it twice now and even I missed it the first time


What is the reason you proclaim?
 
2013-06-14 10:46:10 AM

HST's Dead Carcass: Superman kills. Really now? Because there was no other way? It occurs to me Superman always found an alternative way than killing, otherwise he'd just super punch every villain and exlaim: "Sorry, no other way to do it, he woulda kept going if we tried to lock him up." Lex Luthor would be a greasy stain across 3 states if this were the case.

That just seems sl wrong that Batman wouldn't kill, but Superman would. Like I said, they gotta make him edgy and flawed.

But, the flip side of this is would they had made a Superman movie true to himself, I'd be sitting here biatching about how they've done nothing to advance the character or give us anything that hasn't been done before.

I may be an asshole, but I know myself too well.


It sounds like it would've made more sense if Zod, in trying to kill Supes, gets himself killed in the process.
 
2013-06-14 10:46:12 AM

Rwa2play: I would understand it if it was akin to how Supes in the '78 movie promised Miss Tessmacher that he'd take out the missile heading for NJ first.


I can't give it away, spoils it a little but there is a reason he is one place and not the other besides the disaster porn but even that's justified to some degree because we get Zod portrayed as a ruthless SOB, and Michael Shannon was AMAZING.

The only performance that was forgettable would be Amy Adams, but really it's not that she does a bad job. She does a great job, it's just that everyone around her does so much better of a job that she is outshined.
 
2013-06-14 10:47:21 AM

RexTalionis: Solon Isonomia: That was one writer's take for one particular story

And incidentally, this movie is another writer's take for another particular story.


Agreed, but Waid's criticism of MoS diverging from the essence of Supes is no less valid because of what happen with Zod in the comics. I get "re-imagining" and "updating," but altering a fundamental element of a character is a valid target of criticism.

Take the new Star Trek movie - at the start, Kirk was still a brash womanizer (consistent) but didn't clearly put the ship/mission in front of his own goals (inconsistent and mostly unexplored in the prior film). Once the climax hits, Kirk grows and puts ship/mission before himself and becomes more consistent with the prior characterization while giving us a reason why the prior characterization would exist. From what we're hearing, Supes doesn't have that same growth in MoS.
 
2013-06-14 10:49:35 AM

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?
 
2013-06-14 10:50:34 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Rwa2play: I would understand it if it was akin to how Supes in the '78 movie promised Miss Tessmacher that he'd take out the missile heading for NJ first.

I can't give it away, spoils it a little


NO DON'T~!

but there is a reason he is one place and not the other besides the disaster porn but even that's justified to some degree because we get Zod portrayed as a ruthless SOB, and Michael Shannon was AMAZING.

Well, without watching the movie, you can have disaster porn that makes sense (i.e. California suffering "The Big One" in the '78 movie); but disaster porn for the sake of it would be...really?

The only performance that was forgettable would be Amy Adams, but really it's not that she does a bad job. She does a great job, it's just that everyone around her does so much better of a job that she is outshined.

I guess I'm the only one that gets agitated because they've miscast Lois twice in the movies while they got it right in "Smallville".
 
2013-06-14 10:53:03 AM

yves0010: Yes, it is a "Batman Begins" of the Superman films


i.imgur.com

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-06-14 10:55:41 AM

Solon Isonomia: RexTalionis: Solon Isonomia: That was one writer's take for one particular story

And incidentally, this movie is another writer's take for another particular story.

Agreed, but Waid's criticism of MoS diverging from the essence of Supes is no less valid because of what happen with Zod in the comics. I get "re-imagining" and "updating," but altering a fundamental element of a character is a valid target of criticism.


Thank you for visualizing the gripe I have with this movie and have had since the initial trailer.  I don't mind re-imagining and updating the character so long as you keep what makes the character who s/he is whole.  That's what I liked from both "Batman Begins" and "Iron Man".

Take the new Star Trek movie - at the start, Kirk was still a brash womanizer (consistent) but didn't clearly put the ship/mission in front of his own goals (inconsistent and mostly unexplored in the prior film). Once the climax hits, Kirk grows and puts ship/mission before himself and becomes more consistent with the prior characterization while giving us a reason why the prior characterization would exist. From what we're hearing, Supes doesn't have that same growth in MoS.

Pretty much; and I'm one that hated the new "Star Trek" until I saw it.  Then the rebooting made sense.
 
2013-06-14 10:57:12 AM

yves0010: Yes, it is a "Batman Begins" of the Superman films but it is very much worth it.


Has anyone else noticed a trend of this happening in all the movies now? James Bond, Star Trek, Superman.... reboot a franchise and make the bad guy an all knowing prognosticator that is 5 steps ahead of everyone, including the protagonist.

It worked once, now Hollywood is going to play it out to death before moving on to something else.
 
2013-06-14 10:57:34 AM

Rwa2play: I guess I'm the only one that gets agitated because they've miscast Lois twice in the movies while they got it right in "Smallville".


Its honestly not really miscast, that's too harsh of a word. Just she's not as strong as an actor as the rest of them.

But really, go read the wiki and see who they almost thought about for Lois....Kristen Stewert..

Ugh that would have been horrible
 
2013-06-14 11:00:23 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Rwa2play: I guess I'm the only one that gets agitated because they've miscast Lois twice in the movies while they got it right in "Smallville".

Its honestly not really miscast, that's too harsh of a word. Just she's not as strong as an actor as the rest of them.

But really, go read the wiki and see who they almost thought about for Lois....Kristen Stewert..

Ugh that would have been horrible


Good Christ, a woman much too young for the role with dead eyes?
 
2013-06-14 11:00:42 AM
I still haven't decided whether or not I'm going to pay to see this in the theater. I'm not a huge fan of Superman or Zack Snyder (thought 300 and Watchmen were okay, but not great). But I'm conflicted because the trailers made it look so damn good.

On another note, I saw This Is The End last night, and it was genuinely laugh-out-loud funny. So if you're lukewarm on MoS, I'd recommend that this weekend.
 
2013-06-14 11:01:04 AM

HST's Dead Carcass: reboot a franchise and make the bad guy an all knowing prognosticator that is 5 steps ahead of everyone, including the protagonist.


That's never happened before in film:

www.empireonline.com

www.aceshowbiz.com
jamesbond007.net
 
2013-06-14 11:01:48 AM

HST's Dead Carcass: yves0010: Yes, it is a "Batman Begins" of the Superman films but it is very much worth it.

Has anyone else noticed a trend of this happening in all the movies now? James Bond, Star Trek, Superman.... reboot a franchise and make the bad guy an all knowing prognosticator that is 5 steps ahead of everyone, including the protagonist.

It worked once, now Hollywood is going to play it out to death before moving on to something else.


Uhh that villain was in the second batman and Star Trek and third James Bond of the craig era. It's just a type of villain really
 
2013-06-14 11:02:08 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Rwa2play: I guess I'm the only one that gets agitated because they've miscast Lois twice in the movies while they got it right in "Smallville".

Its honestly not really miscast, that's too harsh of a word. Just she's not as strong as an actor as the rest of them.

But really, go read the wiki and see who they almost thought about for Lois....Kristen Stewert..

Ugh that would have been horrible


Until I read your post, I honestly did not think that a worse portrayal of Lois Lane than Ms. Kate Bosworth's was possible. The idea of Kristen Stewart portraying the character was evidently so horrible that my mind -- twisted and evil as it already is -- could not conceive of it. Truly, movie studio executives are devoid of reason and humanity.
 
2013-06-14 11:03:59 AM

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.
 
2013-06-14 11:03:59 AM

Dimensio: IdBeCrazyIf: Rwa2play: I guess I'm the only one that gets agitated because they've miscast Lois twice in the movies while they got it right in "Smallville".

Its honestly not really miscast, that's too harsh of a word. Just she's not as strong as an actor as the rest of them.

But really, go read the wiki and see who they almost thought about for Lois....Kristen Stewert..

Ugh that would have been horrible

Until I read your post, I honestly did not think that a worse portrayal of Lois Lane than Ms. Kate Bosworth's was possible. The idea of Kristen Stewart portraying the character was evidently so horrible that my mind -- twisted and evil as it already is -- could not conceive of it. Truly, movie studio executives are devoid of reason and humanity.


I would've said Kate Beckinsale myself.
 
2013-06-14 11:05:35 AM

RexTalionis: HST's Dead Carcass: reboot a franchise and make the bad guy an all knowing prognosticator that is 5 steps ahead of everyone, including the protagonist.

That's never happened before in film:

[www.empireonline.com image 355x400]

[www.aceshowbiz.com image 490x360]
[jamesbond007.net image 315x331]


Save for Kaiser, the others took place after Batman did it with the Joker. Since the Joker, the movies have been portraying super duper baddies that can accurately predict how the good guys will act and react to any given situation and it requires the good guys to do something completely against their nature to win the day , which is really all the bad guys want them to do in the first place.
 
2013-06-14 11:06:14 AM

burndtdan: 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.


I should add...

Or at least that's what the review made it sound like.
 
2013-06-14 11:06:28 AM

Dimensio: Truly, movie studio executives are devoid of reason and humanity.


Now you understand than when mixed with coke, it explains much of movie history
 
2013-06-14 11:07:02 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Dimensio: Truly, movie studio executives are devoid of reason and humanity.

Now you understand than when mixed with coke, it explains much of movie history


*nods approvingly*
 
2013-06-14 11:09:14 AM

HST's Dead Carcass: Save for Kaiser, the others took place after Batman did it with the Joker. Since the Joker, the movies have been portraying super duper baddies that can accurately predict how the good guys will act and react to any given situation and it requires the good guys to do something completely against their nature to win the day , which is really all the bad guys want them to do in the first place.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-06-14 11:10:42 AM
Here's the problem:

And then we got to The Battle of Metropolis, and I truly, genuinely started to feel nauseous at all the Disaster Porn.

Rather than come up with interesting villans, the filmmakers double down on the disaster porn.

What was the last action movie that had a memorable villan? Dark Knight (2008)?
 
2013-06-14 11:11:22 AM

RexTalionis: HST's Dead Carcass: Save for Kaiser, the others took place after Batman did it with the Joker. Since the Joker, the movies have been portraying super duper baddies that can accurately predict how the good guys will act and react to any given situation and it requires the good guys to do something completely against their nature to win the day , which is really all the bad guys want them to do in the first place.

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 304x380]


You're too good. But, at least I know you know what I mean. It's a recent trend with an old trope.
 
2013-06-14 11:12:20 AM

thornhill: Here's the problem:

And then we got to The Battle of Metropolis, and I truly, genuinely started to feel nauseous at all the Disaster Porn.


Yeah, it's akin to Halle Berry showing the twins in "Swordfish" because they paid her to do it.  Not because it's relevant to the story.
 
2013-06-14 11:12:42 AM

HST's Dead Carcass: RexTalionis: HST's Dead Carcass: reboot a franchise and make the bad guy an all knowing prognosticator that is 5 steps ahead of everyone, including the protagonist.

That's never happened before in film:

[www.empireonline.com image 355x400]

[www.aceshowbiz.com image 490x360]
[jamesbond007.net image 315x331]

Save for Kaiser, the others took place after Batman did it with the Joker. Since the Joker, the movies have been portraying super duper baddies that can accurately predict how the good guys will act and react to any given situation and it requires the good guys to do something completely against their nature to win the day , which is really all the bad guys want them to do in the first place.


I thought the lets call him villain in the new st was not a step ahead and if he was it was very conceivable as he'd been in the secret program that made everything. James knew what he was doing practically at every step but never why, which is clever writing IMO.

But for the other two, its hard to say the Bond villain wasn't similar to the joker. I liked his personality and goals enough that I didn't care.
 
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.
 
2013-06-14 01:04:28 PM

Boojum2k: 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.


Which was another of Waid's criticisms. Why didn't Superman take the fight to somewhere where there were less people around?

And again, Superman accepts executions when it is the duly constituted legal authority doing the executing, and the system of justice involved is not corrupt. This is an established part of the character canon.

I will note however that I can't completely blame Man of Steel for this diversion from the character canon. It had already occurred in the post-Flashpoint comics.
 
2013-06-14 01:05:07 PM
Gonna watch it with some friends tonight, so I read his spoiler free review. Loved Kingdom Come and Birthright and always thought that Waid was one of the writers that get Superman, so I wouldn't deny that the review made me sorta nervous.

I honestly gonna watch the movie with an open mind, but I just expect ONE thing from this movie...

That they understand that Superman is not Batman and cannot be teated the same way as Batman.

/Big Superman Fan...
//For what is worth, I thought that Green Lantern was OK...
 
2013-06-14 01:05:14 PM

KiltedBastich: And yet he can manage to snap his neck


Because Zod is concentrating on killing as many humans as possible. So continue beating on Zod and letting him kill people and keep beating on him and letting him kill more people, because after all, those people will be perfectly content knowing Superman didn't kill Zod to save them.

Zod is Doomsday with intelligence, and utterly shattered by the loss of his Krypton. He was basically committing suicide by Superman, and he was going to slaughter billions given the chance.
 
2013-06-14 01:07:26 PM

Rwa2play: Which is why I stated this would've been a better story if it were about Wonder Woman.


Look no offense, as you clearly seem interested in the character and the movie, but go see the damn thing before you make these sweeping (and in my opinion, totally wrong) statements.
 
2013-06-14 01:08:20 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: 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.



Has anybody ever wondered about the F = ma in comics?

Superman or anyone else could be hard as diamond and impervious to damage, but unless they also move at hundreds of miles an hour when 'punching' something, the force generated would never equal what we see in films or comics.  It would hurt a lot to be sure and could break down objects, but to generate as much force as is shown sometimes, they would either have to be hyper-dense mass or moving at supersonic speeds.  I dunno, that bit always irks me.  Like when super strong folks pick up something really heavy off to the side of their center of mass and don't lift themselves into the air.

/yes I know it's comics
 
2013-06-14 01:08:35 PM

Boojum2k: KiltedBastich: And yet he can manage to snap his neck

Because Zod is concentrating on killing as many humans as possible. So continue beating on Zod and letting him kill people and keep beating on him and letting him kill more people, because after all, those people will be perfectly content knowing Superman didn't kill Zod to save them.

Zod is Doomsday with intelligence, and utterly shattered by the loss of his Krypton. He was basically committing suicide by Superman, and he was going to slaughter billions given the chance.


So, they made him Nero from Star Trek?
 
2013-06-14 01:08:44 PM

Boojum2k: KiltedBastich: And yet he can manage to snap his neck

Because Zod is concentrating on killing as many humans as possible. So continue beating on Zod and letting him kill people and keep beating on him and letting him kill more people, because after all, those people will be perfectly content knowing Superman didn't kill Zod to save them.

Zod is Doomsday with intelligence, and utterly shattered by the loss of his Krypton. He was basically committing suicide by Superman, and he was going to slaughter billions given the chance.


I was going to post something similar. Also, despite the criticisms of the ending "not being in line with his character", which I strongly disagree with based on watching the damn scene itself, no one has been able to suggest an ending to that fight that wouldn't be akin to wiping your ass with a film strip.
 
2013-06-14 01:10:54 PM

Boojum2k: Because Zod is concentrating on killing as many humans as possible. So continue beating on Zod and letting him kill people and keep beating on him and letting him kill more people, because after all, those people will be perfectly content knowing Superman didn't kill Zod to save them.

Zod is Doomsday with intelligence, and utterly shattered by the loss of his Krypton. He was basically committing suicide by Superman, and he was going to slaughter billions given the chance.


Which is a plot device. This is not the first time that a villain of that power level has tried something like that in Superman's history. The point is that by canon Superman finds a way to overcome the threat without resorting to killing. That's what sets him apart from someone like Zod in the first place.
 
2013-06-14 01:11:01 PM

KiltedBastich: 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."


In the context of this story, Supes wouldn't have the first idea how to imprison him. He's barely come to terms with who he is, and what Krypton is all about. There isn't (as far as he and we know) anything that could hold him, and his entire ethos for existing is to kill Kal and the planet.
 
2013-06-14 01:12:43 PM

un4gvn666: Rwa2play: Negative Zone

Phantom Zone, goddamnit (sorry, nerdrage)


LOL, okay, okay~!

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.


That would kill the movie wouldn't it?
 
2013-06-14 01:12:50 PM

BafflerMeal: Has anybody ever wondered about the F = ma in comics?

