Zack Snyder's 'Man of Steel'

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

How nice for you, still not sure why people who hate movies insist on going back into the thread for that movie, oh well. Man of Steel is my favourite superhero film of all-time and I think the sequel is going to be an absolute blast, wish it were here already.

Because, the character supercedes a singular incarnation put to screen. And, to be involved with discussion of said character surrounding the details of said film can still be a reasonable experience if the conversation remains civilized and intellectual.

Am I not entitled to participate in the thread and offer my knowledge and experience surrounding the voices I have heard speak regarding the film or "character as depicted within the film?" So long as I don't respond to posts that I have quoted with "No it won't" or "It shouldn't because it's stupid," then I have every right to be involved with the discussion relating to a character that I am passionate about.

[Batman1980]

Well for me it was a great movie because I felt pulled into it, like I was really there. I connected to Kal-El and his parents and to Zod and somewhat to the other characters as well. Superman has this stigma as the big boy scout but I think that's something born of his "no-killing" rule that he rarely breaks. Well that and as he's said many times, if he were to really cut loose all the time doing his "superhero thing", people would get killed all the time. I saw what happened in this movie to Metropolis and I think it will affect him and how he handles things going forward. Nobody's perfect, not even a near god like Kal-El with all that knowledge and power but he's held on a pedestal and I think he will learn to be the kind of person who's held in such high esteem. Hopefully the sequel will go into detail about this and while I did love seeing Kryptonians pound on each other with all that power, I hope the sequel will scale back a bit on the action. That's why I hope the main villain won't be someone like Metallo, Doomsday or Darkseid. Actually I think Metallo is a terrible villain, I hope they leave him out of the "Snyderverse" completely.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

Well for me it was a great movie because I felt pulled into it, like I was really there. I connected to Kal-El and his parents and to Zod and somewhat to the other characters as well. Superman has this stigma as the big boy scout but I think that's something born of his "no-killing" rule that he rarely breaks. Well that and as he's said many times, if he were to really cut loose all the time doing his "superhero thing", people would get killed all the time. I saw what happened in this movie to Metropolis and I think it will affect him and how he handles things going forward. Nobody's perfect, not even a near god like Kal-El with all that knowledge and power but he's held on a pedestal and I think he will learn to be the kind of person who's held in such high esteem. Hopefully the sequel will go into detail about this and while I did love seeing Kryptonians pound on each other with all that power, I hope the sequel will scale back a bit on the action. That's why I hope the main villain won't be someone like Metallo, Doomsday or Darkseid. Actually I think Metallo is a terrible villain, I hope they leave him out of the "Snyderverse" completely.

And for me, the sequel is just too late for what you are hoping for. They should have showed some of that in the first film. As is, the character just doesn't seem to care during or after the fight when he should most. All of the death and destruction was followed by a kiss with Lois on the grave of thousands followed by Superman floating over a destroyed spy plane with a smirk on his face telling the military that he knows they have been looking for him. Shouldn't he have just caught it and returned it with a kind request to refrain from such activity? He shows absolutely no remorse or concern for all of the damage and death that just occurred. To me, that ruins the character. Being who he is, he should be a hell of a lot more emotionally affected by what has all just transpired. He should even be at the forefront of actively trying to instill hope back into what citizens remain of the Metropolis populace (woah... did that just rhyme?!?!?! ). There is nothing. He just flies away and leaves humans to clean up after his mess???

If they bring that to the sequel somehow, it will be "too little, too late" in my opinion.

EDIT: I should also clarify since it has been a while since I've said it. The film is a fantastic summer blockbuster! It's just a terrible Superman film.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

And for me, the sequel is just too late for what you are hoping for. They should have showed some of that in the first film. As is, the character just doesn't seem to care during or after the fight when he should most. All of the death and destruction was followed by a kiss with Lois on the grave of thousands followed by Superman floating over a destroyed spy plane with a smirk on his face telling the military that he knows they have been looking for him. He shows absolutely no remorse or concern for all of the damage and death that just occurred. To me, that ruins the character. Being who he is, he should be a hell of a lot more emotionally affected by what has all just transpired. He should even be at the forefront of actively trying to instill hope back into what citizens remain of the Metropolis populace (woah... did that just rhyme?!?!?! ). There is nothing. He just flies away and leaves humans to clean up after his mess???

If they bring that to the sequel somehow, it will be "too little, too late" in my opinion.

EDIT: I should also clarify since it has been a while since I've said it. The film is a fantastic summer blockbuster! It's just a terrible Superman film.

When has Superman EVER helped put stuff back together after he smashed it? Granted I never really read his comics and my exposure to him is limited to the movies and Lois & Clark and Smallville and the Justice League shows and movies. He cared, granted he probably didn't need to smash that spy satellite to make a point but if it really was tasked to following his actions he may not have had a choice. You didn't like the movie, we should just leave it at that, we're not going to change your mind and you're not going to change ours.

