|
Next can we get RedLetterMedia's opinion on this wanton destruction and loss of life? Just to round out the collection.
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:21 |
|
|
I'm still curious how some people dismiss the cruel moment in Superman II when he tortures a powerless man by crushing the bones in his hand and tossing him into a chasm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
Toady posted:I'm still curious how some people dismiss the cruel moment in Superman II when he tortures a powerless man by crushing the bones in his hand and tossing him into a chasm. He had it coming and it was kinda funny, though I acknowledge it's torture and murder some obviously don't. Is there a wiki article or something of people that have fallen into chasms in glaciers and the like, they don't usually survive or are found for that matter. The precious few that do survive a fall into a chasm end up on tv shows called "I Shouldn't Be Alive". e:tv show name MariusLecter fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 16:58
|
|
|
Toady posted:I'm still curious how some people dismiss the cruel moment in Superman II when he tortures a powerless man by crushing the bones in his hand and tossing him into a chasm. But he's so charming! This Superman was very moody.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
I love Waid's writing, but he's being a bit of a dickhead. This Superman, I think, did a good job of doing what the Dark Knight trilogy did, but in a distinct way. They both transitioned into the 21st Century's cynical mindset, but MoS FEELS more like a comic book, and indulges shamelessly in the science fiction feel and delicious boy scout ideology without being too trite. And while comparisons are inevitable, I think MoS did a better job than Batman Begins at introducing the new series.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
Gatts posted:I'm pretty sad it seems like Jor-El's last time on screen was essentially being told his son and hope was doomed. I could see them doing more flashbacks in the sequel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
End of movie spoilers. I don't agree with Waid at all, I think he missed the point. I thought Superman giving up on a better solution and breaking Zod's neck was actually the best resolution to a Superman conflict that has ever occurred on screen. In the beginning of the movie Superman makes the decision to protect the children on the bus at the expense of revealing his identity and risking his own wellbeing. His father admonished him for his decision, arguing that Superman must sacrifice others to protect himself. When his father chooses to sacrifice himself to save the dog, he simultaneously gives Superman the same advice as he did with the bus--for Superman to protect himself rather than save others-- while contradicting his own advice to Superman by risking his life to protect his dog and son. It's clear that Jonathon Kent is primarily motivated by his love for his son, and that his advice to Superman contradicts his own beliefs. But his actions betray his words, and teach Superman the philosophy that will guide Superman's life--that Superman must sacrifice himself to protect others. His father and Superman are the same; Jonathon Kent sacrifices everything to protect his son, while Superman sacrifices everything to protect the world. When Superman kills Zod he sacrifices himself, because killing contradicts who he believes he is (the fact that Zod is a Kryptonian like Superman contributes to this metaphor). He does this for the good of the people he loves. Plus it was badass to watch Superman break a Kryptonian's neck. It raises the stakes when you know that Superman CAN be killed by brute force. None of this easy way out, find a way for the villains to destroy themselves bullshit. Just snap. SNAP. Dolphin fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
Dirty_Moses posted:I love Waid's writing, but he's being a bit of a dickhead. This times a thousand. Other Superman writers have weighed in and none of them have been so childish about their opinion as Waid is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Some people are so attached to Donner's Superman that they think it's the definitive version of the character, but there have been countless portrayals. In Action Comics #1, he wasn't a law-abiding boy scout but a brutish "champion of the oppressed" who grew up in an orphanage. He beat up an abusive husband, kidnapped a corrupt politician to extract a confession by leaping over buildings with him, and used his Clark Kent alter-ego to keep stories of his actions out of the Daily Star newspaper. Donner's Superman was already a tongue-in-cheek anachronism from the Silver Age. After decades without an update, the film franchise faced a doomed future from a disinterested audience. Man of Steel made Superman cool again by approaching the story from the realistic angle of an alien drifter discovered on Earth, forced to choose between worlds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 18:58
|
|
|
Toady posted:Some people are so attached to Donner's Superman that they think it's the definitive version of the character, but there have been countless portrayals. In Action Comics #1, he wasn't a law-abiding boy scout but a brutish "champion of the oppressed" who grew up in an orphanage. He beat up an abusive husband, kidnapped a corrupt politician to extract a confession by leaping over buildings with him, and used his Clark Kent alter-ego to keep stories of his actions out of the Daily Star newspaper. Which Morrison basically recreated last year in the Action Comics reboot in the New 52. So, not only is it part of Superman's history, it's part of what current Superman is, right now. I got into a long argument with a friend (who loved Avengers) about MoS (which he thought sucked). His main complaint in the end was that Superman was too invincible of a character. Even though Thor was literally peerless and invincible when he has the hammer, unless his teammate, Hulk is around, who can heal from anything, is unlimitedly strong, and also heals from anything. And, Superman was going against a near-equal, while Thor was going against giant space whales who he and Hulk could one-shot. And, Superman was actually knocked out for a while... I don't understand it - it's like people create these fantasy versions of characters in their own minds that go against what is actually on screen or in print. You see the same issues with any adaptation where people say chracters are done "wrong," only to find out that their imaginary image of the character is missing or is wrong about a lot of things. Darko fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