Superman or anyone else could be hard as diamond and impervious to damage, but unless they also move at hundreds of miles an hour when 'punching' something, the force generated would never equal what we see in films or comics. It would hurt a lot to be sure and could break down objects, but to generate as much force as is shown sometimes, they would either have to be hyper-dense mass or moving at supersonic speeds. I dunno, that bit always irks me. Like when super strong folks pick up something really heavy off to the side of their center of mass and don't lift themselves into the air.

/yes I know it's comics


Oh, yes, the whole 'pick a bus up by the bumper and swing it like a baseball bat' routine. The one that got me was the end of Doom where they are fighting the solar flare and it only takes about 150 seconds for the solar flare to reach the Earth. I was like: um, 8 minutes and some change, and that has mass, so, longer, fools!
 
2013-06-14 01:13:45 PM

KiltedBastich: Which is a plot device. This is not the first time that a villain of that power level has tried something like that in Superman's history. The point is that by canon Superman finds a way to overcome the threat without resorting to killing. That's what sets him apart from someone like Zod in the first place


This is my whole argument right here and what makes Supes a hero and not a vigilante.
 
2013-06-14 01:14:40 PM

Rwa2play: 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.



She's always known that sometimes it is necessary to kill, and doesn't have a problem with the idea.


Different topic: I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know if this is addressed. If Superman (and by extension all other Kryptonians) gets supercharged by sunlight, then wouldn't Kryptonian that has been exposed to and soaking up that sunlight for couple of decades be exponentially more powerful than one that has just (he said jokingly) seen the light?
 
2013-06-14 01:15:25 PM

KiltedBastich: This is not the first time that a villain of that power level has tried something like that in Superman's history


This is, however, the first time they have shown it in something resembling a more realistic world. The usual way in the comic is a cheap clichéd plot device that is used to keep the writers from having to show Superman making that hard decision, of having to make a real human decision instead of being a god and pulling a deus ex machine right out of his ass. I'll watch Superman snap Zod's neck as a last resort and feel utterly devastated over having to do it a hundred times over rather than seeing him throw a cellophane wrapper at him even once more.
 
2013-06-14 01:16:59 PM

give me doughnuts: Different topic: I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know if this is addressed. If Superman (and by extension all other Kryptonians) gets supercharged by sunlight, then wouldn't Kryptonian that has been exposed to and soaking up that sunlight for couple of decades be exponentially more powerful than one that has just (he said jokingly) seen the light?


My take on this is: A battery can only hold up to the charge it's supposed to hold. Same thing goes for Kryptonians, they're essentially organic solar panels. Once their internal batteries are full, that's all they can hold.
 
2013-06-14 01:18:15 PM

give me doughnuts: Rwa2play: 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.


She's always known that sometimes it is necessary to kill, and doesn't have a problem with the idea.


Different topic: I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know if this is addressed. If Superman (and by extension all other Kryptonians) get ...


It is addressed, obliquely, it's pretty much the same power level once they start absorbing the solar radiation, along with breathing Earth's air which seems to add more of the power set.
 
2013-06-14 01:18:35 PM

give me doughnuts: Different topic: I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know if this is addressed. If Superman (and by extension all other Kryptonians) gets supercharged by sunlight, then wouldn't Kryptonian that has been exposed to and soaking up that sunlight for couple of decades be exponentially more powerful than one that has just (he said jokingly) seen the light?


Not really addressed. In my head, it's not a matter of charging level, it's either on or off. They do deal with the concept of learning and  controlling those powers.
 
2013-06-14 01:19:19 PM

Boojum2k: KiltedBastich: This is not the first time that a villain of that power level has tried something like that in Superman's history

This is, however, the first time they have shown it in something resembling a more realistic world. The usual way in the comic is a cheap clichéd plot device that is used to keep the writers from having to show Superman making that hard decision, of having to make a real human decision instead of being a god and pulling a deus ex machine right out of his ass. I'll watch Superman snap Zod's neck as a last resort and feel utterly devastated over having to do it a hundred times over rather than seeing him throw a cellophane wrapper at him even once more.


Superman threw the cellophane "S" shield at Non, not at Zod.

/Yeah, he didn't see that minor inconvenience coming.
 
2013-06-14 01:19:33 PM

un4gvn666: I was going to post something similar. Also, despite the criticisms of the ending "not being in line with his character", which I strongly disagree with based on watching the damn scene itself, no one has been able to suggest an ending to that fight that wouldn't be akin to wiping your ass with a film strip.


To elaborate on my previous suggestion: Superman has been on Earth for more than 20 years, absorbing yellow sunlight the whole time, but also learning to limit himself so as not to accidentally destroy everything he comes in contact with. Zod has just arrived on Earth, has only just gained his powers, and started learning how to handle them. Heck, they even address this in the movie.

It's again part of the canon that Superman's power levels grow slowly as he gets older and absorbs more solar energy. For example, in Kingdom Come Luthor mentions that Kryptonite doesn't affect Superman the way it used to because of the decades he's spent under yellow sunlight growing stronger. It is perfectly within canon to presume that 2 decades of extra yellow sunlight exposure would give Superman a real edge over Zod who had newly arrived on Earth.

So show Superman get desperate and cut loose with his full strength, show Zod having a "holy shiat I'm so farked!" moment when he realizes that Superman has been holding back, and then show Superman beat the everliving daylights out of Zod, leaving him a beaten wreck despite his Kryptonian powers. Ta da, satisfying resolution, climatic battle, crowning moment of awesome, and Superman doesn't kill and gets to profess loyalty to humanity by turning over Zod to them for punishment / execution.

I repeat, this is all a plot device. The decision to change the character was deliberate and not needed, and that is why Waid is upset about it, and I agree with his criticisms.
 
2013-06-14 01:20:22 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: KiltedBastich: Which is a plot device. This is not the first time that a villain of that power level has tried something like that in Superman's history. The point is that by canon Superman finds a way to overcome the threat without resorting to killing. That's what sets him apart from someone like Zod in the first place

This is my whole argument right here and what makes Supes a hero and not a vigilante.



As Superman undertakes to enforce the law while not being a member of any law enforcement organization, Superman is a vigilante by definition.
 
2013-06-14 01:20:41 PM

Hebalo: Rwa2play: Which is why I stated this would've been a better story if it were about Wonder Woman.

Look no offense, as you clearly seem interested in the character and the movie, but go see the damn thing before you make these sweeping (and in my opinion, totally wrong) statements.


None taken. :)  I'm just inferring from the reviews I've read, comments here and Waid's own take.  I just want this to be a great movie and put DC back on the map, not a movie that, while great, reminds me of the huge plot holes of "The Dark Knight Rises".
 
2013-06-14 01:23:56 PM
These complaints boil down to irrational idealism.

Spoilers:


Superman was begging and pleading with Zod to stop what he was doing. Multiple times he screamed for him to stop. Zod was self-destructive. He didn't care if he died. Zod's home planet, his reason for existing, was completely wiped out by the child of one if its own citizens.Zod was willing to destroy an entire planet to get revenge against Superman for that act, and he was going to start by incinerating an entire family. When Superman takes the only solution available to him to stop imminent death, he is visibly emotionally distressed. He was just forced into murdering the only known survivor of his home planet, the only other person of his species, and he sells that distress perfectly. Even Lois, having seen what he just did, comforted him, knowing he was forced to do something that goes against everything he is. The emotion was raw, it was brilliantly acted, and it humanized Superman in a way I didn't expect from the film.

If you can watch that scene and say "they've thrown away everything the character stands for" then it's easy for people to say you have unrealistic expectations for a Superman film.
 
2013-06-14 01:24:24 PM

KiltedBastich: So show Superman get desperate and cut loose with his full strength, show Zod having a "holy shiat I'm so farked!" moment when he realizes that Superman has been holding back, and then show Superman beat the everliving daylights out of Zod, leaving him a beaten wreck despite his Kryptonian powers. Ta da, satisfying resolution, climatic battle, crowning moment of awesome, and Superman doesn't kill and gets to profess loyalty to humanity by turning over Zod to them for punishment / execution.


This is in no way better than the film. It's what YOU wish to happen, fanboy fic. The film version deals with themes and internal narrative. You're using your opinion of what you'd like to see happen, with cherry picked pieces of canon to prove your point.

The climax was just fine the way it was. Waid has a point, if the most important aspect was to be true to a dated version of the character that isn't selling, and hasn't worked in film.

I'll take this Supes any day.
 
2013-06-14 01:25:22 PM

Hebalo: In the context of this story, Supes wouldn't have the first idea how to imprison him. He's barely come to terms with who he is, and what Krypton is all about. There isn't (as far as he and we know) anything that could hold him, and his entire ethos for existing is to kill Kal and the planet.


But he knows it's the yellow sun that gives him his powers. Doesn't take much to move from that idea to reasoning that depriving Zod of exposure to yellow sunlight will drain his powers.

HST's Dead Carcass: Oh, yes, the whole 'pick a bus up by the bumper and swing it like a baseball bat' routine. The one that got me was the end of Doom where they are fighting the solar flare and it only takes about 150 seconds for the solar flare to reach the Earth. I was like: um, 8 minutes and some change, and that has mass, so, longer, fools!


Actually, if they have independant flying powers it's fine, because they can use the flying powers to offset their exertions. You can assume he's anchoring himself in place by actively using his flight to counterbalance the force he's exerting.

Now, with someone like the Hulk, it's much harder to explain away.
 
2013-06-14 01:25:23 PM

Rwa2play: Hebalo: Rwa2play: Which is why I stated this would've been a better story if it were about Wonder Woman.

Look no offense, as you clearly seem interested in the character and the movie, but go see the damn thing before you make these sweeping (and in my opinion, totally wrong) statements.

None taken. :)  I'm just inferring from the reviews I've read, comments here and Waid's own take.  I just want this to be a great movie and put DC back on the map, not a movie that, while great, reminds me of the huge plot holes of "The Dark Knight Rises".


It's much, much better than Rises. Somewhere between Begins and Dark Knight, I'd say. You're going to love it.
 
2013-06-14 01:26:01 PM
Let's not leave out...

Lack of background set continuity from scene to scene

Scene editing done by a monkey

The utter humorlessness of the writing

Theatre of destruction type scenes involving hundreds of people where basically nobody dies.

Every plot point being based either on Kryptonian phlebotinum that gets contradicted five minutes later, or on contrived threat to Kal-el's F&F

/seen it, and it was poorly done.
 
2013-06-14 01:27:01 PM

un4gvn666: These complaints boil down to irrational idealism.

Spoilers:


Superman was begging and pleading with Zod to stop what he was doing. Multiple times he screamed for him to stop. Zod was self-destructive. He didn't care if he died. Zod's home planet, his reason for existing, was completely wiped out by the child of one if its own citizens.Zod was willing to destroy an entire planet to get revenge against Superman for that act, and he was going to start by incinerating an entire family. When Superman takes the only solution available to him to stop imminent death, he is visibly emotionally distressed. He was just forced into murdering the only known survivor of his home planet, the only other person of his species, and he sells that distress perfectly. Even Lois, having seen what he just did, comforted him, knowing he was forced to do something that goes against everything he is. The emotion was raw, it was brilliantly acted, and it humanized Superman in a way I didn't expect from the film.

If you can watch that scene and say "they've thrown away everything the character stands for" then it's easy for people to say you have unrealistic expectations for a Superman film.


Thanks, that helps justify it some.

I'm still gonna tease the shiat out of my Superman loving friend: Kal El is a murderer. He's no better than Luthor. Darkseid has nothing on that murderer Kal El.

Why? Because I can!
 
2013-06-14 01:29:08 PM

KiltedBastich: Actually, if they have independant flying powers it's fine, because they can use the flying powers to offset their exertions. You can assume he's anchoring himself in place by actively using his flight to counterbalance the force he's exerting.


I'm more biatching about the structural integrity of the object they are wielding. There is no way you can pick up and swing a bus by it's front bumper. Or grabbing random chunks of Asphalt to throw. Asphalt doesn't work that way!!
 
2013-06-14 01:30:12 PM

Hebalo: This is in no way better than the film. It's what YOU wish to happen, fanboy fic. The film version deals with themes and internal narrative. You're using your opinion of what you'd like to see happen, with cherry picked pieces of canon to prove your point.

The climax was just fine the way it was. Waid has a point, if the most important aspect was to be true to a dated version of the character that isn't selling, and hasn't worked in film.

I'll take this Supes any day.


It's not supposed to be better. It's supposed to demonstrate that the ending they picked was a deliberate choice to discard one of the most fundamental defining aspects of the character, and that it was not necessary to do so because a effective narrative that did not require that discarding that aspect of the character was equally plausible.

And if you think that a code against killing makes a character dated, might I suggest you avoid Batman as well. After all, he was so dated when he refused to kill anyone in Nolan's trilogy, wasn't he?

/the 90's called, they want to tell you about these new grim and gritty antiheroes willing to kill they are making all the rage.
 
2013-06-14 01:30:13 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: Thanks, that helps justify it some.

I'm still gonna tease the shiat out of my Superman loving friend: Kal El is a murderer. He's no better than Luthor. Darkseid has nothing on that murderer Kal El.

Why? Because I can!


Ah, but murder is causing the intentional death of another human being. Kal El killed an alien.
 
2013-06-14 01:32:03 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: Why? Because I can!


LOL, you seem like a cool guy, at least.
 
2013-06-14 01:32:19 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: I'm more biatching about the structural integrity of the object they are wielding. There is no way you can pick up and swing a bus by it's front bumper. Or grabbing random chunks of Asphalt to throw. Asphalt doesn't work that way!!


This was one thing I like about Superboy's tactile telekinesis, actually. He can actually pick up a building by a corner and throw it, and have that not be internally inconsistent!
 
2013-06-14 01:32:22 PM

FirstNationalBastard: Pilikia: Mark Waid does not know a lot about Superman. Mark Waid knows a lot about what he thinks Superman should be (insert stop liking things I don't like image here). And his navel-gazing opinioneering aside, the man doesn't know the first thing about writing a coherent movie review.

Yeah, the guy who wrote Kingdom Come and knows comic book history like the back of his hand knows NOTHING about Superman.


Well, let's take a look at Kingdom Come, shall we (with spoilers):

The Joker visits Metropolis, kills Lois and the entire Daily Planet crew.  Superman won't kill the Joker, Magog does (right on the way to the courthouse, no less), goes on trial for the Joker's murder (despite public outcry calling for the death penalty for a criminal who time and time again was allowed to live and only killed more when he escaped) and is acquitted despite Superman's protest that being judge, jury and executioner isn't right.  Supes loses public favor and flees Metropolis.  Magog goes on to battle a bunch of bad guys in the corn belt who eventually rip open Captain Atom, causing a nuclear explosion that lays waste to Kansas and millions of people.

Ffwd to a Superman in exile at the Fortress, bitter and angry at the battle with Magog and the loss of all he holds dear, and who at the advice of Wonder Woman comes back to yoke the chaos, uses Apokolips tech to build a gulag for supervillains, imprisoning them without due process, using holograms to psychologically 'condition' them not to kill, which just makes them angrier.  Superman becomes more and more like the Justice Lord version, saying that if the JL is coming back, they're going to keep things under control.

Ffwd to the end battle where villains battle heroes and Supes battles a mind-controlled Captain Marvel (and is losing).  The government drops a nuke on them, with Marvel diverting the bomb, the blast takes out all but a handful of heroes and villains, and Supes goes to the UN and tries to drop the ceiling on them in a murderous fury, with only the avatar of Alex Ross' dad to convince him otherwise.

Supes comes to his senses, everyone's happy.  Ffwd a few months to a superhero-themed restaurant.  Diana is pregnant with Clark's superfetus, Bruce Wayne already knows because the Amazon looks puffy, then Clark finishes cooking Bruce's steak with heat vision.  If Alfred E. Neumann had made a cameo at the end I wouldn't have been more disappointed.

While I did find the overall story compelling, Waid's whole "no kill" argument can go stuff it.  Kal-El's moral compass was all over the farking map in Kingdom Come, and even though Birthright did have some compelling pieces to it, only parts of it were used in the movie.  He should be thankful that some of his creativity was cemented in Superman film canon and leave that "Soul Aura" shiat for Captain Eo II.
 
