Anyone who's seen 'Man of Steel', can we talk about SPOILER-related stuff?

by sd-7 39 Replies latest social entertainment

• 

  sd-7

  If the title of the thread wasn't enough, SPOILER ALERT.

  SPOILER ALERT.

  Okay...so...that said, I haven't seen the movie, which would be a paradox except that I read the novelization. So...how'd you feel about the way it ended? I was left feeling a bit confused emotionally. I guess I was expecting to feel more uplifted. It's just...the matter of Superman, you know, offing Zod. I mean, I get the reasons why, but...it just seems inappropriate for the first film, because it sets a tone that this is a Superman who will kill people if he has to, when if anything it'd make more sense for him not to kill Zod and maybe find his hand forced in a later film/story.

  It also seems like he's got a very uneasy relationship with the government/military (for very good reasons since he might feel a little bothered by their handing him over to Zod in the first place). I think that part makes sense, but in the aftermath of him snapping a guy's neck, it makes me feel like this Superman might decide to do it again...(mind you, there could be more dialogue in the movie that I'm missing, so...) But of course, Superman has been known to oppose unethical or morally gray stuff the government does (social commentary on spying/drones, anyone?). I certainly think this character would get ripped to shreds publicly by Lex Luthor, except he did kind of you know, save Metropolis and the world. Let's face it, it's not like they could've arrested Zod or put him on trial. Nor could they get him into the Phantom Zone (which would've been the more logical way to end it, in my mind).

  Of course Zod deserved what happened, but...Superman doesn't do stuff like that, normally. I've heard it's happened (rarely) in comics before, so I get that there is precedence for it, but...I'm just hoping it's not something that gets ignored if/when there's a sequel. Then again, it could be argued that Batman...sorta caused Two-face's death in 'The Dark Knight'. And one would imagine he could've killed someone in the midst of all the random cars and stuff he blows up during chase scenes.

  I did think the 'Man of Steel' story was nonetheless entertaining and an interesting take on Superman. I'm wondering--about that Kryptonian codex--is that a reference to Brainiac? The description in the novel made me think of Brainiac.

  I'm kinda hoping that they consider a 'World's Finest' movie after this. Batman would surely be drawn into curiosity after his satellite was destroyed. Reminds me of the opening episode of the 'Justice League' animated series where Batman is investigating security breaches in his Deep Space Monitoring Network. But at this point, I reckon it's wishful thinking. Still, WB will surely want to milk this for all it's worth since they've definitely got a hit on their hands. So I'm hopeful there'll be a 'Justice League' or 'World's Finest' in the future.

  Anyway, any thoughts on the movie?

  --sd-7
• 

  Nathan Natas

  OK...

  SPOILER ALERT!

  ...he's from Krypton ( the planet not the inert gas)

  and

  ... he's Super.

  But seriously... I enjoy any retelling of the Ubermensch tale, but others I saw the film with felt id didn't do much in terms of character development, and it took itself a >bit< too seriously. Compare it to Chris Reeve's first movie, which had a good sense of humor. I already knew the story of Jesus Superman, so I didn't miss a complete re-tellin of the tale. I consider it a fair addition to the modern legends.

  I DID feel the abundant religious references a bit too much, but easy enough to disregard.
• 

  okage

  I've been a Superman fan since I was a child. At one point I owned fifty-something different stylized Superman "S" shirts. From 2004 to 2008, I was called Superman at work (three different jobs) because I was strong, fast, and saved the day every day while wearing the S.

  When Superman Returns came around, I was excited. It was the first Superman movie to come out since I was born (because nobody counts Quest For Peace) and when that kid threw a piano, my heart sank and I felt like Hollywood betrayed Superman's mythos. And then Superman blatantly allowed some other guy to keep raising his bastard child and I felt so very betrayed. Other than that, it was still a good Superman movie.

  Then Zack Snyder was announced as director to a "darker, grittier Superman" movie and from there, I knew that Hollywood was about to rape the hell out of something I loved dearly. During development, I saw disturbing things. Lawrence Fishbourne as Perry White. Jenny Olsen. No Kryptonite. Henry Cavill as Superman (the American icon played by a Brit). And I was able to glance past these things with a bit of sorrow in my heart. But then I saw the costume and literally shouted "what the ***k?!"