[ONE_DAY_AS_A_LION]

Wondering what you guys think about this. I'm not that interested because there would be no super hero involved but the thought is still cool.

Russell Crowe Interested in a Man of Steel Prequel

http://www.movieweb.com/news/russell...-steel-prequel

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by ONE_DAY_AS_A_LION

Wondering what you guys think about this. I'm not that interested because there would be no super hero involved but the thought is still cool.

Russell Crowe Interested in a Man of Steel Prequel

http://www.movieweb.com/news/russell...-steel-prequel

Of course he wants a prequel, he probably had a lot of fun doing the character and working with Snyder and Goyer. I doubt we'll get one, even though I loved MoS, I don't really want to see an entire movie about Jor-El and Lara Lor-Van on Krypton. We'll probably see some more about them in the sequel anyway, they are his birth parents after all.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

When has Superman EVER helped put stuff back together after he smashed it? Granted I never really read his comics and my exposure to him is limited to the movies and Lois & Clark and Smallville and the Justice League shows and movies. He cared, granted he probably didn't need to smash that spy satellite to make a point but if it really was tasked to following his actions he may not have had a choice. You didn't like the movie, we should just leave it at that, we're not going to change your mind and you're not going to change ours.

But, isn't that where you are wrong? Did you read my edit? I enjoyed the film as a summer blockbuster (a turn your brain off at the door popcorn flick). It's only because they associated it with the character of Superman that I have a dislike for it. I am a man of two minds on the subject. And I'm not trying to change anybody else's mind. Just expressing my thoughts.

[bluearth]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

But, isn't that where you are wrong? Did you read my edit? I enjoyed the film as a summer blockbuster (a turn your brain off at the door popcorn flick). It's only because they associated it with the character of Superman that I have a dislike for it. I am a man of two minds on the subject

lol, turn your brain off at the door popcorn flick

If Superman showed care and worry about the damage, and if he didnt destroy the satellite, would it then be classified above a turn your brain off at the door flick?

How do we know his scream after the Zod fight wasnt all the emotion from not just that but everything just before it boiling over?

The ground zero kiss? Is that the worst this film did? If so then I'd say it did pretty good.

[Dorklord]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

And for me, the sequel is just too late for what you are hoping for. They should have showed some of that in the first film. As is, the character just doesn't seem to care during or after the fight when he should most. All of the death and destruction was followed by a kiss with Lois on the grave of thousands followed by Superman floating over a destroyed spy plane with a smirk on his face telling the military that he knows they have been looking for him. Shouldn't he have just caught it and returned it with a kind request to refrain from such activity? He shows absolutely no remorse or concern for all of the damage and death that just occurred. To me, that ruins the character. Being who he is, he should be a hell of a lot more emotionally affected by what has all just transpired. He should even be at the forefront of actively trying to instill hope back into what citizens remain of the Metropolis populace (woah... did that just rhyme?!?!?! ). There is nothing. He just flies away and leaves humans to clean up after his mess???

If they bring that to the sequel somehow, it will be "too little, too late" in my opinion.

EDIT: I should also clarify since it has been a while since I've said it. The film is a fantastic summer blockbuster! It's just a terrible Superman film.

I simply disagree. You're entitled to your opinion of course... but I count these kind of posts as nothing more than extreme nitpickiness.

The planet is about to be wiped out. Let me say that again... the WHOLE PLANET... as in all of mankind. Besides Superman is still only one entity... he can only be in one place at a time and despite the awful destruction and carnage going on in Metropolis... he's still new to the superhero game and quite outnumbered and overwhelmed. Dear Lord... he did the best he could do... and still ended up saving the whole planet from destruction. I'm sorry but these crazy thoughts and ramblings of "he didn't care or show enough remorse about the people of Metropolis" are simply nitpicky goofy bizarre.

He was in the fight of his life to save his Earth against overwhelming odds. Stopping to grab a Kleenex and sob like a baby over some crumbling buildings is not anything I'd be interested in seeing. As Spock would remind us all "The needs of the many (the entire planet in this case) out weight the needs of the few.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by bluearth

lol, turn your brain off at the door popcorn flick

If Superman showed care and worry about the damage, and if he didnt destroy the satellite, would it then be classified above a turn your brain off at the door flick?

Not necessarily. But, then it would be a few steps closer to being a good Superman film.

Originally Posted by bluearth

How do we know his scream after the Zod fight wasnt all the emotion from not just that but everything just before it boiling over?

