Man of Steel Discussion (Spoilers)

[Captain Canuck]

Of course not. Obviously people died as a result. But as I've said numerous times, Superman was left with two options there. Stay and fight, which he did, or try to draw Zod away someplace empty of life (like a desert or the Antarctic) to minimize collateral damage. Except that was Zod's point: to maximize collateral damage/human death by staging the fight in Superman's hometown. If Superman had left to get Zod to chase him, it wouldn't have worked. Zod would merely begin killing people to draw Superman to him.

Essentially, Zod held all the cards.

Why are people not seeing this? It's like the detractors are looking for fault merely for the sake of looking for faults without fairly examining the issue. If Superman is forced to choose between protecting innocents and killing a villain, I can understand him choosing the latter. Granted I get that he's better than that and should find another way, but in this instance, there was no other way. If you or anyone else can come up with a viable option other than killing Zod that doesn't result in the deaths of countless additional people, I'm all ears.

I guess I'm just saying, Supes didn't seem too bothered that people were dying before the scene where he killed Zod. If he had been losing the whole time because he was concerned with protecting the people, the Zod death scene would have been much more meaningful. Or even if he had looked around and though, "Oh man, I was so focused on beating Zod that I didn't think about all the people that are getting hurt by our rampage. I need to end this."

But that wasn't there. I guess my point is that the movie went for the big destruction/action/explosions without really having a heart about it and then all of a sudden tried to get the audience to believe that Superman had a dilemma on his hands between killing Zod and saving a family. Given, watching Zod murder a family in front of him is different from people dying as a result of the fight, at least on an emotional level. But there was never any exposition of Superman dealing with the fact that he was responsible for lots of deaths because he was so focused on Zod, and as a result, the "impossible situation" seemed a bit hollow to me.

 

[DIrishB]

I guess I'm just saying, Supes didn't seem too bothered that people were dying before the scene where he killed Zod. If he had been losing the whole time because he was concerned with protecting the people, the Zod death scene would have been much more meaningful. Or even if he had looked around and though, "Oh man, I was so focused on beating Zod that I didn't think about all the people that are getting hurt by our rampage. I need to end this." But that wasn't there. I guess my point is that the movie went for the big destruction/action/explosions without really having a heart about it and then all of a sudden tried to get the audience to believe that Superman had a dilemma on his hands between killing Zod and saving a family. Given, watching Zod murder a family in front of him is different from people dying as a result of the fight, at least on an emotional level. But there was never any exposition of Superman dealing with the fact that he was responsible for lots of deaths because he was so focused on Zod, and as a result, the "impossible situation" seemed a bit hollow to me.

I can understand that, and agree to a point. However, again, Metropolis had been evacuating for awhile before their fight in the city began. As soon as the big environment changer machine thing began coming into the city and causing ruckus, people started leaving. If I recall correctly that was awhile before Zod and Supes fight came to Metropolis. I'll have to watch it again to work out the timing.

But again, I don't think its fair to label Superman "not caring" about people dying. As for self reflection I don't think there was much, if any, time for it. And again, by keeping Zod occupied with the fight, even with some innocents dying as a result, arguably probably resulted in less deaths than Superman NOT fighting Zod, and allowing him to murder thousands or even millions, a la Miracleman #15.

Zod was intent on revenge. He was intent on killing every human on Earth to terraform the planet for Kryptons even before his fellow soldiers were banished to the Phantom Zone. Once that happened and the Kryptonian Codex was destroyed in the process, he was driven to the point of wanting only revenge, and achieving that revenge by killing as many humans as possible (which without Superman's intervention would have likely been just about everyone on the planet).

It's a simple case of the lesser of two evils: do nothing, let everyone die; OR, do something and some will die, but far, far less (billions and billions less) than doing nothing.

Ultimately there wasn't much exposition in terms of the deaths caused, but I think its unfair to blame those events on Superman himself. He did what he could. He learned in the process. He'll use that knowledge going into the future.

