The Man of Steel.
- Thread starter Espy
- Start date
- Status
stienman just won't let it go Nick. He doesn't understand (or doesn't want to) that Superman was well aware that they weren't going to die, hence the Donner cut has the footage of the arrest (which clearly shows that the director had every intention of showing that Superman was aware he wasn't killing). It was his intent that if they fell, they wouldn't die and would be available for capture.
BananaHands
Staff member
I can certainly see Lex's point of view from the destruction Supes caused.
fade
Staff member
I'd make a Santa Clause joke, but Tim Allen already ruined it.
BananaHands
Staff member
I just imagined the chief in metropolis getting a call from Superman.
"Uh, yeah? No, that's not reall--- Look, we don't even have the equipme--- I don't care if Lex is there, it's still no--- Look, Supes, we have this thing on planet Earth with juris---. Okay, fine. Whatever."[DOUBLEPOST=1372102311][/DOUBLEPOST]
Even the man of steel would be helpless against Baby-Armor-Man!
I didn't realize I was harping on it. Sorry to have bothered you.
BananaHands
Staff member
figmentPez
Staff member
So, if Superman killing Zod in the movie had been set up better, you'd be okay with that?
If the answer is "no, there's never a situation where Superman can't stop a small army of opponents with power levels equal to his own; and stop them quickly enough to prevent the destruction of Metropolis in the process (as that video suggests that Superman allowing the city to be destroyed is even worse than killing)" then you've created a very boring character. If Superman is so perfect that even when faced with forces greater than himself, that he can still protect everyone and be everything without being forced to take extreme measures, then there's no tension. Superman just wins, there are no consequences and you're just pulling a deus ex machina to allow Superman to be impossibly perfect.
Superman is a character liked by everyone (except the villains, and even most of those respect him), is charismatic, handsome, super-powerful, morally upright, accomplished at his job, kind to animals, etc. This has the potential to be a Mary Sue character if not handled correctly. The tension comes form "Can Superman connect to humanity, and save them without becoming an evil despot?" and if the answer is "Yes, unequivocally, and easily, in any situation, with no hesitation, duh!" Then he is just a Mary Sue. If there isn't a situation where Superman can fail to live up to the perfection he strives for, then he's an incredibly boring character.
That's not to say that Superman has to be forced to kill every villain in order to be a good character. Personally I like it when heroes outsmart the villains, and come up with the creative solution to win. (That's what I want to see in a Flash movie). However, I think there's a big difference between "I think Superman is at his best when he finds a way to avoid killing, and the writing shows Superman being better than anyone has to be, finding a solution that saves the day, and protects his ideals as well." and "Superman just doesn't kill, okay, never ever, never, duh!" I find it much better to point out that Superman is at his best when he's a source of optimism and hope, rather than pointing to some absolute that's never existed in comics and leads to Superman acting dumb as a brick and failing to protect people in some comics (Superman Vs Aliens).
If the answer is "no, there's never a situation where Superman can't stop a small army of opponents with power levels equal to his own; and stop them quickly enough to prevent the destruction of Metropolis in the process (as that video suggests that Superman allowing the city to be destroyed is even worse than killing)" then you've created a very boring character. If Superman is so perfect that even when faced with forces greater than himself, that he can still protect everyone and be everything without being forced to take extreme measures, then there's no tension. Superman just wins, there are no consequences and you're just pulling a deus ex machina to allow Superman to be impossibly perfect.
Superman is a character liked by everyone (except the villains, and even most of those respect him), is charismatic, handsome, super-powerful, morally upright, accomplished at his job, kind to animals, etc. This has the potential to be a Mary Sue character if not handled correctly. The tension comes form "Can Superman connect to humanity, and save them without becoming an evil despot?" and if the answer is "Yes, unequivocally, and easily, in any situation, with no hesitation, duh!" Then he is just a Mary Sue. If there isn't a situation where Superman can fail to live up to the perfection he strives for, then he's an incredibly boring character.
That's not to say that Superman has to be forced to kill every villain in order to be a good character. Personally I like it when heroes outsmart the villains, and come up with the creative solution to win. (That's what I want to see in a Flash movie). However, I think there's a big difference between "I think Superman is at his best when he finds a way to avoid killing, and the writing shows Superman being better than anyone has to be, finding a solution that saves the day, and protects his ideals as well." and "Superman just doesn't kill, okay, never ever, never, duh!" I find it much better to point out that Superman is at his best when he's a source of optimism and hope, rather than pointing to some absolute that's never existed in comics and leads to Superman acting dumb as a brick and failing to protect people in some comics (Superman Vs Aliens).
BananaHands
Staff member
Well, in all fairness, they've been doing that for 75 years.
BananaHands
Staff member
Thank you, I got it cut on Wednesday. Decided to go a bit shorter than usual.
Oh you say that, but why see the movie at all then?
ThatNickGuy if you're in town in July and still haven't seen the movie, I'll go with you and I promise to scream "I can't believe this guy is fucking Gina Carano!" during inappropriate times throughout the show.
As to the whole Superman killing thing, to me when he is being sold to children he never kills, when sold to adults he kills boatloads.
As to the whole Superman killing thing, to me when he is being sold to children he never kills, when sold to adults he kills boatloads.
Er, how was Zod right all along? That Earth would have been better off if Superman wasn't there? Nope. Earth would have been better off if Zod had never attacked. Supes isn't responsible for Zod's actions, only Zod is.
On a (hopefully) less controversial note did anyone else like that
Lois Lane worked out that the mysterious superpowered alien was Clark Kent based off 1 encounter with him & then tracking back all the stories about him to find out who he is. It really sold that she was a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter as opposed to other adaptations which just told you she was & expected you to take their word for it.
GasBandit
Staff member
No, I don't recommend the lasagna.
Also it totally got rid of any issues with the audience having to believe that she couldn't figure out who Clark was because of GLASSES. I loved that they just dealt with it and showed us how brilliant she is.
He directed the web video "Death and Return of Superman" and also wrote the script for the film Chronicle. He's also been writing for DC Comics, working on Action Comics.
The son of two fantastically successful Hollywood moguls.
Welcome to two pages ago.
Link? Source? Proof?
Eh, hardly matters. The New 52 Superman proves that DC wants him to be cooler and edgier.
I got that gossip from http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06...pproved-of-man-of-steels-controversial-ending
But I'm sure DC retained enough control to have veto power over things like this.
But I'm sure DC retained enough control to have veto power over things like this.
Personally I believe Superman would sooner stick his hand into Zod's heat beam and try to physically stop the beam than take a life with his own bare hands.
The idea that Superman would kill his opponent if there's no choice is not anathema to me. It can happen, and having Superman make that choice is an interesting direction to take the character. However, the execution of that scene was poor. If you're going to make Superman break his no-killing rule, you'd better make it worthwhile. Zach Snyder didn't, in this case.
The idea that Superman would kill his opponent if there's no choice is not anathema to me. It can happen, and having Superman make that choice is an interesting direction to take the character. However, the execution of that scene was poor. If you're going to make Superman break his no-killing rule, you'd better make it worthwhile. Zach Snyder didn't, in this case.
Oh and for all of those saying that maybe this is the downward spiral of great movies where he becomes the greater Superman? Yeah like 5 minutes later they show him joking with the military to leave him alone. Smirking and making jokes the whole time.
Yeah he's really emotionally wrecked there.
Yeah he's really emotionally wrecked there.
- Status