Well, then that would make it even worse in my opinion since his remorse and regret ends with a simple momentary vocal outburst. Nothing more selfish than acknowledging a semblance of responsibility and then running/flying away without doing anything about it or trying to show those you are protecting the proper way to deal with your own mess.

Originally Posted by bluearth

The ground zero kiss? Is that the worst this film did? If so then I'd say it did pretty good.

I wouldn't say it is the worst, but it is part of a decently lengthy list... the "Why Man Of Steel is a terrible Superman film" list.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Dorklord

I simply disagree. You're entitled to your opinion of course... but I count these kind of posts as nothing more than extreme nitpickiness.

The planet is about to be wiped out. Let me say that again... the WHOLE PLANET... as in all of mankind. Besides Superman is still only one entity... he can only be in one place at a time and despite the awful destruction and carnage going on in Metropolis... he's still new to the superhero game and quite outnumbered and overwhelmed. Dear Lord... he did the best he could do... and still ended up saving the whole planet from destruction. I'm sorry but these crazy thoughts and ramblings of "he didn't care or show enough remorse about the people of Metropolis" are simply nitpicky goofy bizarre.

He was in the fight of his life to save his Earth against overwhelming odds. Stopping to grab a Kleenex and sob like a baby over some crumbling buildings is not anything I'd be interested in seeing. As Spock would remind us all "The needs of the many (the entire planet in this case) out weight the needs of the few.

Did I say that he needed a Kleenex in order to show remorse and show that he cared? No. There are variations of those traits which could easily be reflected with other actions or words that don't involve cuddling up and crying.

In fact, the character did NOTHING to inspire humanity after the tragedy was averted. Sure, the act of stopping the tragedy from being a complete massacre is all fine and good. However, there was nothing that he did to get people inspired to rebuild and restart. He is a character designed to offer humans that inspiration. None was provided in this case.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Dorklord

I simply disagree. You're entitled to your opinion of course... but I count these kind of posts as nothing more than extreme nitpickiness.

The planet is about to be wiped out. Let me say that again... the WHOLE PLANET... as in all of mankind. Besides Superman is still only one entity... he can only be in one place at a time and despite the awful destruction and carnage going on in Metropolis... he's still new to the superhero game and quite outnumbered and overwhelmed. Dear Lord... he did the best he could do... and still ended up saving the whole planet from destruction. I'm sorry but these crazy thoughts and ramblings of "he didn't care or show enough remorse about the people of Metropolis" are simply nitpicky goofy bizarre.

He was in the fight of his life to save his Earth against overwhelming odds. Stopping to grab a Kleenex and sob like a baby over some crumbling buildings is not anything I'd be interested in seeing. As Spock would remind us all "The needs of the many (the entire planet in this case) out weight the needs of the few.

To me Superman means being capable of things other people can't or won't do, even if that means killing when it's absolutely necessary. You ask me the humans in the movie showed a much lower regard for life and property, they were using plane weapons in a town and in a city that caused massive damage all by itself. They also did whatever it took to send Faora and the rest of Zod's forces back to the Phantom Zone and as far as I can their efforts caused massive damage to the city and probably costs thousands of people their lives, homes and belongings. Wonder if the soldiers and politicians went back after the battle to help recover/rebuild.

[Dorklord]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Did I say that he needed a Kleenex in order to show remorse and show that he cared? No. There are variations of those traits which could easily be reflected with other actions or words that don't involve cuddling up and crying.

In fact, the character did NOTHING to inspire humanity after the tragedy was averted. Sure, the act of stopping the tragedy from being a complete massacre is all fine and good. However, there was nothing that he did to get people inspired to rebuild and restart. He is a character designed to offer humans that inspiration. None was provided in this case.

He stopped the bad guys from destroying the Earth and wiping out all of humanity... and to boot he even stopped them from destroying all of Metropolis. I find that pretty darn inspiring. Sorry you didn't. Great Superman movie... great summer blockbuster. Can't wait for the sequel.

[mredman]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

But, isn't that where you are wrong? Did you read my edit? I enjoyed the film as a summer blockbuster (a turn your brain off at the door popcorn flick). It's only because they associated it with the character of Superman that I have a dislike for it. I am a man of two minds on the subject. And I'm not trying to change anybody else's mind. Just expressing my thoughts.

your thoughts are FLAWED. What Snyder brought to the screen with MoS is actually way more accurate then Donner ever put on the screen. So if you did not enjoy this you were never a superman fan to begin with.

Don't forget this is an origin story

[Show spoiler]it ends where he actually becomes Superman starting as an intern on daily planet as Clark with the glasses

.