2013-06-14 01:32:37 PM

KiltedBastich: Hebalo: This is in no way better than the film. It's what YOU wish to happen, fanboy fic. The film version deals with themes and internal narrative. You're using your opinion of what you'd like to see happen, with cherry picked pieces of canon to prove your point.

The climax was just fine the way it was. Waid has a point, if the most important aspect was to be true to a dated version of the character that isn't selling, and hasn't worked in film.

I'll take this Supes any day.

It's not supposed to be better. It's supposed to demonstrate that the ending they picked was a deliberate choice to discard one of the most fundamental defining aspects of the character, and that it was not necessary to do so because a effective narrative that did not require that discarding that aspect of the character was equally plausible.

And if you think that a code against killing makes a character dated, might I suggest you avoid Batman as well. After all, he was so dated when he refused to kill anyone in Nolan's trilogy, wasn't he?

/the 90's called, they want to tell you about these new grim and gritty antiheroes willing to kill they are making all the rage.


Your argument is essentially "writers make choices". Yes, that's a part of the job. They chose to use that scene to accentuate the struggle Kal is undergoing. And they did a damn fine job of it.

The code doesn't date him, but neither should it handcuff him. I think you're just nitpicking for the sake of doing so.
 
2013-06-14 01:32:59 PM

KiltedBastich: Which was another of Waid's criticisms. Why didn't Superman take the fight to somewhere where there were less people around?


Because Zod wouldn't let him? Had he tried to do that, Zod would have just gone full tilt

un4gvn666: If you can watch that scene and say "they've thrown away everything the character stands for" then it's easy for people to say you have unrealistic expectations for a Superman film.


This
 
2013-06-14 01:34:54 PM
The Flash: So you're not a Boy Scout after all.
Superman:  Never made it past my first merit badge.

Having Superman struggle with crossing "the line" isn't exactly unheard of.  The Justice League animated series really hammered on this, to the point where Batman has to stop him from killing Darkseid.  So, if the idea of him making the "hard choice" is the biggest complaint, people are looking at the character through a pretty narrow lense.
 
2013-06-14 01:48:22 PM

Hebalo: Your argument is essentially "writers make choices". Yes, that's a part of the job. They chose to use that scene to accentuate the struggle Kal is undergoing. And they did a damn fine job of it.

The code doesn't date him, but neither should it handcuff him. I think you're just nitpicking for the sake of doing so.


They made a choice to discard the code. That code is what keeps him from becoming judge, jury and executioner. Without that code, a great many other things the character does and doesn't do no longer made sense, because they were the logical consequences of using his powers to solve problems while not simply killing the source of the problem, which is after all a solution that is trivially simple for him to use at nearly any time.

Most people have some difficulty killing everyone who causes them problems. Superman would have no such problems. Only the most powerful beings around can give Superman a run for his money. As has been pointed out, if you do away with Superman's code against killing, why isn't Lex Luthor a greasy smear? Superman could kill him in such a way that no one would ever even know he did it in the first place, let alone be able to prove it.
 
2013-06-14 01:49:05 PM

KiltedBastich: It's again part of the canon that Superman's power levels grow slowly as he gets older and absorbs more solar energy.


Doesn't it depend on his midichlorian count?
 
2013-06-14 01:49:15 PM
I really, really wanted to like Man of Steel, but it was just a bad film all the way around. From the shaky-cam, "Bourne"-like action cuts, the non-sensical scenes on Krypton (oh noes the planet's gonna blow up, if only there were some way off of here....I mean besides the hundreds of spaceships currently flying around), the non-linear storytelling interrupting any shot at character development, to the "Transformers"-like 'splosions, to Perry White's ear-stud. Just blahhhh.
 
2013-06-14 01:53:01 PM

Graboidz: I really, really wanted to like Man of Steel, but it was just a bad film all the way around.



Could not disagree more. Brilliant film, a joy to watch, everything I could want in a Superman film.
 
2013-06-14 01:55:55 PM

KiltedBastich: un4gvn666: I was going to post something similar. Also, despite the criticisms of the ending "not being in line with his character", which I strongly disagree with based on watching the damn scene itself, no one has been able to suggest an ending to that fight that wouldn't be akin to wiping your ass with a film strip.

To elaborate on my previous suggestion: Superman has been on Earth for more than 20 years, absorbing yellow sunlight the whole time, but also learning to limit himself so as not to accidentally destroy everything he comes in contact with. Zod has just arrived on Earth, has only just gained his powers, and started learning how to handle them. Heck, they even address this in the movie.

It's again part of the canon that Superman's power levels grow slowly as he gets older and absorbs more solar energy. For example, in Kingdom Come Luthor mentions that Kryptonite doesn't affect Superman the way it used to because of the decades he's spent under yellow sunlight growing stronger. It is perfectly within canon to presume that 2 decades of extra yellow sunlight exposure would give Superman a real edge over Zod who had newly arrived on Earth.

So show Superman get desperate and cut loose with his full strength, show Zod having a "holy shiat I'm so farked!" moment when he realizes that Superman has been holding back, and then show Superman beat the everliving daylights out of Zod, leaving him a beaten wreck despite his Kryptonian powers. Ta da, satisfying resolution, climatic battle, crowning moment of awesome, and Superman doesn't kill and gets to profess loyalty to humanity by turning over Zod to them for punishment / execution.

I repeat, this is all a plot device. The decision to change the character was deliberate and not needed, and that is why Waid is upset about it, and I agree with his criticisms.


I think you discredited your own argument. Isn't the whole premise of this movie that Superman is learning, well, how to be Superman? How can he be concerned about not destroying everything but then make the decision to just say "Fark it if I'm gonna win I have to go all out"? Not to mention that yes he's known about these powers, but this is the first enemy he's had to fight with them, how is he any more capable of control than Zod? Especially since he kept them a secret for most of his life and has no clue what his true capabilities are? And let's say Supes does unleash and beat Zod to a pulp in your version of the movie, how the hell is he and/or humanity supposed to contain or control him? It seems a bit more ideal that Supes kills him rather than trying to write in somewhere that Jor El just happened to know that Kal would have to face off against other Kryptonians and surprise! I have this cool alien tech that will help you control the situation, kinda makes for an anticlimactic situation-see the other superman movies. I understand your sticking to your guns about Superman not killing and kudos. As a life long Superman fan I applaud you want him to be the hero he's known to be. But I think the kill does set up the foundation for him to become that hero in a movie version, as someone mentioned upthread. Comics are continuous so it's understandable that you can keep villains alive to come back later and do stuff. But movies are appealing to a wider audience and don't run in the lines comics do, which is why most movie series aren't exceeding long. However I do realize Hollywood is changing that trend.
 
2013-06-14 01:56:34 PM

Graboidz: the non-sensical scenes on Krypton (oh noes the planet's gonna blow up, if only there were some way off of here....I mean besides the hundreds of spaceships currently flying around)


Yeah because it was the movie that invented that...

Troll harder.
 
2013-06-14 02:02:30 PM

KiltedBastich: And if you think that a code against killing makes a character dated, might I suggest you avoid Batman as well. After all, he was so dated when he refused to kill anyone in Nolan's trilogy, wasn't he?


Refused to kill. Feh. Two minutes later Nolan made him into a hypocrit.

I wonder how meny died when the League of Shadows palace went ker-blooey?
Sure some of the ninjas escaped, but what about the farmer Bruce was supposed to execute?
 
2013-06-14 02:03:57 PM

give me doughnuts: KiltedBastich: And if you think that a code against killing makes a character dated, might I suggest you avoid Batman as well. After all, he was so dated when he refused to kill anyone in Nolan's trilogy, wasn't he?

Refused to kill. Feh. Two minutes later Nolan made him into a hypocrit.

I wonder how meny died when the League of Shadows palace went ker-blooey?
Sure some of the ninjas escaped, but what about the farmer Bruce was supposed to execute?


Bruce would not kill the farmer, but Bruce did also not have to save him.
 
2013-06-14 02:04:28 PM

rocky_howard: Graboidz: the non-sensical scenes on Krypton (oh noes the planet's gonna blow up, if only there were some way off of here....I mean besides the hundreds of spaceships currently flying around)

Yeah because it was the movie that invented that...

Troll harder.


Not trolling in any way, I was just confused as to why Kryptonians would just kind of stand around waiting for their planet to explode when there are obviously fleets of spaceships circling overhead, and they have the ability to travel to other worlds and terraform them in needed?
 
2013-06-14 02:05:14 PM

give me doughnuts: KiltedBastich: And if you think that a code against killing makes a character dated, might I suggest you avoid Batman as well. After all, he was so dated when he refused to kill anyone in Nolan's trilogy, wasn't he?

Refused to kill. Feh. Two minutes later Nolan made him into a hypocrit.

I wonder how meny died when the League of Shadows palace went ker-blooey?
Sure some of the ninjas escaped, but what about the farmer Bruce was supposed to execute?


Ha! This. At least someone else noticed this besides me. What about the rockets he uses on his bike/tumbler? I'm pretty sure people aren't walking away from those explosions...
 
2013-06-14 02:08:43 PM

Graboidz: Not trolling in any way, I was just confused as to why Kryptonians would just kind of stand around waiting for their planet to explode when there are obviously fleets of spaceships circling overhead, and they have the ability to travel to other worlds and terraform them in needed?


None of the ships at Krypton, apart from the "prison ship" were shown to be able to leave the atmosphere (that I recall,) and the outpost ships were abandoned long ago, as (likely) was the entire program.

I think the whole point was that Jor-El was trying to convince them to leave, but no one supported/believed him.
 
2013-06-14 02:11:10 PM

FirstNationalBastard: Coincidentally, Mark Waid happened to write one of the best Superman stories ever.

He just had to call it "Irredeemable".


THIS.  SO.  MUCH.

Whenever I thought that book reached it's end, it kept going and was good about it.
 
2013-06-14 02:11:48 PM

Graboidz: rocky_howard: Graboidz: the non-sensical scenes on Krypton (oh noes the planet's gonna blow up, if only there were some way off of here....I mean besides the hundreds of spaceships currently flying around)

Yeah because it was the movie that invented that...

Troll harder.

Not trolling in any way, I was just confused as to why Kryptonians would just kind of stand around waiting for their planet to explode when there are obviously fleets of spaceships circling overhead, and they have the ability to travel to other worlds and terraform them in needed?


They have flying cars not spaceships, they went all space exploration == bad and scraped the rockets after somebody blew up a moon
 
2013-06-14 02:13:25 PM

Hebalo: Graboidz: Not trolling in any way, I was just confused as to why Kryptonians would just kind of stand around waiting for their planet to explode when there are obviously fleets of spaceships circling overhead, and they have the ability to travel to other worlds and terraform them in needed?

None of the ships at Krypton, apart from the "prison ship" were shown to be able to leave the atmosphere (that I recall,) and the outpost ships were abandoned long ago, as (likely) was the entire program.

I think the whole point was that Jor-El was trying to convince them to leave, but no one supported/believed him.


I thought the same thing. Seeing that in every Superman origin I have seen. It is Jor-El who is arguing to leave Krypton because its about to explode and everyone else does not believe him. Heck, Superman The Animated Adventure had this origin.
 
2013-06-14 02:21:08 PM

yves0010: Hebalo: Graboidz: Not trolling in any way, I was just confused as to why Kryptonians would just kind of stand around waiting for their planet to explode when there are obviously fleets of spaceships circling overhead, and they have the ability to travel to other worlds and terraform them in needed?

None of the ships at Krypton, apart from the "prison ship" were shown to be able to leave the atmosphere (that I recall,) and the outpost ships were abandoned long ago, as (likely) was the entire program.

I think the whole point was that Jor-El was trying to convince them to leave, but no one supported/believed him.

I thought the same thing. Seeing that in every Superman origin I have seen. It is Jor-El who is arguing to leave Krypton because its about to explode and everyone else does not believe him. Heck, Superman The Animated Adventure had this origin.


That's fine, and I don't want to get hung up on what is essentially a minor point that we could probably debate all afternoon. And I really hope Man of Steel brings in some big bank so that a Justice League movie will get the go-ahead. I just felt the whole film, from storyline to presentation, missed the mark.
 
2013-06-14 02:23:01 PM
I got back from seeing it 20 minutes ago. Excellent movie all around.
 
2013-06-14 02:27:16 PM
Movie made 21 million on late opening Thursday, let's see how it goes during the weekend.  Plus CinemaScore polled audiences who gave it a B+. So yeah, RT is just dumb.

http://www.deadline.com/2013/06/man-of-steel-beginning-worldwide-rel ea se-record-opening-day-in-the-philippines/
 
2013-06-14 02:31:04 PM

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


Keep in mind that he did so only after Zod had committed a full genocide of Earth and there was no possible way for him to stop him from moving on to other dimensions/worlds and wiping out untold lives. All others in that dimension were dead and there was no way to contain them much less imprison them.

It also caused a psychological collapse for Superman and an alternate personality formed. IIRC, it was referenced in the years that followed as the toughest decision he ever made and one he regretted.
 
2013-06-14 02:34:37 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.


Literally.

(just in case anyone thought you were thinking figuratively)
 
2013-06-14 02:34:43 PM

PsyLord: 58%?  Wow, that's not good.


This is the End is at 89% looks like I made the right choice on which one to go see this weekend
 
2013-06-14 02:35:55 PM

pat34us: This is the End is at 89% looks like I made the right choice on which one to go see this weekend


Both are good, This is the End is pretty freaking hilarious

It peters out a little near the end, but wraps up nicely
 
2013-06-14 02:35:58 PM
Best Superman Story Ever:


3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-06-14 02:40:31 PM
Granted, Amy Adams doesn't look much like Margo Kidder, so I had some trouble buying her as Lois. On the other hand, she was a better reporter and detective, tracking down Clark at the Kent farm early in the movie.
 
2013-06-14 02:49:08 PM
Couple of thing:
1. Bay didn't do it, so +100,000,000 for that.
2. In our internet based society, no one will be happy with anything.
    2.a.  Wait until Episode VII comes out.  People will want to crucify JJ Abrams for not doing Start Wars justice.  The film may be really good, but because it didn't have enough lightsabers or because someone felt like they cast the wrong person for character X, people will hate it.
3. I personally think it was the Superman movie we should have gotten.  It had enough back story, it had enough humility, it worked.
4. Why is everyone complaining about Superman not saving everyone?  It is kind of hard to save people when you are getting thrown around a town/city.
   4.a. Superman - Hey Zod, come chase me out to the middle of nowhere.
          Zod - You get back here. (Zod starts towards Superman then proceeds to the base of a large skyscraper)
          (Cut to Superman in the middle of a field looking back at Metropolis and seeing another skyscraper fall down and hearing people scream for help.)
          (Superman looks at the camera) Isn't this what you people wanted?

Dark Knight (movie) = Man of Steel (movie)

Spoiler:
"I'm American as they come.  I grew up in Kansas."

/After the credits: Would have loved to see Superman fly to Gotham City, start up the bat signal and when Batman shows up ask him if he wants to start a crime fighting team.  A league, if you will.  (Fade to black)
 
2013-06-14 02:51:38 PM
And, here's my biggest biatch about Superman:

The man always has to be careful, oh so careful as to not crush everything he freaking breathes on. If he is NEVER able to flex or stress test his muscles, where is he getting muscle tone? Shouldn't he be Kate Moss skinny or WoW player flabby? He can never truly exercise or workout, so why all the muscle tone?
 
2013-06-14 02:53:16 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: And, here's my biggest biatch about Superman:

The man always has to be careful, oh so careful as to not crush everything he freaking breathes on. If he is NEVER able to flex or stress test his muscles, where is he getting muscle tone? Shouldn't he be Kate Moss skinny or WoW player flabby? He can never truly exercise or workout, so why all the muscle tone?


Bad post is bad.

1.- He's not human, so he won't function like one.
2.- His muscles are super dense. They won't go flabby.
3.- The sun/atmosphere nourishes
4.- Just because he's strong doesn't mean he doesn't exert. What kind of logic is this?
 
2013-06-14 02:57:31 PM

sid244: /After the credits: Would have loved to see Superman fly to Gotham City, start up the bat signal and when Batman shows up ask him if he wants to start a crime fighting team. A league, if you will. (Fade to black)


Supposedly, a satellite visible early in the film has the WayneCorp logo on it.
 