And again, no one has come up with a better option for dealing with Zod. The best I've heard is to take the fight somewhere desolate, but the truth is Zod was intent on not only hurting Superman physically, but emotionally, and thus aiming his vengeance at humanity. Superman could've pulled him into a desert or the arctic ad nauseum but Zod would likely return to population centers to take as many humans out as possible in the process.

No one seems to consider or address that in their arguments against the film.

Again, the film had problems, and some rightfully pointed out, but no ones done a fair job of examining the climax from an issue of better or worse.

 

[DARKKNIGHT]

I guess I'm just saying, Supes didn't seem too bothered that people were dying before the scene where he killed Zod. If he had been losing the whole time because he was concerned with protecting the people, the Zod death scene would have been much more meaningful. Or even if he had looked around and though, "Oh man, I was so focused on beating Zod that I didn't think about all the people that are getting hurt by our rampage. I need to end this."

But that wasn't there. I guess my point is that the movie went for the big destruction/action/explosions without really having a heart about it and then all of a sudden tried to get the audience to believe that Superman had a dilemma on his hands between killing Zod and saving a family. Given, watching Zod murder a family in front of him is different from people dying as a result of the fight, at least on an emotional level. But there was never any exposition of Superman dealing with the fact that he was responsible for lots of deaths because he was so focused on Zod, and as a result, the "impossible situation" seemed a bit hollow to me.

I pretty much agree. On paper I don't have an issue with Superman killing Zod in the fashion that he did, but it felt off in the context of the movie. Him killing Zod would have had a lot or meaning, and just worked better, if you saw him attempting to save people here and there during their battle. I think that somehow, Snyder is becoming a worse filmmaker as his career progresses.

 

[Ice]

[video=youtube;weMMywZyrwQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weMMywZyrwQ&feature=share[/video]

 

[wyokid]

So by now it's pretty much universally agreed that this movie sucks (hell, even The Simpsons was making fun of it) and is a textbook example of everything wrong at DC, but man I hope this kid liked the movie.

 

[Ice]

Wow. That's a great photo.

 

[DARKKNIGHT]

So by now it's pretty much universally agreed that this movie sucks (hell, even The Simpsons was making fun of it) and is a textbook example of everything wrong at DC...

I wouldn't go that far. I didn't like that movie, but it wasn't like it was horrible. A complete missed opportunity, but there are things to like. I'd say it's on par with at least half of the Marvel Studios movies.

 

[Ice]

I wouldn't go that far. I didn't like that movie, but it wasn't like it was horrible. A complete missed opportunity, but there are things to like. I'd say it's on par with at least half of the Marvel Studios movies.

No way. Noooo way. This movie was indeed horrible and it doesn't come anywhere near any of the Marvel movies. Not even the 'bad' ones.

 

[DARKKNIGHT]

I disagree. I'm sure this is a matter of personal taste, but I thought it was better than Incredible Hulk, Thor, and on par with Thor 2 and Iron Man 2 and 3. Overall, I thought the plot behind MOS was good, it just wasn't executed well.

 

[DIrishB]

This movie wasn't horrible, you're exaggerating with that description. It was certainly better than Superman Returns, or the old Superman III and Superman IV, so it's better than at least half of the previous Superman films. It also had some great aspects to it: Costner as Jonathan Kent, actually addressing Clark's feelings of alienation and isolation on Earth, etc. And the effects were certainly better than any previous Supes film. Most of the haters keep citing the same old tired and illogical argument regarding Metropolis' destruction due to Supes and Zod's fight or that Superman doesn't kill (even though he has on occasion in the comics itself), arguing Supes should have led Zod away from the city. Of course they're overlooking the fact Zod wants to cause mass destruction and murder, and if Clark had left to draw him out of the city Zod would've just started wiping people out to hurt Clark (much like he tries to do in the subway station when Clark is forced to break Zod's neck). He was faces with two options: try to draw Zod away, which wouldn't have worked and resulted in much higher casualties; or stay and fight and try to stop Zod, which would've resulted in casualties, but not as many as if he did nothing. And Superman killed him to save innocents. He begged and pleaded with Zod not to do it, as he didn't want to kill him, but morally he did the right thing. He killed the homicidal, super powered Kryptonian villain to save an innocent family (and who knows how many additional people had Zod's rampage continued). There's also the argument "Superman would've found another way" besides killing or fighting in the city. Perhaps, but again, considering he'd only put the costume on a few days or weeks before that big battle, he's still new to the whole super hero thing. It's stupid to think he'd be the seasoned and wise hero he is from the comics right from the start. It offers a chance to see him grow into that role.