So MoS 2 will be SUPERMAN now that we have gotten the Batman Begins of Superman in MoS.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

To me Superman means being capable of things other people can't or won't do, even if that means killing when it's absolutely necessary. You ask me the humans in the movie showed a much lower regard for life and property, they were using plane weapons in a town and in a city that caused massive damage all by itself. They also did whatever it took to send Faora and the rest of Zod's forces back to the Phantom Zone and as far as I can their efforts caused massive damage to the city and probably costs thousands of people their lives, homes and belongings. Wonder if the soldiers and politicians went back after the battle to help recover/rebuild.

And, that type of behaviour is always expected from the military and humans in general. I'm just saying that Superman himself needed to shown with a bit more humility in the aftermath. I would have preferred A LOT more humility, but I would be happy with any signs of humility in this case. He just doesn't seem to care at all. This gave the character a "better than everyone" ego in the aftermath that I don't think fits the character in any incarnation.

P.S. It wasn't shown, but the film gave me the impression that the military was going to be far more involved in the clean-up than Superman was going to be.

[mredman]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

In fact, the character did NOTHING to inspire humanity after the tragedy was averted. Sure, the act of stopping the tragedy from being a complete massacre is all fine and good. However, there was nothing that he did to get people inspired to rebuild and restart. He is a character designed to offer humans that inspiration. None was provided in this case.

you simply don't get it do you

ITS AN ORIGIN MOVIE. HE IS NOT REALLY SUPERMAN YET.

[Show spoiler]THE MOVIE ENDS WITH HIM AS BECOMING THE PERSONA CLARK WITH THE GLASSES AND SUPERMAN THEN WHAT YOU SPEAK OF WILL FOLLOW AS WE KNOW IT

[Dorklord]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

And, that type of behaviour is always expected from the military and humans in general. I'm just saying that Superman himself needed to shown with a bit more humility in the aftermath. I would have preferred A LOT more humility, but I would be happy with any signs of humility in this case. He just doesn't seem to care at all. This gave the character a "better than everyone" ego in the aftermath that I don't think fits the character in any incarnation.

P.S. It wasn't shown, but the film gave me the impression that the military was going to be far more involved in the clean-up than Superman was going to be.

I'm sorry that you didn't get all of what you wanted from the flick... and ultimately felt that way in the end. I really am. But... I (and many many many others) just didn't get that ("lack of humility or better than everyone else") feeling that you're speaking of at all from the character.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by mredman

your thought are FLAWED. What Snyder brought to the screen with MoS is actually way more accurate then Donner ever put on the screen. So if you did not enjoy this you were never a superman fan to begin with.

Don't forget this is an origin story

[Show spoiler]it ends where he actually becomes Superman starting as an intern on daily planet as Clark with the glasses

.

So MoS 2 will be SUPERMAN now that we have gotten the Batman Begins of Superman in MoS.

Am I talking about Donner? NO. I'm talking about what this character is supposed to represent. I don't care if he is just starting out as a Superhero. The character went through several very important life lessons with his father (Jonathan Kent) that clearly left him with a moral centre. Within the context of JUST THIS FILM, I feel that the character of Jonathan Kent was there to help create the man. And, Jonathan's scenes were very adept at that. In the end, with the way Kal-El behaves during/after the final battle, I feel as though the character of Jonathan was completely wasted and/or countered. Jonathan and his sacrifice deserve far more than how his son behaved in the aftermath.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Am I talking about Donner? NO. I'm talking about what this character is supposed to represent. I don't care if he is just starting out as a Superhero. The character went through several very important life lessons with his father (Jonathan Kent) that clearly left him with a moral centre. Within the context of JUST THIS FILM, I feel that the character of Jonathan Kent was there to help create the man. And, Jonathan's scenes were very adept at that. In the end, with the way Kal-El behaves during/after the final battle, I feel as though the character of Jonathan was completely wasted and/or countered. Jonathan and his sacrifice deserve far more than how his son behaved in the aftermath.

Jor-El was also instrumental, even if it was mostly right before or right after he put the suit on, telling his son about all the ideals and values he would use/have as Superman. Jonathan Kent died protecting his son from the fears and prejudices of this world and because he believed what his son was capable of doing was more important than one man's life. I'm done replying to you in this thread though, all it does is irritate me.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by mredman

you simply don't get it do you

ITS AN ORIGIN MOVIE. HE IS NOT REALLY SUPERMAN YET.

[Show spoiler]THE MOVIE ENDS WITH HIM AS BECOMING THE PERSONA CLARK WITH THE GLASSES AND SUPERMAN THEN WHAT YOU SPEAK OF WILL FOLLOW AS WE KNOW IT

Wait! Someone is yelling at me in capital letters on an internet forum! I think maybe my mind has been changed!

right back at ya pal!

This is all for discussion purposes. I have no agenda or emotional attachment to the matter at hand. No need to get vicious or aggressive people. I simply am discussing the film in a calm and civilized manner.