  Three days before the movie came out, I was on Yahoo telling people that this wasn't the Superman from the comics. This Superman was a murderer and wouldn't you know it? He killed Zod. I was able to call this three days before anyone else saw it because there was no possible way he'd uphold his moral code that he stuck to in the source material.
  And some argued about when he killed Zod in the comics. I effortlessly argued that in the comics, he stripped a fake Zod of his powers because the pocket universe Zod had already killed everyone on earth. It wasn't until fake Zod threatened to regain his powers and kill everyone Superman loved that he reluctantly killed him. And for years in the comic (decades in real life), he would lament the lengths he went to stop that Zod.

  Superman lamented killing Zod while he was fighting Doomsday and because he restrained himself, Doomsday seemingly killed him. Not in the movie, though. When the next movie comes out, there won't be a word about how killing someone was going too far. Because, you know, he'll kill the badguy in THAT movie too.

  My wife is a huge Superman fan, too, and she was arguing with a friend online about Man of Steel and I wrote out her argument about source material to sound perfectly knowledgeable about Superman. I jokingly stated that I'd rather watch Kevin Smith direct the movie and have Superman fight a giant spider for no reason than watch Man of Steel, both were possibilities for what became Superman Returns. Damn it if he didn't fight a giant robotic spider for no reason in Man of Steel.

  Instead of the staple of Pa Kent dying of a heart attack/not dying at all, he goes out in a pathetic attempt at plot advancement. And when he tells Clark not to use his abilities or he'd be viewed as a freak, it slandered the character of Pa Kent. Because no one really treated him as a freak in the movie. So he spent the length of the movie finding how to cope from people when it was his earth father who was bullying him. Thanks for being encouraging toward your adopted son, Kevin Costner.

  The weak terraforming plot did nothing for me. Not even a wiggle.

  The manner in which he got his suit (a fake, cheap knockoff that was too dark to be iconographic) just bypassed all that made Clark a noble hero. By the end of the movie, he's just a guy who can move mountains with his hands and has no code to live by. He can kill and he can do it easily if HE feels it's necessary. May as well be Red Son Superman. At least an Elseworlds story has no obligation by the fans to respect the source material.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Okay, this is a dark version. The success of the DARK KNIGHT films probably inspired a man of steel who decides to snap the neck of someone who will not stop killing humans. It's not supposed to be all clean and goody-goody like the Christopher Reeve movies were.

  What bugged me was General Zod saying to Superman that he trained for battle and was genetically crafted for it, then ends with "Where did you train- on a FARM?" That was the perfect setup for Superman to use some kind of thing they could have filmed earlier on the farm and for him to say "Yes, on a farm."
• 

  fakesmile

  superman never killed indiscriminately but he killed doomsday in 93. so he was not above killing if that was the last option. now the savage dragon was a beast. he would pound face into a brick wall over a pair of glasses.
• 

  tec

  It was a sadder ending than Superman is traditionally known for... mainly because his people COULD have lived, right? But chose to do so only at the expense of the native people.

  It was also sad... so very sad... that now Zod will never get to say,

  "KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!"

  I had read that this superman was meant to be a bit darker, a bit edgier than previous versions. I was shocked not that he killed Zod (Zod was going to kill EVERYONE)... but that he sacrificed that family to do so. Zod would have killed them anyway, but still... I kept waiting for the camera to pan back and show us the family still standing there, but it never did.

  Peace,

  tammy
• 

  sd-7

  Okage--thanks for that insight. I've read some Superman comics, but not enough to be an expert. I was left disturbed by the ending. I thought he was supposed to inspire hope. How does he do that by snapping Zod's neck?

  Instead of the staple of Pa Kent dying of a heart attack/not dying at all, he goes out in a pathetic attempt at plot advancement. And when he tells Clark not to use his abilities or he'd be viewed as a freak, it slandered the character of Pa Kent.

  Yeah--this was a major point for me that was like...my first thought was, There is no way in hell that Clark Kent would've stood there and let his father die rather than reveal his powers. Even people who've watched 'Smallville' would've known that Clark Kent would have found a way. (As many laughably absurd, teen-soap moments as 'Smallville' had, I absolutely love the show, used to have marathons of watching it all the time.) That was a huge point where I said, whoa, this isn't like the Superman that I know.

