Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Agent Richard07, Jun 11, 2013.
Gods, I'd forgotten about the speedo. Seriously!
OK.... about the speedo: I didn't miss it!
But he's not, at least not permanently. All of the Kryptonian prisoners besides Zod are still alive in the Phantom Zone, there's a chance that there were Kryptonian colony worlds or offshoots of those worlds that Zod missed, there's Kara (Supergirl) if you take the prequel comic into account; and if you don't the open cryopod implies that someone might have survived from the Earth scoutship even in the film, and Kal-El still has the Kryptonian Codex embedded in his cells -- which Jor-El intended for him to extract and bring back his people somehow when he felt the time was right for them to peacefully coexist with humanity.
I get what you're saying, but I've rarely heard those used as a negative before.
Visual FX have finally progressed far enough to allow us to see the real consequences of a battle between godlike superpowered beings in a live action Superman film --something we had previously only seen to a lesser degree in the Superman-inspired fight in The Matrix Revolutions and which many people have been wanting to see for ages-- and now all of a sudden it's being used as a criticism.
You know, Godzilla and King Kong and countless other monsters, superbeings, and villains somehow managed to trash buildings and cities long before 9/11. I get why we as an audience would make that connection having lived through seeing it, but not every scene of mass destruction in a city has to intended as a 9/11 allegory now. You can make the argument that it was in Star Trek into Darkness because of all the other War on Terror allusions in that story, but Man of Steel didn't really touch on that too extensively, being more of a The Day the Earth Stood Still mixed with an alien invasion type story (really, a Superman type story).
Okay, unconnected to the Superman discussion, but why is her head twice the size of his, why doesn't she have thumbs, and why are her bracelets riding up to her knuckles? That just looks awkward.
davejames, fyi, Zod was in the scout ship with the birth pods that crashed away from the singularity which is how he escaped. When I saw the movie, I remember thinking, oh no, are they going to continue the Zod story in the sequel because he went down with that ship and didn't get caught in the singularity. LOL, guess not.
Aren't you forgetting the Avengers? That featured a city wide invasion that involved aliens wrecking havoc all over New York city, both small and huge. Where as Superman fights Zod and doesn't really give a crap about the destruction that's going on around him, the Avengers are at least coordinating with each other and the city police to ensure that the civilians are out of harms way. I didn't see any footage of Captain America walking away from a gas station that was exploding just to make him look like a bada**. And even after the fight in the Avengers, we get to see people reacting to the destruction, posting photos of their missing/dead friends and families, and being thankful for what the heroes did. In the end, it showed New York as a city in the midst of recovery, where as in Man of Steel, everything is back to normal.
Moral of the argument, if you want your super hero to be heroic, he has to give a crap about the destruction both he and the bad guys are causing.
1. Her head isn't twice as large Max's head.
2. She does have thumbs (it's right next to her eye on the last panel)
3. Her bracer is up to her knuckles because Superman broke her wrist while he was under the control of Max. She moved the bracer up to her hand to support it.
Ah, you're right. Forgot about that. So I guess his surviving wasn't implausible at all.
Although I do think they should have done a better job explaining what Zod was up to at the end of the movie. First time I saw it, I wasn't really clear where this Genesis Chamber was, or who was flying off with the scout ship, or why it was being taken into battle, etc.
Let me rephrase my original response. The needs of the one was on Jonathan Kent's side, but the needs of the many were on Clark and Martha's side since they both wanted Jonathan safe. I don't recall Martha holding Clark back when he looked like he was about to rescue him. So "the needs of the many" thing doesn't really apply to his decision at all. Jonathan was just an idiotic coward who was willing to throw away his life because of something.... he didn't know. I guess it's a lot like the Prime Directive in Star Trek. We don't know what will happen if you save this culture from extinction, so why bother? Let them die Papa Kent would say.
There were also 5 of them, where Superman was just one guy. And his hands were completely full just taking on Zod; there wasn't much time to coordinate anything with the local police. At least not that I ever saw.
I do agree we probably should have seen a bit more concern from Superman during the battle though, and maybe some shots of him afterwards helping out with the recovery effort.
Everyone keeps going on and on about how much destruction Superman does in his fight with Zod, but the fact is that by the time he showed up in Metropolis the world builder had done almost all of the damage already.
I always thought what was relevant about Jonathon's death in STM was that it put one barrier in front of Clark "All my powers, all the things I can do, but I couldn't save him." The death of those he loves is the one thing he can't stop - until of course he turns back time to stop Lois' death. The film uses those two plot points to great effect and makes Jonathon's death part of Clark's character arc.
Unfortunately, upon even minor analysis that character arc doesn't accomplish much - Clark doesn't exactly grow. Basically he cheats his way out of the Kobayashi Maru and never learns to deal with death. Not to mention the logic issues his turning back time creates for the movie in general. But, in the moment, it generally works.