2013-06-14 02:58:00 PM
I did develop a crush on the bad Kryptonian girl who worked for Zod. Unlike most of the others, she moved like a trained fighter.
 
2013-06-14 03:01:53 PM

Alphax: I did develop a crush on the bad Kryptonian girl who worked for Zod. Unlike most of the others, she moved like a trained fighter.


Hell yes. She was goth hot, and she was kicking the shiat out of Superman for a bit, which I thought was just awesome.
 
2013-06-14 03:02:31 PM

RexTalionis: sid244: /After the credits: Would have loved to see Superman fly to Gotham City, start up the bat signal and when Batman shows up ask him if he wants to start a crime fighting team. A league, if you will. (Fade to black)

Supposedly, a satellite visible early in the film has the WayneCorp logo on it.


Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.
 
2013-06-14 03:03:06 PM

Hebalo: There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.


Whoa, wtf? I totally missed that.

Guess I better watch it again!
 
2013-06-14 03:04:08 PM
I just listened to Zack Snyder on NPR: "I have a reverence for that mythology and I really wanted to treat the experience of seeing Superman born [with care]. ... And that ancient technology ... I find fun to think about. ... Within that world, it was fun to see Jor-El putting his son into the basket and [metaphorically] sending him down the river."

Did you hear that Abrams? That's how you do a reboot.
 
2013-06-14 03:04:12 PM

RexTalionis: sid244: /After the credits: Would have loved to see Superman fly to Gotham City, start up the bat signal and when Batman shows up ask him if he wants to start a crime fighting team. A league, if you will. (Fade to black)

Supposedly, a satellite visible early in the film has the WayneCorp logo on it.


I couldn't tell if it was or not and I've seen the thing twice, there are TONS of Lexcorp stuff though and it does set the stage for Lex's rise to try and point out to humanity that we don't need a savior.
 
2013-06-14 03:05:31 PM

IdBeCrazyIf: RexTalionis: sid244: /After the credits: Would have loved to see Superman fly to Gotham City, start up the bat signal and when Batman shows up ask him if he wants to start a crime fighting team. A league, if you will. (Fade to black)

Supposedly, a satellite visible early in the film has the WayneCorp logo on it.

I couldn't tell if it was or not and I've seen the thing twice, there are TONS of Lexcorp stuff though and it does set the stage for Lex's rise to try and point out to humanity that we don't need a savior.


Especially if that savior is indirectly causing untold millions in property damage and casualties in the tens to hundreds of thousands.

I'm looking forward to it.
 
2013-06-14 03:05:45 PM

Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.


God you guys got better eyes than I do
 
2013-06-14 03:07:51 PM

NewbornRook: I think you discredited your own argument. Isn't the whole premise of this movie that Superman is learning, well, how to be Superman? How can he be concerned about not destroying everything but then make the decision to just say "Fark it if I'm gonna win I have to go all out"? Not to mention that yes he's known about these powers, but this is the first enemy he's had to fight with them, how is he any more capable of control than Zod? Especially since he kept them a secret for most of his life and has no clue what his true capabilities are? And let's say Supes does unleash and beat Zod to a pulp in your version of the movie, how the hell is he and/or humanity supposed to contain or control him? It seems a bit more ideal that Supes kills him rather than trying to write in somewhere that Jor El just happened to know that Kal would have to face off against other Kryptonians and surprise! I have this cool alien tech that will help you control the situation, kinda makes for an anticlimactic situation-see the other superman movies. I understand your sticking to your guns about Superman not killing and kudos. As a life long Superman fan I applaud you want him to be the hero he's known to be. But I think the kill does set up the foundation for him to become that hero in a movie version, as someone mentioned upthread. Comics are continuous so it's understandable that you can keep villains alive to come back later and do stuff. But movies are appealing to a wider audience and don't run in the lines comics do, which is why most movie series aren't exceeding long. However I do realize Hollywood is changing that trend.


The same way that a martial artist learns to pull punches in competition so as not to hurt his opponents, but can still strike with deadly force when needed.

According to this narrative, Superman has had his full powers since childhood. He's spent literally decades learning not to use his full strength, because to him the world might as well be made of cardboard and tissue paper. He can crumble walls and break bones just by stumbling and reflexively throwing out his hands to catch himself. He has to control that constantly. You live like that long enough, it's automatic and reactive, nearly instinctive. He would have to consciously choose to use his full strength without that restraint - something that Zod probably hasn't really even started learning to do in the first place.
 
2013-06-14 03:16:59 PM
Just got back from seeing this movie, I thought it was pretty good
 
2013-06-14 03:21:55 PM

IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do


Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.
 
2013-06-14 03:23:05 PM

imashark: Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.


The person, no but trust me there is enough ground work laid its pretty damn obvious he'll be in the next
 
2013-06-14 03:23:59 PM

imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.


Not this one. But there's Lexcorp signs around, so he'll likely be in the next one, plotting against this dangerous alien menace.
 
2013-06-14 03:24:25 PM

imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.


Lex Luthor is not in Man of Steel.

Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.
 
2013-06-14 03:29:01 PM

Dimensio: Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.


I want them to pick someone in their early thirties, younger fresher
 
2013-06-14 03:29:56 PM

Dimensio: imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.

Lex Luthor is not in Man of Steel.

Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.



No, he played Gene Hackman playing Lex Luthor.
 
2013-06-14 03:31:44 PM

IdBeCrazyIf: Dimensio: Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.

I want them to pick someone in their early thirties, younger fresher


Tom Hardy? He's done a bald villain before...
 
2013-06-14 03:31:44 PM

IdBeCrazyIf: Dimensio: Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.

I want them to pick someone in their early thirties, younger fresher


Michael C. Hall should be available.
 
2013-06-14 03:31:49 PM

Dimensio: imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.

Lex Luthor is not in Man of Steel.

Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.


I don't think Spacey could pull it off. He's too... jaunty. Luthor needs to be cold, calculating, with a slimy joy that oozes into ever scene. He revels in the power he's amassed as head of LexCorp, and disregards any rules that bar him from amassing more.

Superman is Lex's natural enemy because Superman is the one man with more power than him that you can't bribe, blackmail, or murder. Add Lex's xenophobia, and you have a perfect storm.

I just don't see Spacy pulling it off.

/Yes I realize I might be fan-fictioning, but my interpretation of the core of modern Luthor is correct.
 
2013-06-14 03:31:49 PM

IdBeCrazyIf: Dimensio: Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.

I want them to pick someone in their early thirties, younger fresher


Michael Rosenbaum is 40, but he looks younger.
 
2013-06-14 03:33:32 PM

Dimensio: imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.

Lex Luthor is not in Man of Steel.

Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.


images2.wikia.nocookie.net

Take Clancy Brown, shave his head and beard. Voila.
 
2013-06-14 03:34:36 PM

RexTalionis: Dimensio: imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.

Lex Luthor is not in Man of Steel.

Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.

[images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 299x400]

Take Clancy Brown, shave his head and beard. Voila.


He definitely has the voice for it.

/heh
 
2013-06-14 03:38:18 PM

imashark: RexTalionis: Dimensio: imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.

Lex Luthor is not in Man of Steel.

Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.

[images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 299x400]

Take Clancy Brown, shave his head and beard. Voila.

He definitely has the voice for it.

/heh


He was the voice of Paralax in the Green Lantern movie.
 
2013-06-14 03:43:35 PM

imashark: He definitely has the voice for it.

/heh


iseewhatyoudidthere.jpg
 
2013-06-14 03:50:23 PM
Jon Hamm should be Lex Luthor. Between having worked with Snyder in Sucker Punch plus his funny or die sketch:  http://t.co/Dg2bESN3Fn  plus his Don Draper character, he has everything to make a great Lex, heck, even the alliteration.
 
2013-06-14 03:51:55 PM
LEX LUTHOR
 
2013-06-14 03:53:34 PM

Alphax: Granted, Amy Adams doesn't look much like Margo Kidder, so I had some trouble buying her as Lois. On the other hand, she was a better reporter and detective, tracking down Clark at the Kent farm early in the movie.


When I see it, I think I'll be more distracted that Zod isn't played by Terance Stamp than with a non Margo Kidder looking Amy Adams.
 
2013-06-14 03:53:43 PM
LEX LUTHOR


i.imgur.com
 
2013-06-14 03:56:28 PM
imashark:

He definitely has the voice for it.

/heh


I sort of like the idea of an older Lex outwitting the younger, stronger Clark.  However, in the past decade or so Lex was made out to be this subtle musclehead, pumped up by Kryptonite-enhanced steroids.  In the original comics Lex was just this bald guy who outwitted Superman.  Clancy could pull that off, and the ability to merge his voice with the actor from the animated series would be amazing.  If they could have cast Mark Hamill as the Joker in Dark Night, only a 25-year younger Hamill? Get out of town...
 
2013-06-14 04:00:53 PM

RexTalionis: Dimensio: imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.

Lex Luthor is not in Man of Steel.

Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.

[images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 299x400]

Take Clancy Brown, shave his head and beard. Voila.


Then you have the Kurgin, no Lex Luthor.
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-06-14 04:01:38 PM

Nana's Vibrator: Alphax: Granted, Amy Adams doesn't look much like Margo Kidder, so I had some trouble buying her as Lois. On the other hand, she was a better reporter and detective, tracking down Clark at the Kent farm early in the movie.

When I see it, I think I'll be more distracted that Zod isn't played by Terance Stamp than with a non Margo Kidder looking Amy Adams.


Eh, this Zod is a more complex, better written character. He's a patriot, the defender of the people of Krypton. But he's willing to exterminate humanity in order to bring back his people.
 
2013-06-14 04:04:59 PM
I like Mark Waid but he is wrong. Superman has killed before and i am sure he will again but he does not take it lightly.

The movie was damn good. Go see it
 
2013-06-14 04:07:42 PM

Alphax: Nana's Vibrator: Alphax: Granted, Amy Adams doesn't look much like Margo Kidder, so I had some trouble buying her as Lois. On the other hand, she was a better reporter and detective, tracking down Clark at the Kent farm early in the movie.

When I see it, I think I'll be more distracted that Zod isn't played by Terance Stamp than with a non Margo Kidder looking Amy Adams.

Eh, this Zod is a more complex, better written character. He's a patriot, the defender of the people of Krypton. But he's willing to exterminate humanity in order to bring back his people.


And more importantly, this Zod is played completely differently, no fear of trampling the legacy.
 
2013-06-14 04:09:26 PM
I heard Henry is a great Superman and Shannon is a damn good Zod...that's it.
 
2013-06-14 04:15:11 PM
****SPOILERS FROM REVIEW*****

Haven't seen it yet, but from what Waid says, the third act pretty much exactly what happens in Transformers: Dark of the Moon.

Having sat through that debacle already, I don't need to hurry to see it again in Superman form. I've never understood why comic book films almost always need to end with the good guy outright KILLING the bad guy. What really galls me about this is that superhero comics for decades understood that having the hero kill or otherwise irreparably defeat the bad guys resulted in pretty anticlimactic situations. All the hero has to do is get the bigger gun, or be the sneakier party, or have the shortest fuse, and then the villain's down for good.

Because of the comic code restrictions and industry policing, comic books spent decades being about situations where the heroes couldn't kill and HAD to cause (and contain!) collateral damage to defeat their foes who  were actually trying to kill them. That gave the stories much more tension and a greater sense of heroism -- after all, the heart of mythology is about overcoming death and all-consuming evil to achieve wisdom and mastery over the world around us.

I can't accept any argument that Superman had to kill once to have remorse or anything of the sort. That's not the character; that's not what he stands for or who he is. The point of Superman has always been that he's better than the rest of us, a model figure to look up to. It makes sense that Superman would toss Zod into the Phantom Zone like in Superman 2. It doesn't make any sense at all to have a giant battle with him at the exclusion of others and then to end it with a fatal neck snap.

That's just as dumb as Optimus Prime shooting someone begging for mercy in the head. It's not just a betrayal of the character; it's a dark reflection of how 21st century culture understands heroes to be the sort who will kill a bad guy rather than look for any more peaceful, humanizing alternative.
 
2013-06-14 04:15:29 PM
I vote Benedict Cumberbatch as the next Lex Luthor, but then again I'd like to see him play every villain in all movies from here on out.
 
2013-06-14 04:16:55 PM

secularsage: ****SPOILERS FROM REVIEW*****


mitEj: I like Mark Waid but he is wrong. Superman has killed before and i am sure he will again but he does not take it lightly.

The movie was damn good. Go see it

 
2013-06-14 04:17:44 PM
 

secularsage: Haven't seen it yet, but from what Waid says, the third act pretty much exactly what happens in Transformers: Dark of the Moon.

It makes sense that Superman would toss Zod into the Phantom Zone like in Superman 2. It doesn't make any sense at all to have a giant battle with him at the exclusion of others and then to end it with a fatal neck snap.

That's just as dumb as Optimus Prime shooting someone begging for mercy in the head. It's not just a betrayal of the character; it's a dark reflection of how 21st century culture understands heroes to be the sort who will kill a bad guy rather than look for any more peaceful, humanizing alternative.


See that bolded part? It means you're talking out of your ass. Thus, your opinion of something you don't understand is meaningless.
 
2013-06-14 04:19:41 PM
I feel like we don't need another long drawn-out origins story in every reboot. One of the things the '89 Batman movie did right was jump right into the action and relegate Batman's backstory to a quick flashback. Yeah, they farked up the detail about having Joker kill his parents instead of Joe Chill, but they had the right idea in keeping the backstory to a minimum.
 
2013-06-14 04:21:56 PM

velvet_fog: I feel like we don't need another long drawn-out origins story in every reboot. One of the things the '89 Batman movie did right was jump right into the action and relegate Batman's backstory to a quick flashback. Yeah, they farked up the detail about having Joker kill his parents instead of Joe Chill, but they had the right idea in keeping the backstory to a minimum.


To be fair, we have only seen Superman's origin story once before in the last 50 years. This movie gives us brief flashbacks, but doesn't dwell solely in it, and it also adds nuances of character that make up the theme of hte film.
 
2013-06-14 04:23:14 PM

velvet_fog: I feel like we don't need another long drawn-out origins story in every reboot.


I agree, and apparently so does Zach Snyder, since Superman's origin takes only about 20-30% of MoS.
 
2013-06-14 04:24:43 PM

Hebalo: velvet_fog: I feel like we don't need another long drawn-out origins story in every reboot. One of the things the '89 Batman movie did right was jump right into the action and relegate Batman's backstory to a quick flashback. Yeah, they farked up the detail about having Joker kill his parents instead of Joe Chill, but they had the right idea in keeping the backstory to a minimum.

To be fair, we have only seen Superman's origin story in a theatrical movie once before in the last 50 years. This movie gives us brief flashbacks, but doesn't dwell solely in it, and it also adds nuances of character that make up the theme of hte film.


I have corrected your oversight.

/Smallville was a ten year origin story.
 
2013-06-14 04:40:41 PM

RexTalionis: Dimensio: imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.

Lex Luthor is not in Man of Steel.

Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.

[images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 299x400]

Take Clancy Brown, shave his head and beard. Voila.


Interesting. He has the presence to play Luthor. Especially the more recent "tough" businessman version.
 
2013-06-14 04:41:05 PM

Hebalo: secularsage: Haven't seen it yet, but from what Waid says, the third act pretty much exactly what happens in Transformers: Dark of the Moon.

It makes sense that Superman would toss Zod into the Phantom Zone like in Superman 2. It doesn't make any sense at all to have a giant battle with him at the exclusion of others and then to end it with a fatal neck snap.

That's just as dumb as Optimus Prime shooting someone begging for mercy in the head. It's not just a betrayal of the character; it's a dark reflection of how 21st century culture understands heroes to be the sort who will kill a bad guy rather than look for any more peaceful, humanizing alternative.

See that bolded part? It means you're talking out of your ass. Thus, your opinion of something you don't understand is meaningless.


Oh, because I can't read a synopsis of an experience and make a connection? I have to experience everything firsthand to have a valid opinion on a matter, or to have the intellect to understand it?

Based on the reviews I've seen, btw, most of the people who've enjoyed this movie ARE talking out of their ass. Those of us sitting on the fence about shelling out $10-15 to see it are doing so with good reason. It looks like a Zack Snyder film with a Superman-like character. It doesn't really look like Superman.
 
2013-06-14 04:41:29 PM

Mrbogey: He has the presence to play Luthor.