  Pa Kent would NEVER have suggested Clark let a bunch of kids die rather than reveal his powers, either. If there's one thing Jonathan Kent instilled in Clark, it's that you've got to help people if you can. You've got to do the right thing. The world's beliefs would've had to be worked out later. Of course he didn't want Clark to be a show-off about it, but saving a life was what really mattered. Jonathan would've been proud of Clark for doing that. Save a life--yes. Use super-speed to score a touchdown for the football team? No.

  Man, I guess I didn't even notice that "Jenny" was--WHAT THE--a FEMALE JIMMY OLSEN????? Huh??? So that's who that was? Oh my Zod. I almost don't want to see the movie now... They could've made it Penny White and cast Angela Bassett. Why not? She can be Amanda Waller AND Perry White in the DC Movie Universe! Okay, also, it was pretty insulting, I think, to cast a British guy for SUPERMAN, THE All-American hero. I can't think of anything more illogical--wait, I can. They could've cast Samuel L. Jackson in a bad wig as Superman. "Stop, motherf-----! Or I'll snap your motherf---ing neck! STOP!" Random? Yes. Sorry.

  When Superman Returns came around, I was excited. It was the first Superman movie to come out since I was born (because nobody counts Quest For Peace) and when that kid threw a piano, my heart sank and I felt like Hollywood betrayed Superman's mythos. And then Superman blatantly allowed some other guy to keep raising his bastard child and I felt so very betrayed. Other than that, it was still a good Superman movie.

  What? Nobody counts Quest for Peace? Who doesn't love Nuclear Man, ha ha ha! Superman Returns gave me a headache the first time I saw it, but certainly the kid was kind of a uh...what? moment. I did enjoy Kevin Spacey's turn as Lex Luthor, and I thought Superman picking up the huge land mass was a pretty classic scene (as was him landing the airplane in the baseball field at the beginning). There were good moments there, but Superman-as-deadbeat-dad was not such a good moment. Also, after watching Superman II again, I realized how stupid 'Returns' was--Superman had just finished being away, and reassured the President at the end of Superman II that he wouldn't go away again, and then he goes away. For five years.

  When the next movie comes out, there won't be a word about how killing someone was going too far. Because, you know, he'll kill the badguy in THAT movie too.

  And therein lies the deathstroke to the movie's future. Just a simple change in the ending would've saved it for me, even allowing the other glaring deviations from Superman mythology. I can't see them doing another film and just ignoring this, but the fact that they did it really messes up the entire DC cosmos if they were planning to expand into Justice League or bring Batman in league with Superman. I may not know Superman, but I definitely know Batman comics. And there is no way in hell Batman will team up with a Superman who will kill. Batman would be trying to find a way to stop Superman the moment he heard the news.

  ...Which means....

  ....If they reboot Batman, he's going to kill the bad guy, too. It's the next logical step. Wonder if Tim Burton's busy...

  By the way, I wouldn't say Superman in 'Man of Steel' has no code--rather, he has a code that applies only to him, apparently. Maybe they'll end the film series with him joining Darkseid and turning Earth into a New Apokolips or something, ha ha ha...

  --sd-7
• 

  sd-7

  Zod would have killed them anyway, but still... I kept waiting for the camera to pan back and show us the family still standing there, but it never did.

  Wait, what?? You mean they didn't show the family surviving that???? Wow, the novel left me with the belief that he killed Zod before Zod's heat vision could reach the family. I'm just gettin' more messed up the more I hear about it...

  --sd-7
• 

  sd-7

  superman never killed indiscriminately but he killed doomsday in 93.

  Now, I never read the original story there, so maybe the Super Nintendo game altered the story--I thought the Cyborg hurled Doomsday's body into deep space, because there was always a chance that Doomsday could reawaken. I mean, if Superman came back, Doomsday probably wasn't dead, either. But I guess I should read the actual comic rather than relying on a Super Nintendo game, no matter how much I may have enjoyed said game.

  --sd-7
• 

  PleiadesPoliceman

  The entire history and technology of Planet Kryptom is stored in Superman's D.N.A. of all Kryton, human beings are learning their supposed junk dna is not junk, it all has a purpose!

  Were you loving the movie sd7?