So by now it's pretty much universally agreed that this movie sucks (hell, even The Simpsons was making fun of it) and is a textbook example of everything wrong at DC, but man I hope this kid liked the movie.

The Simpsons make fun of everything, including classic and beloved movies and Academy award winners. The Simpsons making fun of something isn't an indication it sucks, merely an indication it exists.

No way. Noooo way. This movie was indeed horrible and it doesn't come anywhere near any of the Marvel movies. Not even the 'bad' ones.

Man of Steel is preferable to Iron Man 2.

 

[Ice]

I'm not exaggerating anything. It's called an opinion for a reason and just because people don't share yours doesn't mean they're over doing anything.

This movie was a mess, which is a shame due to the promising trailers.

 

[DIrishB]

I'm not exaggerating anything. It's called an opinion for a reason and just because people don't share yours doesn't mean they're over doing anything. This movie was a mess, which is a shame due to the promising trailers.

Iron Man 2 was a mess too. And seriously, let's tone down the self righteousness. If you're going to say something is horrible or a mess, at least give your reasoning for your opinion.

 

[wyokid]

I think the movie was horrible because it was really bad

 

[Ice]

Iron Man 2 was a mess too. And seriously, let's tone down the self righteousness. If you're going to say something is horrible or a mess, at least give your reasoning for your opinion.

There's nothing to tone down. Every time someone says something negative about this movie, you get all defensive about it. Which is fine. You like it, that's cool. But people are allowed to not like things as well.


What's horrible about this movie has been said plenty of times throughout. The disaster ****, the killing, how Pa Kent was written, Jor El's consciousness thing... I could go on. No one expected a "seasoned Superman". People expected a good Superman story. This was not it.

 

[DIrishB]

I think the movie was horrible because it was really bad

Nice trolling.

There's nothing to tone down. Every time someone says something negative about this movie, you get all defensive about it. Which is fine. You like it, that's cool. But people are allowed to not like things as well. What's horrible about this movie has been said plenty of times throughout. The disaster ****, the killing, how Pa Kent was written, Jor El's consciousness thing... I could go on. No one expected a "seasoned Superman". People expected a good Superman story. This was not it.

I didn't love the movie, don't get me wrong. It certainly has it's problems, and I'm definitely aware of them. I'm just saying some of the arguments are illogical.

I've already addressed the disaster and killing stuff. What was wrong with how Pa Kent was written? That was actually my favorite aspect of the film. And you had a problem with Jor-El's consciousness/hologram thing? Did you also hate Brando's Jor-El consciousness talking to Clark through the crystals in the original Superman films by Donner? If not, what's the difference?

 

[Ice]

I've already addressed the disaster and killing stuff. What was wrong with how Pa Kent was written?

I was not in favor with the lessons he was giving Clark. To hide rather than to help. It was understandable where he was coming from, but rather than saying "maybe" should've let the kids die, he should've said to be more careful in how he uses his powers and all. And to tell Clark not to rescue him because of all those people there? That was just bad.

That was actually my favorite aspect of the film. And you had a problem with Jor-El's consciousness/hologram thing? Did you also hate Brando's Jor-El consciousness talking to Clark through the crystals in the original Superman films by Donner? If not, what's the difference?

I haven't seen Donner's Superman in years. I don't remember Superman talking to Jor El as if he was there, which is what it was like in Snyder's. It was silly to me to have it like that.