He already plays Luthor. He's this version:

images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-06-14 04:42:41 PM

secularsage: Oh, because I can't read a synopsis of an experience and make a connection?


No, not when the synopsis is clearly biased and factually incorrect.
 
2013-06-14 04:48:40 PM

th0th: imashark:

He definitely has the voice for it.

/heh

I sort of like the idea of an older Lex outwitting the younger, stronger Clark.  However, in the past decade or so Lex was made out to be this subtle musclehead, pumped up by Kryptonite-enhanced steroids.  In the original comics Lex was just this bald guy who outwitted Superman.  Clancy could pull that off, and the ability to merge his voice with the actor from the animated series would be amazing.  If they could have cast Mark Hamill as the Joker in Dark Night, only a 25-year younger Hamill? Get out of town...


Luthor has been made into a "subtle musclehead" (even though recently, he hasn't been that subtle) because writers are lazy and have a hard time shoehorning him into conflicts with superheroes and supervillains if he isn't trying to bash someone's head in.

Hence why he has that stupid green suit in some comics.
 
2013-06-14 04:52:57 PM
New rule: You don't get to participate in a discussion of a film's merits and flaws if your thoughtful opinion post begins with, or contains within, the words, "I haven't seen it, but...".

It's for your protection, not ours. Because when you do that, it's inevitable that someone who actually has seen the film will take your ignorance and ram it straight up your ass.

/Loved the film
//Getting a kick....
 
2013-06-14 04:53:12 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: Superman kills. Really now? Because there was no other way? It occurs to me Superman always found an alternative way than killing, otherwise he'd just super punch every villain and exlaim: "Sorry, no other way to do it, he woulda kept going if we tried to lock him up." Lex Luthor would be a greasy stain across 3 states if this were the case.

That just seems sl wrong that Batman wouldn't kill, but Superman would. Like I said, they gotta make him edgy and flawed.

But, the flip side of this is would they had made a Superman movie true to himself, I'd be sitting here biatching about how they've done nothing to advance the character or give us anything that hasn't been done before.

I may be an asshole, but I know myself too well.



Yep. People are complaining that Man of Steel gives them exactly what they complained was missing from the last Superman movie. There was literally no way the filmmakers could win.

Just saw the movie and enjoyed it, although they could have trimmed about 10 minutes, especially during the Metropolis battle, that seemed to drag.

As for the killing scene, this was Superman's first conflict in this story. Maybe his experience finally knowing what it is like to take a life after decades of knowing he could kill anyone informs on his later stories, thus the no killing rule in later stories.

People can't whine that they want to see something new about the character and then complain that it isn't slavishly faithful to the comics.
 
2013-06-14 04:57:31 PM

secularsage: Oh, because I can't read a synopsis of an experience and make a connection? I have to experience everything firsthand to have a valid opinion on a matter, or to have the intellect to understand it?


Nope, but you did more that that, you took a synopsis, based on that decided it was exactly like the end of another film (not really knowing whether it was), and decided that the end scenario (which you haven't experienced, have no context surrounding, no appreciation for the themes and concepts the movie is concerned with), and judged it stupid.

You've clearly made your mind up, and your opinion, based on sweet fark all, must clearly mean more than a sucker like me, who, I don't know, actually SAW THE farkING MOVIE.

So I said you're talking out of your ass. Because you are.

That's all I'm saying.
 
2013-06-14 04:59:20 PM

stoli n coke: People can't whine that they want to see something new about the character and then complain that it isn't slavishly faithful to the comics.


Welcome to Fark.jpg
 
2013-06-14 05:08:01 PM
Spoilers -

Things I loved:

Lois tracking Clark down and no big "secret identity" crap. "Hi, I'm Lois, you're Clark. You're an alien and I'm cool with that."

Lois not being a worthless twat. Character had balls and wasn't damsel in distress at all (and falling through atmosphere burning up warrants screams btw).

Ma and pa kent. Costner was great.

SuperMAN. He's 33, he's a man.
 
2013-06-14 05:09:17 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: And, here's my biggest biatch about Superman:

The man always has to be careful, oh so careful as to not crush everything he freaking breathes on. If he is NEVER able to flex or stress test his muscles, where is he getting muscle tone? Shouldn't he be Kate Moss skinny or WoW player flabby? He can never truly exercise or workout, so why all the muscle tone?


And I direct you to his monologue at the end of "JLU" when he's fighting Darkseid.
 
2013-06-14 05:09:32 PM

imashark: Luthor has been made into a "subtle musclehead" (even though recently, he hasn't been that subtle) because writers are lazy and have a hard time shoehorning him into conflicts with superheroes and supervillains if he isn't trying to bash someone's head in.

Hence why he has that stupid green suit in some comics.


You're an idiot. Lex has been a musclehead before recent comics. In fact, he becoming one again is a throwback to that era:


www.weirdspace.dk

Sure, he's also been depicted as a flabby old guy but that doesn't mean the muscled version is "lazy and made by recent writers".
 
2013-06-14 05:10:28 PM

imgod2u: I just listened to Zack Snyder on NPR: "I have a reverence for that mythology and I really wanted to treat the experience of seeing Superman born [with care]. ... And that ancient technology ... I find fun to think about. ... Within that world, it was fun to see Jor-El putting his son into the basket and [metaphorically] sending him down the river."

Did you hear that Abrams? That's how you do a reboot.


Really?  Coming from a long time Trekkie that initially wanted nothing to do with the reboot, Abrams handled it well.
 
2013-06-14 05:13:13 PM

Mrbogey: RexTalionis: Dimensio: imashark: IdBeCrazyIf: Hebalo: Yes, yes it does. There's also a Lexcorp truck visible.

God you guys got better eyes than I do

Is Lex in this movie? I need to know. Because someone needs to do Lex Luthor some freaking justice.

One of the greatest villains of all time (even more malevolent, I'd argue, than the Joker) who's best portrayal on film has been a used car salesman who is trying to get into real estate.

Lex Luthor is not in Man of Steel.

Kevin Spacey could potentially serve as a good Lex Luthor. Unfortunately, his casting in Superman Returns will likely eliminate him as an option in any Man of Steel sequel, even though he did not play Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.

[images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 299x400]

Take Clancy Brown, shave his head and beard. Voila.

Interesting. He has the presence to play Luthor. Especially the more recent "tough" businessman version.


Uh, I picture him with a bald head and he looks more like Obadiah Stane.
 
2013-06-14 05:26:35 PM

Rwa2play: And I direct you to his monologue at the end of "JLU" when he's fighting Darkseid.


Oh hell yeah! I had a geekgasm watching him pound Darkseid around town. As he said, it was a rare occasion, so when does he get to go pump iron to have the perfect physique?
 
2013-06-14 05:31:14 PM

FirstNationalBastard: PsyLord: World War Z is rated at 80% and Superman: MOS at 58%.  Did I wake up in Bizarro Earth again?

I wonder... is anal sex "normal" sex on Bizarro World?


I'll glove up buttercup
 
2013-06-14 05:35:28 PM

mariner314: Lois tracking Clark down and no big "secret identity" crap. "Hi, I'm Lois, you're Clark. You're an alien and I'm cool with that."


The only drawback to such a portrayal is that it prevents a reprise of the best Superman villain speech ever.
 
2013-06-14 05:58:01 PM

Dimensio: mariner314: Lois tracking Clark down and no big "secret identity" crap. "Hi, I'm Lois, you're Clark. You're an alien and I'm cool with that."

The only drawback to such a portrayal is that it prevents a reprise of the best Superman villain speech ever.


archive.4plebs.org
 
2013-06-14 06:02:37 PM
*SPOILERS*

Thematically, I had no problem with Superman killing Zod at the end or the "disaster porn" because of just how much world-building is done through that.  The Kryptonians just about laid waste to Metropolis and Superman has shown that he is not above killing (to the casual observer).  This gives reason for the military and Lexcorp to seek to find methods to take Superman down in future movies because, as it is even said, Supes led the Kyrptonians there.  This also gives Superman cause to not wish to kill ever again.  He has now felt what it is like, it is not existential anymore and it is in the back of his head for all future battles and something that Lex can take full advantage of.  I thought it was a good move when you consider continuity that they want to be set up.

Also, am I the only one who thinks Lex is going to make his big battlesuit out of the Kryptonian armor?  It seemed way too similar in look.
 
2013-06-14 06:04:48 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: Rwa2play: And I direct you to his monologue at the end of "JLU" when he's fighting Darkseid.

Oh hell yeah! I had a geekgasm watching him pound Darkseid around town. As he said, it was a rare occasion, so when does he get to go pump iron to have the perfect physique?



You're talking about a guy that can fly and use his eyes like blowtorches with his thoughts. Speeding up his metabolism so the Krispy Kremes don't get him doesn't seem like that much of a stretch.
 
2013-06-14 06:05:33 PM

Rwa2play: imgod2u: I just listened to Zack Snyder on NPR: "I have a reverence for that mythology and I really wanted to treat the experience of seeing Superman born [with care]. ... And that ancient technology ... I find fun to think about. ... Within that world, it was fun to see Jor-El putting his son into the basket and [metaphorically] sending him down the river."

Did you hear that Abrams? That's how you do a reboot.

Really?  Coming from a long time Trekkie that initially wanted nothing to do with the reboot, Abrams handled it well.


"well" is relative. It was a decent enough movie; but ultimately forgettable. Was it an improvement over most of the prior ST movies? Sure (save ST2, 6, possibly 9). Was it a *good* movie in the grand landscape of movies? Not really.

I will choke a baby panda if Man of Steel turns out to be bad....
 
2013-06-14 06:07:06 PM

Daquin: *SPOILERS*

Thematically, I had no problem with Superman killing Zod at the end or the "disaster porn" because of just how much world-building is done through that.  The Kryptonians just about laid waste to Metropolis and Superman has shown that he is not above killing (to the casual observer).  This gives reason for the military and Lexcorp to seek to find methods to take Superman down in future movies because, as it is even said, Supes led the Kyrptonians there.  This also gives Superman cause to not wish to kill ever again.  He has now felt what it is like, it is not existential anymore and it is in the back of his head for all future battles and something that Lex can take full advantage of.  I thought it was a good move when you consider continuity that they want to be set up.

Also, am I the only one who thinks Lex is going to make his big battlesuit out of the Kryptonian armor?  It seemed way too similar in look.


Someone who gets it... Thanks.
 
2013-06-14 06:20:59 PM
This is the only thing Man of Steel really lacked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJENrNU7wC8
 
2013-06-14 06:25:44 PM
When Zod said, "You have no idea how long we've been looking for you, Kal-El.", am I the only one who thought, "About 33 years."?
 
2013-06-14 06:34:14 PM
And I just got back from it. It's pretty good, not quite as good as Batman Begins, but pretty good. Clark doesn't have any personality. This is a movie about Kal-El, and how he decides to be a human. But I usually liked it when Clark Kent had to figure out how to be Kal-El, and what sacrifices each "persona" had to make. Kill Bill was completely wrong/backwards; Superman/Kal-El is the mask, a fake person used by Clark Kent to fight for justice, etc. Batman was the weird backwards one. Bruce Wayne is fake, a mask worn by Batman to help achieve his objectives (hell, they literally tell you as much at the end of Batman Begins). But in this movie, they go 100% religious allegory, about Jesus learning who he is, and what he has to do to save humanity. It never really goes into what kind of human Clark is. He's an alien grappling w/ his humanity, not a human grappling w/ his alien nature. It's definitely a lot harder trying it this way, but it falls flat. The last scene kind of sums up what went wrong w/ a lot of his characterization. Same goes for the actor. Great job as Superman/Kal-El, but his Clark Kent is non-existent.

Zod is pretty damn good. They did a much, much better job giving him a reason for being a total jerk/villain. It makes a lot of sense, in a perverted, twisted sort of logic, for him to do the terrible things he does. Still, it also means he's not the same egotistical, charming asshole he was in Superman 2. Terrence Stamp was better than everyone else, and it was so obvious, he was genuinely puzzled when people didn't submit to him immediately. This Zod has a real reason to be a jerk, but it also just makes him a run of the mill zealot, which isn't quite as memorable. And nobody kneels before him, so he's totally not really Zod.

The special effects are passable, and the villain chick gets some of the best shots in. A lot of the time, I felt like I was watching Injustice tournament videos. Metropolis must be freaking huge, like, bigger than Manhattan, b/c they seem to destroy every thing multiple times, and there's still tons of buildings to fight through. One annoying thing (not unique to Snyder) is zooming in/out when you don't need to. Either follow alien fighter craft for the whole shot, or keep the camera zoomed out to show scale/speed. Don't zoom in and out mid shot. Look at the final space battle in Return of the Jedi, and how they shoot the dog fighters. You don't move the camera around just to move the camera around. It's like God's cameraman in the sky is a shiatty amateur or local newscast. Set up your shot, and keep it there. Jerking it around, zooming in/out, that shiat's for live CNN feeds of disasters, not movie shots. JJ Abrams is the worst offender, by far.

Definite B+. Even the silly scene w/ the priest at the church. "Hey, here's Superman, sitting in front of a stain-glass window of Jesus. Look how clever we are. See, Superman is kind of like Jesus. You follow? See, he is sent here by his Father to save humanity. How nuanced! How literary!" While I almost laughed during that scene, it didn't derail the movie.
 
2013-06-14 06:36:26 PM

stoli n coke: HST's Dead Carcass: Rwa2play: And I direct you to his monologue at the end of "JLU" when he's fighting Darkseid.

Oh hell yeah! I had a geekgasm watching him pound Darkseid around town. As he said, it was a rare occasion, so when does he get to go pump iron to have the perfect physique?


You're talking about a guy that can fly and use his eyes like blowtorches with his thoughts. Speeding up his metabolism so the Krispy Kremes don't get him doesn't seem like that much of a stretch.


The only thing that bugged me, how the hell does he shave? How does he even grow a beard??? Come on, man, the last time he grew a mullet, he was literally dead.
 
2013-06-14 06:40:00 PM

Trocadero: The only thing that bugged me, how the hell does he shave? How does he even grow a beard??? Come on, man, the last time he grew a mullet, he was literally dead.


static.comicvine.com
 
2013-06-14 06:51:17 PM

RexTalionis: Trocadero: The only thing that bugged me, how the hell does he shave? How does he even grow a beard??? Come on, man, the last time he grew a mullet, he was literally dead.

[static.comicvine.com image 747x556]


So, if Lois tried to run her fingers through his hair, she'd sheer them off because the hair is Superman strong?
 
2013-06-14 06:52:10 PM
I just left the theater and, well, I thought it sucked. It felt like a bunch of scenes haphazardly thrown together, with characters magically appearing where the threadbare plot needed them to be. There was no character development to speak of, mainly because the characters barely spend any time with each other. Even the supposed saving grace, the action, was a blurry CGI-laden mess. It truly was the Transformers of comic book movies.
 
2013-06-14 06:56:50 PM
I really enjoyed it. I didn't even take my usual mid-movie weed break. I did think the last half of the movie felt like one endless fight though. And when Superman is busy smooching Lois in the rubble of what used to be Metropolis I kind of was wondering shouldn't he maybe go helping some of the thousands of survivors that are surely stuck in that rubble? Maybe save the smooching for later?

Eh, but I still enjoyed it.
 
2013-06-14 07:00:05 PM

Trocadero: Even the silly scene w/ the priest at the church. "Hey, here's Superman, sitting in front of a stain-glass window of Jesus. Look how clever we are. See, Superman is kind of like Jesus. You follow? See, he is sent here by his Father to save humanity. How nuanced! How literary!" While I almost laughed during that scene, it didn't derail the movie.


Yeah that scene was just a little over-the-top, I was giggling.
 
2013-06-14 08:34:32 PM

Confabulat: Trocadero: Even the silly scene w/ the priest at the church. "Hey, here's Superman, sitting in front of a stain-glass window of Jesus. Look how clever we are. See, Superman is kind of like Jesus. You follow? See, he is sent here by his Father to save humanity. How nuanced! How literary!" While I almost laughed during that scene, it didn't derail the movie.

Yeah that scene was just a little over-the-top, I was giggling.


And yet, the advice the priest gives him contains no references to the bible, or anything directly religious. He tells him to listen to his gut.
 