I think most of the problems involved in MoS's scene of Jonathon's death is that like most of the emotional beats in the movie, it's rushed. But it does try to connect back to when Jonathon tells Clark that maybe he'll sometimes have to let people die in order to protect his secret. Interestingly, despite Mark Waid's overall negative (and somewhat self-serving) review of MoS, he said he really liked Joanthon's death because of the fight Clark and Jonathon have right before it. Basically the last real thing Clark says to Jonathon is "You're not my father!", so he follows Jonathon's order not to save him in order to prove to Jonathon that he is his father, that he has absorbed his lessons and will try to honor them to the best of his ability. That's not a bad moment of emotional growth. And, unlike the Donner films, Clark does have a character arc in MoS - he emerges from the events of the movie with a plan and a direction when he began in a state of confusion and wandering.
Yeah, I just threw that in there as a cute Star Trek reference given that we're on a Star Trek board but we can make a thing of it if you want.
Clark is the one, and humanity is the many.
There not actually being any heat vision it's easy to forget that it's officially part of the story. It's a kind of made up excuse to remove all moral blame, so I tend to skip over it. (Incidentally it also removes all moral credit as well. Superman is not acting as an independent moral agent, and it's all about the killing and a few moments' angst.)
If Superman had merely choked Zod unconscious, and the people escaped, the same supposed necessity to kill Zod would have been there. Except that seeing Superman kill Zod in "cold" blood would have been less entertaining. The heat vision crap was just mischief designed to an end: Superman kills. Many people think killing the villain is a fun ending. But if it just do it barefaced, so to speak, it becomes a little embarrassing. So the mediocre writers dress it up. I guess it's like roleplaying in sex? Nobody really, truly believes the pretense but it's sort of like somebody else is doing the dirty?
The moment Zod reappeared I knew where this was going. I was detached, moderately bored and mildly put off. Personally I never expected too much from a comic book movie, so I paid more attention to the good stuff.
The cryopod doesn't have to be opened from the inside. All Superman really knows about is the last. Superman has no intention of recreating Kryptonians on Earth, even if he knows how. Otherwise, he could have, should have and would have tried talking Zod down with the hope of eventually using the Codex.
I missed that too, probably because I still have no idea why the birth pods wouldn't go into the singularity too.
Plus none of the Avengers had any romantic happy moments in the middle of a ruined city where people were most likely still dying.
Would have been nice if his mother had any say in the matter, but nobody gives a crap about mothers in these kind of movies.
^^^It's a Christopher Nolan movie, it's really no surprise that the woman disappears when her husband is sacrificing his life, just like she doesn't matter. But I'm so glad we got this Lois I'm still not inclined to look the gift horse in the mouth.
The Avengers sure found time to joke around though. And the big recovery montage was half-filled with cheesy comments ("I love you Thor!" and "Superheroes in New York?") and people clowning around in superhero costumes. So it's not like the movie was taking the destruction THAT seriously.
Yes. We have this Lois who follows Clark for weird reasons and gets attacked by evil machines so she can be rescued by Superman. She also gets sent to Zod's ship for.... reasons. Oh, wait. She was sent there so she could be rescued by Superman. Also she tags along with the military so they can bomb Zod's ship because.... she can't push a button. Ack! What was I thinking? She tagged along so she could be rescued by Superman. Actually, I think she was just there for exposition dumps.
Also, she's not a good person if death, doom and destruction don't phase her.
?? Not romantic, but they certainly had time to sit about and crack wise.
Tony Stark: Alright. Hey. Alright. Good job, guys. Let's just not come in tomorrow. Let's just take a day. Have you ever tried shawarma? There's a shawarma joint about two blocks from here. I don't know what it is, but I wanna try it.
Considering how many damaged and failing buildings would have been collapsing at that point in the story, the fact that they giggled a bit and then went to ALL glower at Loki in a hero pose shot (because only one or two of them couldn't take him as he was crawling away while the others saw to survivors??) shows their wanton disregard for human life. Or at least it should if people were applying the same standards to that movie as to this one.
I'm astonished this debate continues on and on. It's a comic book movie. Every one I've ever seen has shown enormous destruction and made next to no mention of survivors, death tolls or anything else, except insofar as it served to move the story forward. Anyone with half a brain knows to accept the conventions of the genre which is that as soon as the good guy trounces the bad guy the trauma is over and on with the show because NO ONE IS ACTUALLY DYING. It's a story about a guy in blue tights who flies - it's ludicrous to expect a realistic treatment of the destruction. Comic books don't do it, comic book movies don't do it.
If you want to try to argue that it's a basic part of Superman's character that he tries to save people while fighting, then I have to ask - what about the town that inevitably had to flood in STM when he turned back time and hung around to save Lois rather than did the heroic deeds he did the first time around? What about all the people engulfed in the destruction during his fight with Doomsday in the comics? People are applying inconsistent standards to this story as opposed to others. Sometimes it fits the pacing and theme of a tale to make protecting all the people a plot point, sometimes it doesn't.
It's just that we were assured as a fact that it would be back in the comics "in less than a year."
Because if they made the destruction dark and gritty, it wouldn't have been fun. Plus the real difference here is that unlike Superman, the Avengers were being heroic. I think this moment sums it up nicely.
Server Lady: All I know is Captain America saved my life, to him and the others, I just wanna say thank you.
And Captain America was the labeled soldier of the group.
Separate names with a comma.