 

[DIrishB]

I was not in favor with the lessons he was giving Clark. To hide rather than to help. It was understandable where he was coming from, but rather than saying "maybe" should've let the kids die, he should've said to be more careful in how he uses his powers and all. And to tell Clark not to rescue him because of all those people there? That was just bad.

I didn't see it as bad, but as realistic. Any parent would put the well being of their own kid ahead of others. I also think you're reading the "maybe" line wrong. While Jonathan does want to protect Clark, he also knows his abilities will be able to help people someday. His "maybe" line wasn't saying he maybe should've let the kids die, so much as leaving the option of whether to use his powers for good or not up to Clark, to leave it as his decision. That's the right thing to do, to let him forge his own path, instead of outright declaring he must, or subtly manipulating him to do so.

I haven't seen Donner's Superman in years. I don't remember Superman talking to Jor El as if he was there, which is what it was like in Snyder's. It was silly to me to have it like that.

It's a computer program based on Jor-El's consciousness/personality. How is that any more silly than a space ship opening a wormhole and traveling across the galaxy, or Kryptonian villains being imprisoned in the Phantom Zone, or a man who can fly? Given the advanced state of Kryptonian technology, and the fact such a program really isn't that impossible for us to create with our own technology in the next decade, I think you may be using tunnel vision in that regard.

 

[Ice]

I didn't see it as bad, but as realistic. Any parent would put the well being of their own kid ahead of others. I also think you're reading the "maybe" line wrong. While Jonathan does want to protect Clark, he also knows his abilities will be able to help people someday. His "maybe" line wasn't saying he maybe should've let the kids die, so much as leaving the option of whether to use his powers for good or not up to Clark, to leave it as his decision. That's the right thing to do, to let him forge his own path, instead of outright declaring he must, or subtly manipulating him to do so.

Like I said, it was understandable where he was coming from- still didn't like it.

It's a computer program based on Jor-El's consciousness/personality. How is that any more silly than a space ship opening a wormhole and traveling across the galaxy, or Kryptonian villains being imprisoned in the Phantom Zone, or a man who can fly? Given the advanced state of Kryptonian technology, and the fact such a program really isn't that impossible for us to create with our own technology in the next decade, I think you may be using tunnel vision in that regard.

I should've made myself clearer. I don't find the silliness in the consciousness thing itself, but the fact that it was as if Jor El was there himself. I just didn't like it. It was odd to me.

 

[wyokid]

That's the right thing to do, to let him forge his own path, instead of outright declaring he must, or subtly manipulating him to do so.

Which is why whenever he does anything it's because someone tells him to do it.

 

[DIrishB]

Like I said, it was understandable where he was coming from- still didn't like it.



I should've made myself clearer. I don't find the silliness in the consciousness thing itself, but the fact that it was as if Jor El was there himself. I just didn't like it. It was odd to me.

The program was loaded onto the two ships (first the one Clark finds in the ice and then uploaded into one of Zod's ships). In a sense he was there. The program was able to know what was going on in the ship, the locations of Zod's soldiers in relation to Clark and Lois, and enact actions based on trying to protect them. As said, it's just an advanced AI, programmed with verbal responses to conversation based on Jor-El's consciousness. Advanced brain mapping could've accomplished that. It's beyond our current tech levels on Earth, but not by much.

Which is why whenever he does anything it's because someone tells him to do it.

Such as? If he did whatever anyone told him wouldn't he have joined Zod? Wouldn't he have stayed on the farm instead of going out into the world? Is that why he destroyed the drone at the end the Army was using to find his ship, and told them to back off? That's a weak statement, wyo.


Like I said, the film certainly has it's problems but it's not the horrible piece of crap many make it out to be. It's a mediocre Superman film, absolutely. But again, Iron Man 2 was a pretty big piece of crap in its own right, and I certainly wouldn't classify IM2 as a better film than MoS. Much as I love the Marvel films, even I recognize IM2 as the weak link.