2013-06-14 08:36:29 PM

Sweet Chin Music: There was no character development to speak of,


Weird, you must have seen a different cut, one that didn't contain Kevin Costner's scenes with Clark, or Jor-el and his scenes with Kal. And it probably didn't have any of the Diane Lane closet scene either.

/seriously, wtf is he on about?
 
2013-06-14 08:37:41 PM

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

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


yes. He did it after Zod and cronies killed the ENITIRE POPULATION OF A PLANET.
Even the big blue gay ass boys out has his limits. Not that it matters considering the number of DCU retcons between first Crisis and now.
 
2013-06-14 08:43:51 PM

Stratohead: yes. He did it after Zod and cronies killed the ENITIRE POPULATION OF A PLANET.


And here he did it before the same guy could do it but when he had already threatened too and Superman didn't have any way to permanently stop him.

Stratohead: Even the big blue gay ass boys out has his limits. Not that it matters considering the number of DCU retcons between first Crisis and now.


LOL, go fark yourself.
 
2013-06-14 08:48:49 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: RexTalionis: Trocadero: The only thing that bugged me, how the hell does he shave? How does he even grow a beard??? Come on, man, the last time he grew a mullet, he was literally dead.

[static.comicvine.com image 747x556]

So, if Lois tried to run her fingers through his hair, she'd sheer them off because the hair is Superman strong?


No it would be like running your hands through normal hair, except if you try to cut them off with a scissor, the scissors would break on contact.
 
2013-06-14 09:00:19 PM

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


Didn't superman kill Brainaic in the last animated movie?

Or at least, didn't stop Brainiac from self-destructing?

Maybe Kryptonians can heal from having their neck snapped. Maybe it's equivalent to the "smashing a vase over the head to sleep" in Krypton.
 
2013-06-14 09:11:57 PM

Hebalo: Sweet Chin Music: There was no character development to speak of,

Weird, you must have seen a different cut, one that didn't contain Kevin Costner's scenes with Clark, or Jor-el and his scenes with Kal. And it probably didn't have any of the Diane Lane closet scene either.

/seriously, wtf is he on about?


All Pa Kent did was tell his son that it might be okay to let a bunch of kids die, then he died a very stupid, easily avoidable way to reinforce that horrible lesson. He's no Uncle Ben, that's for damn sure. The only thing Clark took away from the closet scene was that he should share that very helpful advise with the man who, only minutes earlier, was threatening his mother. What a hero.
 
2013-06-14 09:24:12 PM

Boojum2k: This is the only thing Man of Steel really lacked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJENrNU7wC8


If that is the only element missing from Man of Steel, then you are saying that it includes this?

/Would see a Superman movie with that at least three times.
 
2013-06-14 09:25:34 PM
I saw it this afternoon, and here's my take, spoilers and all (not that there aren't plenty already in this thread).

I liked it, it's at least better  than all but the best of the recent hero movies to me, with TDK, Spiderman 2, Iron Man, and Captain america being the only ones better than it IMHO.  The final fight against Zod was probably the best aerial super-battle I've watched, and one of the best uses of 3D I've seen movies.  And with the 2 fathers piece, I loved the struggle between Costner and Crowe's messages, the hiding your power vs. being the hero figure.  Almost every scene with Costner tugged at the heart strings hard.

Most of the rage that I'm seeing coming from fanboys and critics I'll offer my take on:

1. Superman didn't try hard enough to protect everyone.
In the fights with Zod's forces, it was clear the Superman was matched in 1-on-1 combat if not outclassed.  He was fighting not knowing the full extent of his own powers against trained warriors who knew theirs and how to utilize it.  I bought off on the fact that he wasn't as good as they were and was doing it purely on strength of will, and was not saving people because he couldn't..

2. It turned into a disaster-porn move.
See number 1.  What do you expect when you have the strongest fictional character to ever exist fighting against a force of individuals who are his physical equals?  Last movie everyone complained he didn't do enough super stuff.  Now they did too much?  There's no pleasing you people.

3. He killed Zod/My 2 dads/moral code
I'll defer to Dogma on this one, where the Metatron is talking about when he told Jesus what he must do.  He's being asked by his father figures to do 2 different things, and choose how he will live and protect.  I honestly didn't think there seemed to be any other way to stop Zod than to kill him.  At the same token, the scream afterward, I couldn't decide if it was only from having to kill, or the realization that he had just wiped out his entire race with the exception of himself.  I thought it was perfectly conflicted and well done

My only complaint was that any romantic tension between Lois and Clark was absent, thus the kiss seemed to come out of nowhere.

I liked it enough to see it again.  In fact, I have to, since I saw it without the wife while she was at work, and she wanted to see it too.  Now I just have to keep quiet about seeing it until I can drag her to the theater.
 
2013-06-14 09:35:27 PM

Trocadero: Definite B+


Your review was spot on.  I enjoyed the heck out of it.  It had some noticeable warts, but definitely was the best Superman theatrical release since Superman (Superman 2  Donnor cut was better though).  Still pales when compared to DC Animated stuff, but they all do.  (All-star Superman for the win, Superman vs. the Elite for honorable mention).
 
2013-06-14 09:51:26 PM
I stopped taking this whiny piece of shiat "review" seriously the moment he bemoaned the lack of outer-underwear.

Man of Steel was AWESOME. Every farking thing about it.

But, hey, the relentless shiatstorm of basement dwelling bottom feeders using the Internet to grandstand their mighty Superman knowledge and crap all over a very, VERY good movie has been a popular pastime today.
 
2013-06-14 10:37:41 PM

Lernaeus: I stopped taking this whiny piece of shiat "review" seriously the moment he bemoaned the lack of outer-underwear.

Man of Steel was AWESOME. Every farking thing about it.

But, hey, the relentless shiatstorm of basement dwelling bottom feeders using the Internet to grandstand their mighty Superman knowledge and crap all over a very, VERY good movie has been a popular pastime today.


I just got back from the show as well and I have to agree it was an awesome movie. Without giving away more than was given away from the incessantly irritating Waid let me say it left a lot of room for sequels, in spite of the fact it turned a couple of things around. And yep, it was darker and more violent than I anticipated even reading the reviews.  I went in to the movie half expecting him to show the trademark constant compassion.
My take is he's developing and learning to care for the puny humans and he has a way to go and he's very rough around the edges, i.e. he hasn't fully learned to harness his powers properly. The groundwork has been laid down in this release.

There were a few humorous moments delivered mostly by dialog but I just don't get the hatred by so many especially Waid. He just seems so bitter and so angry. Wake up chump, it's 2013 and technology allows for more exciting action and crap exploding.

The only minor criticism is it jumped around between current day SM and younger SM a bit more than I cared for but it wasn't very difficult to follow.

Well done.
 
2013-06-14 10:45:15 PM
I saw it today and totally geeked out. The best part, the thing that Singer's film needed, was (SPOILER ALERT) the fact that Lois figured out who Clark was early on. She's a reporter, she figures it out, and it makes her a great character. THat and when she teams up with Jor-El. Lois was pure awesome, and I loved it.
 
2013-06-14 11:33:39 PM
Just got back from seeing. Honestly, it was meh at best. It had so many flaws, that I don't even know where to begin. And holy shiat was it poorly edited. It was all over the place. I saw it in IMAX 3D in a theatre where the crowd on opening night is filled with giddy fanboys. The climactic scene drew the applause of about 4 people. It was painful.
 
2013-06-14 11:35:17 PM
i1182.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-14 11:39:11 PM

chewielouie: . It had so many flaws, that I don't even know where to begin.


well, begin then. I thought it was great.
 
2013-06-15 12:12:42 AM

Boojum2k: give me doughnuts: Rwa2play: 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.


She's always known that sometimes it is necessary to kill, and doesn't have a problem with the idea.


Different topic: I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know if this is addressed. If Superman (and by extension all oth ...


in the movie maybe it is obliquely addressed but in the comics there is definitely charging that happens as he gets more power from flying to the sun than at earth.  He has reserves and it is possible to drain him.  But for the purposes of the movie guys with 1/300th the power of superman wouldn't make compelling Kryptonian villains.
 
2013-06-15 12:19:40 AM

Boojum2k: This is the only thing Man of Steel really lacked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJENrNU7wC8


Yes, I think they should have had the Superman March over the end credits instead of the perfectly fine, but decidedly unexceptional Hans Zimmer music they used.

Zimmer's theme inspired "this is really intense" (like the Batman stuff he did, which it was perfect for).  The Superman March gives the feeling that you're watching a movie about the "perfect, flawless hero."

The Zimmer music was great for the film.  But I felt the march would have been perfect for the end credits.

I don't have a problem with them not ending with him flying into space and smiling at the camera.  That wouldn't have fit.
 
2013-06-15 12:21:36 AM
I enjoyed it and I could definitely see this world being the basis for a JL movie.
 
2013-06-15 12:24:03 AM
I saw the film last night at the drive in, and I thought it was pretty damn good. The flash back scenes at times though for me kind of felt random. Other than it was a great Superman flick. The friend that I was with didn't like, but he kept comparing it to the Christopher Reeves Superman. I loved the fight scenes in Smallville, but I did got to hang out on the set in Plano, Il while they were shooting.
 
2013-06-15 12:32:23 AM
This movie was an okay action picture and an awful Superman movie.

*SPOILERS*

Off the top of my head (and in no particular order) here are complaints I had after seeing it this afternoon ...

1.  The muted color palette.  Terrible.  Superman is an optimistic character; he is not Batman.  This is something Marvel understands and Warner Brothers never will apparently.  They made the same mistake with the last Superman movie and it's a shame.

2.  Paint-by-numbers action script - and what I mean by that is that whoever put it together went with the "we need an action scene every 10 pages" and that resulted in a bunch of ridiculous scenes.  It was obvious what was going on here when the first five minutes turned Krypton into an Avatar meets Star Wars ripoff; and Jor El became Aquaman.  Just stupid.

3.  The Indian Ocean battle with the Doctor Octopus space-ship was the equivalent of "He has to fight a gigantic mechanical spider in the third act" - you can tell some a-hole producer insisted over and over again that the Superman fights needed to be like the Matrix so they threw him a bone to shut him up.

4.  Everyone knows the most important aspect of a Superman story is Clark Kent.  This film screwed up Clark Kent soooo badly.  It was more "We need to follow the Batman template" foolishness.  Clark Kent does not need to travel the world like Carradine in Kung-Fu to find himself.  He's a farm boy from Kansas with a firm moral center; that's been the basic component of the character for 70 years.

5.  Being responsible for his Jonathan Kent's death was stupid and more "we need to make him brooding and tortured" bullshiat.

6.  The music in the film was completely unremarkable.  The only music I noticed while the film was going on was that the music playing during the "Lois Lane on the spaceship" scene was a ripoff of the Daft Punk Tron Legacy music.  Nothing else was memorable.  This is a sin when the Superman character probably has one of the 5 or 10 most memorable and iconic theme music attached with it.

7.  Basic Superman components that were missing or almost entirely ignored/wrong:  Clark being a reporter, Clark working at the Daily Planet, Lois Lane not knowing his secret identity, Kryptonite, the Fortress of Solitude, Jimmy Olson (no I don't count the broad caught in the rubble).

8.  No explanation given whatsoever for why Zod wanted Lois Lane (of the entire population of the world) to be on his spaceship.  Pure plot contrivance.

9.  Disaster porn.  Nobody cares about a bunch of crumbling buildings with seemingly nobody in peril.  It's something modern-day action film makers just do not understand.  They just dont.  If there's no attachment to the characters, you don't care if they are in peril.  There's no tension.

10.  The decision to have Superman kill Zod at the end.  There are a couple thousand ways they could have ended the film without this death.  Off the top of my head, they already established that Superman lost his powers on the spaceship - they could have just said "The spaceship's Krypton materials has a kryptonite-lite 'weaken-not-murder' effect on Kryptonians" and then he could have incarcerated Zod inside of one.  But that's not what they wanted - going back to the old, failed Kevin Smith meeting with WB brass - they wanted a Superman with "the eyes of a killer".  They just don't understand the character, and haven't for 25 years.

*END SPOILERS*

To conclude, the producers and studio were far too concerned with making a Star Wars/Avatar/Matrix/Independence Day knock-off and completely unconcerned with making a Superman movie.  It's their intellectual property, they can do whatever they want, but if they were trying to start a franchise (which they are), they kind of blew it.  My 18 year old nephew said "meh" and my 13 year old niece said she didn't like it.  Neither one of them had seen the Donner films, but I grew up on them - the Donner films are far, far superior movies.  How Warner Bros doesn't realize they were gifted a template in the late 70s, I have no idea.
 
2013-06-15 12:33:56 AM
Couple of things:

1) I feel like they're thinking long-term here.  When he killed Zod and then let out that long howl, I was hit with the realization that 'this' is why he makes that decision to live and fight and protect without killing.  His own version of 'Never Again.'

2) The damage inflicted on both Smallville and Metropolis hit me as being relevant to the long-term story of this world.  In the world of the Avengers, after Thor shows up, it changes everything for that world.  In this world, the aftermath of the alien invasion is going to change 'everything' and I sincerely think that this story is setting up all the future movies to come.

For example, Superman's arrival could trigger Wonder Woman's arrival in the world of man, and perhaps coax Arthur up from his underwater kingdom.

I didn't really care for the violence of the movie, but I sincerely believe it was done so for a reason pertinent to the long-term story.
 
2013-06-15 12:41:11 AM

SunsetLament: How Warner Bros doesn't realize they were gifted a template in the late 70s, I have no idea.


Um, Bryan Singer used that template a few years back and it sucked. This movie is miles better.
 
2013-06-15 12:43:16 AM

SunsetLament: Being responsible for his Jonathan Kent's death was stupid and more "we need to make him brooding and tortured" bullshiat.


There's a link right here on Fark that points out that Clark Kent is directly responsible for Pa Kent's death in the first Superman movie because he was being a dick.

This time he just didn't do anything, rather than goading the old man to his demise.
 
2013-06-15 12:50:10 AM

Confabulat: SunsetLament: Being responsible for his Jonathan Kent's death was stupid and more "we need to make him brooding and tortured" bullshiat.

There's a link right here on Fark that points out that Clark Kent is directly responsible for Pa Kent's death in the first Superman movie because he was being a dick.

This time he just didn't do anything, rather than goading the old man to his demise.


And arguably, Johnathon told Clark NOT to help, that sometimes sacrifices must be made for the greater good.
 
2013-06-15 12:52:36 AM

Confabulat: SunsetLament: How Warner Bros doesn't realize they were gifted a template in the late 70s, I have no idea.

Um, Bryan Singer used that template a few years back and it sucked. This movie is miles better.


Miles better? No. Take out the stupid kid angle from Superman Returns, and all of the sudden it becomes much better. And the airplane rescue scene in Superman Returns is better than any one scene in Man of Steel.
 
2013-06-15 12:53:14 AM

SunsetLament: Neither one of them had seen the Donner films, but I grew up on them - the Donner films are far, far superior movies. How Warner Bros doesn't realize they were gifted a template in the late 70s, I have no idea.


Wow. Unfathomable that you see those films as superior to this one. Donner films were okay, but have NOT aged well. Man of Steel was amazing, awe inspiring, and well worth seeing.

I was going to refute your issues one by one, but I don't have the energy, and frankly, you've made up your mind. So be it. Though it was clear to me that Zod requested Lois Lane after seeing her with Kal moments earlier.
 
2013-06-15 12:53:46 AM
*SPOILERS*
How did the injured and unconscious Lois survive a few hours in 40 below zero weather long enough for the military to find her after Clark takes off in the arctic ship?
 
2013-06-15 12:54:09 AM

chewielouie: And the airplane rescue scene in Superman Returns is better than any one scene in Man of Steel.


But it's the ONLY good scene in Returns. Your case is shaky.
 
2013-06-15 12:54:44 AM

Enormous-Schwanstucker: Lernaeus: I stopped taking this whiny piece of shiat "review" seriously the moment he bemoaned the lack of outer-underwear.

Man of Steel was AWESOME. Every farking thing about it.

But, hey, the relentless shiatstorm of basement dwelling bottom feeders using the Internet to grandstand their mighty Superman knowledge and crap all over a very, VERY good movie has been a popular pastime today.

I just got back from the show as well and I have to agree it was an awesome movie. Without giving away more than was given away from the incessantly irritating Waid let me say it left a lot of room for sequels, in spite of the fact it turned a couple of things around. And yep, it was darker and more violent than I anticipated even reading the reviews.  I went in to the movie half expecting him to show the trademark constant compassion.
My take is he's developing and learning to care for the puny humans and he has a way to go and he's very rough around the edges, i.e. he hasn't fully learned to harness his powers properly. The groundwork has been laid down in this release.

There were a few humorous moments delivered mostly by dialog but I just don't get the hatred by so many especially Waid. He just seems so bitter and so angry. Wake up chump, it's 2013 and technology allows for more exciting action and crap exploding.

The only minor criticism is it jumped around between current day SM and younger SM a bit more than I cared for but it wasn't very difficult to follow.

Well done.


/like
//mobile
///currently bemoaning the lack of keyboards in the mix at a Pink Floud tribute show

////big farking need
 
2013-06-15 12:55:04 AM

Confabulat: SunsetLament: How Warner Bros doesn't realize they were gifted a template in the late 70s, I have no idea.

Um, Bryan Singer used that template a few years back and it sucked. This movie is miles better.


Bryan Singer's mid-2000s film showed a complete misunderstanding of what Donner did in his films.  Donner showed an optimistic, morally centered person bringing hope to the world.  Singer turned Superman into a brooding, depressed dead-beat dad who was hanging around outside his kid's house like a child molester.  The muted color scheme (including the "Drunk Superman from Superman III" costume) showed he didn't understand the character at all.  It also had zero action in it and contained a scene were Superman lifted a continent-sized piece of Kryptonite.

Donner and Singer's Supermen films were like night and day.
 
2013-06-15 12:55:51 AM
////ahem, NERD
 
2013-06-15 12:57:12 AM

Confabulat: chewielouie: . It had so many flaws, that I don't even know where to begin.

well, begin then. I thought it was great.


No heart, no hope and felt completely uninspired. Superman: the Movie and Superman II, despite the their own flaws and dated special effects  are far and away more enjoyable.
 
2013-06-15 01:03:09 AM

chewielouie: Confabulat: chewielouie: . It had so many flaws, that I don't even know where to begin.

well, begin then. I thought it was great.

No heart, no hope and felt completely uninspired. Superman: the Movie and Superman II, despite the their own flaws and dated special effects  are far and away more enjoyable.


Those sound like platitudes.
 
2013-06-15 01:04:58 AM
I tried to watch the Donner flicks recently and they have NOT aged well. You can watch the first Star Wars and it feels the same, it feels like it could be made today. The Donner Superman flicks are like Star Trek: The Motion Picture. They exist in a time and place and it shows.
 
2013-06-15 01:06:55 AM

Confabulat: I tried to watch the Donner flicks recently and they have NOT aged well. You can watch the first Star Wars and it feels the same, it feels like it could be made today. The Donner Superman flicks are like Star Trek: The Motion Picture. They exist in a time and place and it shows.


Thank you.
 
2013-06-15 01:12:30 AM

REO-Weedwagon: I see Warner Brothers is launching a new marketing campaign today saying the new Superman movie is really about Christianity, and pretty much if you love Jesus, then you should definitely bring out the whole family to see the movie. Actually, organize the church youth group to come see it as well, you know, for Jesus. They currently have the "story" plastered all over Fox News and other various media outlets that attract and instruct the rubes.

"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."
[img397.imageshack.us image 230x229]


I'd rather have all the cynical nihilist shiatheads who think like Bill Hicks die a horrible death.
 
2013-06-15 01:21:04 AM

Confabulat: I tried to watch the Donner flicks recently and they have NOT aged well. You can watch the first Star Wars and it feels the same, it feels like it could be made today. The Donner Superman flicks are like Star Trek: The Motion Picture. They exist in a time and place and it shows.


Wait ... you mean a film that takes place in 1978 America looks like 1978 America?  While a film that takes place on different planets that have nothing to do with modern-day Earth still look like those different planets (that don't actually exist) thirty years later?  I find this possible to believe.

Let me guess ... you must find Raiders of the Lost Ark to look dated too?

Here's a surprise that's really going to crush you, Ghostbusters looks like 1985 New York; there's nobody walking around talking on cell phones and all the cars look like they were made in the 80s.
 
2013-06-15 01:22:35 AM
For those that haven't seen it, Armond White LOVED it. What more do you really need to know?
 
2013-06-15 01:27:25 AM
*SPOILERS*
It amazes me how many scenes from MoS are similar to scenes from better movies.

Superman in handcuffs, flanked by armed guards? Avengers, last year, ST Into Darkness this year.

That giant Kryptonian attacking the plane by leaping on it? Hulk attacking the jet scene from Avengers.

The Black Zero being sucked into a wormhole after being rammed by a smaller ship carrying a special payload? The fate of the Narada from Star Trek.

Clark learning the location of the scout ship from chatter overheard in a diner? The diner scene from Thor where he learns the location of Mjolnir.

Superman walking down a small-town street towards a giant Kryptonian with a look of apprehension on his face? Thor walking towards the Destroyer in the small New Mexico town, ready to accept his fate.

The scene where Lois takes a picture of the attack drone outside the arctic ship, only to be attacked? The infamous snake scene from Prometheus, complete with well-deserved pain.

The scene with young Clark posing with the towel cape? Similar to the scene in Captain America with a kid playing with a trash can lid painted to look like Cap's shield.

The jets futilely attacking the Black Zero in Metropolis was straight out of Independence Day.

Consider me unimpressed.
 
2013-06-15 01:31:07 AM

chewielouie: For those that haven't seen it, Armond White LOVED it. What more do you really need to know?


So he's NOT wrong every time?  How about that.
 
2013-06-15 01:39:01 AM

SunsetLament: This movie was an okay action picture and an awful Superman movie.

*SPOILERS*


So basically, you don't know what you're talking about.

1 What does Marvel understand? They also use a muted color palette on Captain America movie? Thor? Hawkeye? Get freaking real... They only gave Avengers Cap a colorful costume and that was on purpose to make him look corny, but for Winter Soldier is back to drab blue.

2 Meh

3 Hehe, well, Jon Peters was the producer of this movie, so I was expecting that just for laughs.

4 Read Birthright.

5 No, it's perfectly fine and even people who didn't like the movie comment on that scene being godly.

6 True, but hardly a relevant complaint.

7 No, missed the point here. LOL at "classic". The Lois Lane triangle is one of the dumbest aspects of the character. For the rest, jesus, are you brain damaged? He went to work for the Planet at the end and they'll obviously make a sequel so it's not like he'll never be a journalist in this world. He was at the end of the movie.

8 Because he wanted to know secrets about Kal and got her in case he didn't want to cooperate. Remember she's the one who tells Zod about his mom while under their spell.

9 Meh

10 So you have never read a comic and never watched Superman II, right? In Superman II, he kills a depowered Zod while grinning and shows no remorse afterwards. In the comics he kills Zod and then feels bad, just like in this movie. He also indirectly kills a Russian version of Zod.  Conclusion? Killing Zod is part of his mythos and Donner Superman fumbled the ball.
 
2013-06-15 01:43:01 AM
This movie was one of my dreams brought to life. He's been picked on, made to feel different, alone. He is slow to trust because he does not even know if he should trust. He protects his mother with all of the emphasis and emotion he can muster. He constantly tests his limits on both ends of the scale, showing superhuman strength and superhuman restraint. He flew and he saved the day.

He is not a boy scout though, he is a force, a force for good. The movie was transparent about this. It was not about Jesus or Christianity or any of that stuff, it was about testing your limits and aspiring to be something more than you are expected to be. That is the hope Superman symbolizes, that we too can one day aspire and defeat our own limits and accomplish wonders.
 
2013-06-15 01:43:26 AM

SunsetLament: Confabulat: I tried to watch the Donner flicks recently and they have NOT aged well. You can watch the first Star Wars and it feels the same, it feels like it could be made today. The Donner Superman flicks are like Star Trek: The Motion Picture. They exist in a time and place and it shows.

Wait ... you mean a film that takes place in 1978 America looks like 1978 America?  While a film that takes place on different planets that have nothing to do with modern-day Earth still look like those different planets (that don't actually exist) thirty years later?  I find this possible to believe.

Let me guess ... you must find Raiders of the Lost Ark to look dated too?

Here's a surprise that's really going to crush you, Ghostbusters looks like 1985 New York; there's nobody walking around talking on cell phones and all the cars look like they were made in the 80s.


No. That's exactly NOT the point. Raiders of the Lost Ark is as fresh today as it ever was. It's an 80s film that takes place in the 30s but it's timeless. It could be released today and feel fresh.

Superman: The Movie screams 1978, from everything from set design to the philosophical questions raised to the utter absurdity of some of the solutions (really, do we have to discuss the whole spinning-the-Earth-backward thing? If Man of Steel did something like that people would HOWL. And remember how he can throw his S logo to capture Zod?) It's a very badly dated movie and does not stand up to the test of time, or even logic. Margot Kidder was never hot enough to get Superman.
 
2013-06-15 01:55:08 AM
Some of you guys are working way too hard to earn those "paid shill posting positive word-of-mouth online" paychecks.
 
2013-06-15 01:57:19 AM

Truman Burbank: Some of you guys are working way too hard to earn those "paid shill posting positive word-of-mouth online" paychecks.


Your mom's prices went up.
 
2013-06-15 02:08:52 AM

Truman Burbank: Some of you guys are working way too hard to earn those "paid shill posting positive word-of-mouth online" paychecks.


I liked it. I went to the movie not sure if I would, and I was happily surprised. I didn't even smoke weed in the bathroom halfway through like I normally do because I was interested in what was going on.

No one paid me to think that. No one paid me to type this. I just really liked the movie. Is that so hard for you to understand? Does it confuse you when people on the internet actually like something? I know it's rare.
 
2013-06-15 02:12:37 AM
I liked this movie. The effects were amazing and I thought it did a good job tweaking the character to work for a modern audience. I think the thing to remember here is this version of Superman is still learning to be Superman. Yeah he would probably like to save more bystanders from the crossfire but he's kind of busy trying to avoid getting his ass handed to him by Zod n' friends. He's a farm boy with super powers. But Zod and his crew are trained killers. I suspect if this film spawns sequels we will see this version of Superman grow in his abilities and how to use them more effectively.
 
2013-06-15 02:18:30 AM

Truman Burbank: Some of you guys are working way too hard to earn those "paid shill posting positive word-of-mouth online" paychecks.


I'm sorry, the tinfoil helmet you are wearing somehow made you write gibberish. Care to try to make a cogent post?
 
2013-06-15 02:27:25 AM
You know what sealed the deal for me? The Hulk saves more people in The Avengers than Superman does in MoS...
 
2013-06-15 02:44:20 AM

Sweet Chin Music: You know what sealed the deal for me? The Hulk saves more people in The Avengers than Superman does in MoS...


No, he doesn't.
 
2013-06-15 03:14:14 AM

rocky_howard: Sweet Chin Music: You know what sealed the deal for me? The Hulk saves more people in The Avengers than Superman does in MoS...

No, he doesn't.


Superman destroys the World Shaper that was trying to turn Earth into New Krypton, killing all the native life.  I think he wins that count.
 
2013-06-15 03:29:17 AM
I have returned from a 00:30 showing of the movie. I enjoyed it overall, though I did know most of what to expect. I find myself in agreement with most who viewed the movie positively but who also criticized the pacing.

I do have one comment, however.

Was not General Zod's plan ultimately a heavily scaled up "real estate" plot?
 
2013-06-15 03:33:49 AM

rocky_howard: Sweet Chin Music: You know what sealed the deal for me? The Hulk saves more people in The Avengers than Superman does in MoS...

No, he doesn't.


Yes, he does. How many people did Superman kill when he tackled Zod through that gas station? How about when he and Zod started slamming through skyscrapers in Metropolis? For a guy with the symbol for hope on his chest, Supes has quite the body count.
 
2013-06-15 03:35:52 AM

Sweet Chin Music: Yes, he does. How many people did Superman kill when he tackled Zod through that gas station?


None?

Sweet Chin Music: How about when he and Zod started slamming through skyscrapers in Metropolis? For a guy with the symbol for hope on his chest, Supes has quite the body count.


Irrelevant. How many did Tony kill when he "brought the party" to the team?

And who did Hulk save besides Tony?

And gee, you talk as if in Avengers there was no destruction...
 
2013-06-15 03:43:32 AM

Dimensio: I have returned from a 00:30 showing of the movie. I enjoyed it overall, though I did know most of what to expect. I find myself in agreement with most who viewed the movie positively but who also criticized the pacing.

I do have one comment, however.

Was not General Zod's plan ultimately a heavily scaled up "real estate" plot?


Sorta.. though I was reminded more of the Master's plan to turn Earth into New Gallifrey.
 
2013-06-15 06:00:45 AM

rocky_howard: Sweet Chin Music: Yes, he does. How many people did Superman kill when he tackled Zod through that gas station?

None?

Sweet Chin Music: How about when he and Zod started slamming through skyscrapers in Metropolis? For a guy with the symbol for hope on his chest, Supes has quite the body count.

Irrelevant. How many did Tony kill when he "brought the party" to the team?

And who did Hulk save besides Tony?

And gee, you talk as if in Avengers there was no destruction...


*SPOILERS*
*
*
*
Hulk saved hundreds of people when he stopped that space whale thing from plowing through a skyscraper.

Sure there was destruction in Avengers, but you know what else there was? Hope. We saw firefighters, cops, National Guard, and soldiers actively working to save people. The Avengers, too, go out of their way to save the nameless masses, not just their moms or their cute reporter friends. In the end, some people cheered their names, while others held candlelight vigils to honor the dead. In The Avengers, the people actually mattered.

MoS, in contrast, completely drops the ball, as it rarely even acknowledges the common man, which is ridiculous given the amount of destruction we see on both Smallville and Metropolis. Was that cute Jenny girl the only person buried in the rubble? It sure felt that way... You'd think a guy with super-strength and x-ray vision would be ideal for search and rescue, but the aftermath of all that destruction was completely glossed over for a weak scene between Supes and the General. Thousands of people died and what do we get? "I think he'd kinda hot." What a farking joke...
 
2013-06-15 06:56:04 AM

un4gvn666: IdBeCrazyIf: RexTalionis: sid244: /After the credits: Would have loved to see Superman fly to Gotham City, start up the bat signal and when Batman shows up ask him if he wants to start a crime fighting team. A league, if you will. (Fade to black)

Supposedly, a satellite visible early in the film has the WayneCorp logo on it.

I couldn't tell if it was or not and I've seen the thing twice, there are TONS of Lexcorp stuff though and it does set the stage for Lex's rise to try and point out to humanity that we don't need a savior.

Especially if that savior is indirectly causing untold millions in property damage and casualties in the tens to hundreds of thousands.

I'm looking forward to it.


Millions? more like Billions
 
2013-06-15 07:20:22 AM
*Spoilers*

I was one of those that walked out of the theater saying "Man, he really didn't give two shiats about any of those people in the buildings, did he?"  But, yeah, when taken in context, here's a guy who's never really pushed himself before, only recently learned to do half the things he is capable of, and going up against born and bred and fully trained warriors with no ethical code or qualms about slaughtering the innocent.

I think it would have been much better off had they not had him randomly kissing Lois while people were still dying under buildings to reinforce that he actually is a Jesus-figure and wants to save everyone.  He getting his mack on while I am sure his super hearing is still picking up the screaming of the nearby injured millions seems a bit...  Odd.  And it would have gave his ultimate decision to kill Zod a lot more punch.  But hey, I guess they wanted to set up the Lois/Clark love story, which is annoying and I think would have been better served to set it up as a trust/friendship in this movie that progresses to something more in the next, but I'm not a Hollywood writer.

Overall, I came away from this pretty happy, if not a little disappointed in his seemingly callous approach to collateral damage.  But as I thought about it, his flying into a gas station full of people and the like can be chalked up to inexperience (not having ever really pushed his powers before) and emotion he hasn't learned to control (a superbeing tossing his mother around and threatening to kill her).  I can see a lot of regret at both the collateral damage (see also: the "World Made of Cardboard" speech) and his neck snapping of Zod playing into the next one, both with his new found control and obsessive need to help everyone all the time with the governments distrust of him and desire to find a way to take him down.  Enter Lex, and if they ever pull a Marvel and get the Justice League moving, the government's increasing paranoia and maybe even a Cadmus-like storyline ultimately coming out of it.

All in all, good movie, and great groundwork for the universe.
 
2013-06-15 07:23:47 AM
My thoughts on the film
S
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
b
e
l
o
w

So first I want to get to the "Clark Kent" argument. That argument is stupid and full of shame and fail that dishonors your family. He is Clark Kent all over the movie but he struggles with what he is., He struggles with his powers and how to use them in a world without causing fear and terror. Like General Zod Clark is waiting for the right enterance

In this movie Clark Kent learns he is Kal-El and struggles with what that means, General Zod comes and gives him the chance to be Kal (at the cost of about 7 billion dead on earth). He struggles with that but in the end he creates/becomes Superman: A Synthesis of both. That becomes a mask he puts on to protect his mother and friends in Smallville.

At the end of the movie he creates a new mask of Clark Kent to be the Daily Planet reporter. He creates that mask to make it so he can be superman better. But all superman is at his core is Clark Kent given the powers of a god. Clark struggles with how to deal with it and be a good person.

Disaster Porn: Yeah, its a problem I have with movies now a days. I am tired of seeing biblical level destruction. I am not going to fault the movie for that because its what the storyline in question really called for.

Killing Zod: Kal-El Could kill (Kryptonians are pretty much shown to be epic level dicks in this movie), Clark could kill (and some times he wants to) but in Killing Zod we see Superman failing with all his powers. Unlike letting Jonathan die (which was heart wrenching ) Here his powers, intellect, and character failed him. He did something which was morally repugnant to him. That will define him going forward and make him not kill... I.E. Superman being this moral force that doesn't murder. The film is about his becoming Superman and that was a crucial moment for this film in his becoming superman.

I think those are the major criticisms of the movie and they are stupid and wrong
 
2013-06-15 07:27:58 AM
A lot of this thread sounds like 'they changed something, and I don't like it, so this is the worst move EVAR!!'.  And I'm thinking, 'isn't this just like the Star Trek Into Darkness threads a few weeks back?'
 
2013-06-15 07:38:07 AM

Alphax: A lot of this thread sounds like 'they changed something, and I don't like it, so this is the worst move EVAR!!'.  And I'm thinking, 'isn't this just like the Star Trek Into Darkness threads a few weeks back?'


Having liked both the Man of Steel and the new Trek movies, I see it as the two sides of the same coin.  While MoS downplayed most of the usual traits that made Superman (Boy Scout like adherence to an unshakable moral code) in order for him to develop into it later, the new Trek movies amplified everyone's qualities.  Bones is cranky and fed up ALL the time, Kirk is even more of a snarky, self confident horn dog, Uhura is even more competent if not slightly type A, Spock tries even harder to be super-logical and when he fails goes even father off the emotional scale...  They all got boiled down to their essentials, and now they are concentrated traits of what made them so memorable in the first place.  

Either way, I feel like it worked, even if I had to think about it for a bit later.
 
2013-06-15 07:42:19 AM

Shadowknight: Alphax: A lot of this thread sounds like 'they changed something, and I don't like it, so this is the worst move EVAR!!'.  And I'm thinking, 'isn't this just like the Star Trek Into Darkness threads a few weeks back?'

Having liked both the Man of Steel and the new Trek movies, I see it as the two sides of the same coin.  While MoS downplayed most of the usual traits that made Superman (Boy Scout like adherence to an unshakable moral code) in order for him to develop into it later, the new Trek movies amplified everyone's qualities.  Bones is cranky and fed up ALL the time, Kirk is even more of a snarky, self confident horn dog, Uhura is even more competent if not slightly type A, Spock tries even harder to be super-logical and when he fails goes even father off the emotional scale...  They all got boiled down to their essentials, and now they are concentrated traits of what made them so memorable in the first place.  

Either way, I feel like it worked, even if I had to think about it for a bit later.


Well said.
 
2013-06-15 09:40:14 AM

Sweet Chin Music: rocky_howard: Sweet Chin Music: Yes, he does. How many people did Superman kill when he tackled Zod through that gas station?

None?

Sweet Chin Music: How about when he and Zod started slamming through skyscrapers in Metropolis? For a guy with the symbol for hope on his chest, Supes has quite the body count.

Irrelevant. How many did Tony kill when he "brought the party" to the team?

And who did Hulk save besides Tony?

And gee, you talk as if in Avengers there was no destruction...

*SPOILERS*
*
*
*
Hulk saved hundreds of people when he stopped that space whale thing from plowing through a skyscraper.

Sure there was destruction in Avengers, but you know what else there was? Hope. We saw firefighters, cops, National Guard, and soldiers actively working to save people. The Avengers, too, go out of their way to save the nameless masses, not just their moms or their cute reporter friends. In the end, some people cheered their names, while others held candlelight vigils to honor the dead. In The Avengers, the people actually mattered.

MoS, in contrast, completely drops the ball, as it rarely even acknowledges the common man, which is ridiculous given the amount of destruction we see on both Smallville and Metropolis. Was that cute Jenny girl the only person buried in the rubble? It sure felt that way... You'd think a guy with super-strength and x-ray vision would be ideal for search and rescue, but the aftermath of all that destruction was completely glossed over for a weak scene between Supes and the General. Thousands of people died and what do we get? "I think he'd kinda hot." What a farking joke...


You're so right. It would have been more appropriate for Superman to have sat around eating schwarma instead.

/idiot
 
2013-06-15 09:46:35 AM

chewielouie: Just got back from seeing. Honestly, it was meh at best. It had so many flaws, that I don't even know where to begin. And holy shiat was it poorly edited. It was all over the place.  I saw it in IMAX 3D in a theatre where the crowd on opening night is filled with giddy fanboys. The climactic scene drew the applause of about 4 people. It was painful.


So a film not made in IMAX or 3D format isn't good in post conversion?  Color me surprised.  You are an idiot for seeing it in a format that the studio made them add in post.  The movie was not without problems, but I saw it in regular 2D, (though digital.), and thought is was good, easily better than Singers "sequel". (Which inexplicably is at 75% on Rotten Tomatoes)
SPOILER.....
The single biggest improvement was the change to Lois, showing that a pulitzer prize investigative reporter can actually, you know, figure out who someone is.
END SPOILER
The fact that Superman actually fights and you see what happens when two Kryptonians go all out was good.  Yes a  little bit of disaster porn, but it is understandable, I think, in the context of the movie.  For crying out loud, General Zod wanted to terraform the population of earth out of existence. So no suprise that he would have so little regard for our cities.  Superman was fighting an equal (and in some was his superior) so to expect him to somehow stop the wanton destruction would have been too big a plot hole.

As a rule I refuse to see a movie in 3D unless it was filmed as such; I am not a fan of the cardboard cutout-ish look that the post 3D conversion adds.
 
2013-06-15 09:55:28 AM

Dimensio: Was not General Zod's plan ultimately a heavily scaled up "real estate" plot?


You magnificent bastard.
 
2013-06-15 10:23:07 AM
Seen it last night... all I will say is that is VERY WELL DONE, very entertaining, had a great balance between the more quiet moments and the more bombastic ones and put some effort in exploring why Superman is Superman.

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOI LER S SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

Yes, for the most part Superman doesn't kill, but this is a Superman trying to get a hold of the SuperHero business, and is put into an almost impossible situation, where is confronted with no other option, and even after that, is not like he shrugs it and says "Oh, well". It has and impact and it has some resonance.

Besides, having took a life, it gives more weight to his "no kill" policy. He took a life and now he knows how it feels to do that, and knows how EASY could it be to just kill everybody. But still, if he decides to not go that 90's antihero route, it gives it more importance.

The only MAJOR issue I had with it was the death of Johnathan Kent... I think that it wasn't necessary for him to die, or it could have been handled better.

Photography was great, the design was great, the music was fantastic and the acting was good.

In my opinion, it was as good as an effort as Batman Begins.

2 nitpicks:

1.- The REEAALY could have tone down the shaky cam... specially in the more quiet moments.

2.- Something on the Superman costume didn't convinced me... I liked the color scheme and the longer cape, but it the waist looked weird... I'm glad they decided against the red underwear, but I would loved for them to use either the New 52 costume (that, in my opinion, is an AWESOME update of the classic suit) or the one on the Injustice game.
 
2013-06-15 10:41:04 AM

RyansPrivates: chewielouie: Just got back from seeing. Honestly, it was meh at best. It had so many flaws, that I don't even know where to begin. And holy shiat was it poorly edited. It was all over the place.  I saw it in IMAX 3D in a theatre where the crowd on opening night is filled with giddy fanboys. The climactic scene drew the applause of about 4 people. It was painful.

So a film not made in IMAX or 3D format isn't good in post conversion?  Color me surprised.  You are an idiot for seeing it in a format that the studio made them add in post.  The movie was not without problems, but I saw it in regular 2D, (though digital.), and thought is was good, easily better than Singers "sequel". (Which inexplicably is at 75% on Rotten Tomatoes)
SPOILER.....
The single biggest improvement was the change to Lois, showing that a pulitzer prize investigative reporter can actually, you know, figure out who someone is.
END SPOILER
The fact that Superman actually fights and you see what happens when two Kryptonians go all out was good.  Yes a  little bit of disaster porn, but it is understandable, I think, in the context of the movie.  For crying out loud, General Zod wanted to terraform the population of earth out of existence. So no suprise that he would have so little regard for our cities.  Superman was fighting an equal (and in some was his superior) so to expect him to somehow stop the wanton destruction would have been too big a plot hole.

As a rule I refuse to see a movie in 3D unless it was filmed as such; I am not a fan of the cardboard cutout-ish look that the post 3D conversion adds.


Actually, the movie looked pretty good in the IMAX 3D, that wasn't the problem with it. And you're the idiot if you really think you're the one that can tell the difference between movies shot 3D or converted in post-production. It's almost impossible to tell the difference.

As for the movie itself, it was just ok. The flashbacks were some of the best parts of it, but the fist fight scenes we've all been craving for in a Superman movie were far less exciting than Hulk smashing the Aliens in The Avengers.
 
2013-06-15 10:47:42 AM

RyansPrivates: You are an idiot


chewielouie: And you're the idiot


daily-grind.net

Tone it down, guys.  It's just a movie.  It's not important.
 
2013-06-15 11:05:53 AM

Larry Mahnken: RyansPrivates: You are an idiot

chewielouie: And you're the idiot

[daily-grind.net image 750x381]

Tone it down, guys.  It's just a movie.  It's not important.


Shut up, idiot.
 
2013-06-15 11:15:35 AM
I dont understand the "Batman doesnt kill" argument, didnt he throw Two Face/Dent over the edge while saving Gordons kid?
 
2013-06-15 11:37:22 AM

chewielouie: Larry Mahnken: RyansPrivates: You are an idiot

chewielouie: And you're the idiot

[daily-grind.net image 750x381]

Tone it down, guys.  It's just a movie.  It's not important.

Shut up, idiot.


You're an idiot for pointing out his obvious idiocy that any idiot could see.
 
2013-06-15 11:39:27 AM

chewielouie: And you're the idiot if you really think you're the one that can tell the difference between movies shot 3D or converted in post-production. It's almost impossible to tell the difference.


And yes I can tell.  The problem is in the depth of details on specific elements.  Depth of field is actually done pretty well with conversions.  Element depth, not so much.
 
2013-06-15 12:00:15 PM

Funkyourdaughter: I dont understand the "Batman doesnt kill" argument, didnt he throw Two Face/Dent over the edge while saving Gordons kid?


That pissed off a lot of people, as did the Joker dying in the Burton movie.

(Spoiler?)
 
2013-06-15 12:31:44 PM
1 good thing, at least no more Zod in Superman movies for awhile if ever again, I now await the Lex Luthor land deals and xenophobia.
 
2013-06-15 12:58:39 PM

Kurmudgeon: 1 good thing, at least no more Zod in Superman movies for awhile if ever again, I now await the Lex Luthor land deals and xenophobia.


I wouldn't mind Luthor being the antagonist in the next movie.  But then they've got to move on to a new villain.
 
2013-06-15 01:47:50 PM
Oh, and the "That's it; I'm out!" moment in TFA?

Yeah, I f*cking applauded when that happened. 'Bout damn time they stopped dancing around the "unbreakable rule".
 
2013-06-15 03:00:43 PM
In this thread, a bunch of people who do not like the character of Superman say "Dude, I farking loved this movie because Superman doesn't act anything like Superman!!!!1!!"
 
2013-06-15 03:03:10 PM

SunsetLament: In this thread, a bunch of people who do not like the character of Superman say "Dude, I farking loved this movie because Superman doesn't act anything like Superman!!!!1!!"


Which specific postings express such sentiment?
 
2013-06-15 03:25:42 PM

Larry Mahnken: Kurmudgeon: 1 good thing, at least no more Zod in Superman movies for awhile if ever again, I now await the Lex Luthor land deals and xenophobia.

I wouldn't mind Luthor being the antagonist in the next movie.  But then they've got to move on to a new villain.


Luthor can be the meta antagonist that sets up the main villains for a few movies. He could make Bizzaro a failed clone of Superman or open a dimensional portal to Bizzaro World. He could build a giant spider for him to fight with polar bears piloting it. Or he could help create Metallo.
 
2013-06-15 03:47:02 PM

Dimensio: SunsetLament: In this thread, a bunch of people who do not like the character of Superman say "Dude, I farking loved this movie because Superman doesn't act anything like Superman!!!!1!!"

Which specific postings express such sentiment?


It starts with this one and it's all downhill from there.  I'm not going to read the thread to you if that's what you're asking for.
 
2013-06-15 06:12:37 PM
DarkPascual: 

1.- The REEAALY could have tone down the shaky cam... specially in the more quiet moments.


Srsly

Hollywood, just stahp with the Shaky Cam
 
2013-06-15 06:17:13 PM

SunsetLament: Dimensio: SunsetLament: In this thread, a bunch of people who do not like the character of Superman say "Dude, I farking loved this movie because Superman doesn't act anything like Superman!!!!1!!"

Which specific postings express such sentiment?

It starts with this one and it's all downhill from there.  I'm not going to read the thread to you if that's what you're asking for.


Its not that he doesn't act like superman

Yeah you can save the people in Metropolis but Zod is going to kill you and then kill them. You have to stop zod first
 
2013-06-15 06:48:26 PM

SunsetLament: Dimensio: SunsetLament: In this thread, a bunch of people who do not like the character of Superman say "Dude, I farking loved this movie because Superman doesn't act anything like Superman!!!!1!!"

Which specific postings express such sentiment?

It starts with this one and it's all downhill from there.  I'm not going to read the thread to you if that's what you're asking for.


Awww, diddums have a different opinion, and no one agrees???? Poor you.
 
2013-06-15 06:53:30 PM

Hebalo: SunsetLament: Dimensio: SunsetLament: In this thread, a bunch of people who do not like the character of Superman say "Dude, I farking loved this movie because Superman doesn't act anything like Superman!!!!1!!"

Which specific postings express such sentiment?

It starts with this one and it's all downhill from there.  I'm not going to read the thread to you if that's what you're asking for.

Awww, diddums have a different opinion, and no one agrees???? Poor you.


He asked for an example, I gave it to him.  He's entitled to his opinion.  I just find it hilarious that his (and many others' opinions demonstrated in the thread is) "I really love this Superman movie because Superman doesn't act like Superman."
 
2013-06-15 09:05:38 PM

SunsetLament: I just find it hilarious that his (and many others' opinions demonstrated in the thread is) "I really love this Superman movie because Superman doesn't act like Superman."


Except no one is saying that. They are saying this is Superman acting like Superman in a more realistic context. Anything else is coming out of your own head, not anyone else. Take your meds.
 
2013-06-15 09:21:52 PM
It's pretty douchey to stand up and yell anything in a theater. It was a great moment too. I've been getting pretty annoyed with how Superman is always being written so that he has some ridiculous out. Here he finally had to make a choice, and it hurt him. "Superman doesn't kill" because the writers never put him in a position where he has to.

The thing where he has to go to the other side of the world was very clearly explained. I don't know how in the world you could miss the whole plan since they then carry it out for a good length of time.

I'll be seeing it many, many times. Easily my favorite superhero movie to date.
 
Displayed 373 of 373 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report