Darko posted:I don't understand it - it's like people create these fantasy versions of characters in their own minds that go against what is actually on screen or in print.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:That's exactly what they do. Superheros mean different things to different people, and when an adaptation conflicts with the meanings that someone has associated with a character, they conclude that the adaptation is flawed. Then newcomers and people that had different associations with the character will say that the naysayers are missing the point of the new adaptation. No one is wrong exactly, its just that people disagree on what is important to the mythos. This x1,000 for DC superheroes and its the biggest thing DC movies have to overcome. While Spiderman, Hulk, Iron Man, etc are all loved by millions, for some reason most people don't have the same super-personal attachment/vision for Marvel characters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:That's exactly what they do. Superheros mean different things to different people, and when an adaptation conflicts with the meanings that someone has associated with a character, they conclude that the adaptation is flawed. Then newcomers and people that had different associations with the character will say that the naysayers are missing the point of the new adaptation. No one is wrong exactly, its just that people disagree on what is important to the mythos. Using a pre-established association as a means to judge a film whose intent was to never abide by those pre-established notions is kind of unfair though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
Toady posted:Some people are so attached to Donner's Superman that they think it's the definitive version of the character, but there have been countless portrayals. In Action Comics #1, he wasn't a law-abiding boy scout but a brutish "champion of the oppressed" who grew up in an orphanage. He beat up an abusive husband, kidnapped a corrupt politician to extract a confession by leaping over buildings with him, and used his Clark Kent alter-ego to keep stories of his actions out of the Daily Star newspaper. quote:Donner's Superman was already a tongue-in-cheek anachronism from the Silver Age. After decades without an update, the film franchise faced a doomed future from a disinterested audience. Man of Steel made Superman cool again by approaching the story from the realistic angle of an alien drifter discovered on Earth, forced to choose between worlds. Superman is forced to choose between worlds in the Donner version. After Lois dies, he flies up into the clouds, confused about what to do. On one side he hears Jor-El telling him that it's forbidden for him to change human history. On the other hand he hears Jonathan Kent telling him that he's on this Earth to accomplish great things. Although he spends most of the movie becoming reacquainted with his biological father and learning about his ethnic heritage, he ultimately picks his adoptive father when it comes to a moral crisis. Superman was tongue-in-cheek here and there, but it was sincere for the most part and even got pretty dark. For a short moment, Lois was actually dead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCsHTNP2MaU A lot of complaints people make about writing for Superman being inherently difficult because he's invincible are actually well handled in the 1978 film. **** MoS adds that humans are frightened of Superman at first, and that's a neat addition (especially since there's a big national debate about illegal immigration going on right now), but I don't think that Superman being an instant celebrity in 1978 version is a shortcoming of the film, it was addressing different issues. Steve Yun fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
This is a really good sci-fi spectacle on a space-opera scale. Really enjoyed anything to do with Krypton. Only complaint is: should've had more Superman saving people. But the mythological groundwork it lays is really solid and really cool. For the record though, the Krypton backstory is the only thing that this movie does outright BETTER than the Donner movie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:51
|
|
|
Darko posted:Which Morrison basically recreated last year in the Action Comics reboot in the New 52. So, not only is it part of Superman's history, it's part of what current Superman is, right now. Not only that, Hulk and Thor were basically unchallenged in The Avengers and the largest threat came from the nuke which they couldn't have done anything about and which would have killed countless people. That was the main source of tension and conflict, even though the super heros basically had this fight well under control they were still going to "lose" because of the nuke. Man of Steel shows what would happen if that nuke went off. Superman is not only physically challenged but he also can't (entirely) prevent the destruction of Metropolis and has to make a painful decision to kill his enemy. Superman is basically challenged and hurt on multiple levels in this movie: he is physically hurt by the Kryptonians, emotionally hurt through the death of those around him, his reputation is hurt by his inability to prevent the destruction, his ideals are hurt by being forced to kill Zod: Pa Kent - "Are you hurt?" Clark - "You know they can't do anything to hurt me." Pa Kent - "What I meant was: are you okay?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:Anyone posted what "Birthright" writer Mark Waid thought about the film yet? I think Waid's criticism here is really overblown, but I do agree that they should've spared a minute or two more to show us Superman trying and failing to move his fights out of populated areas, or reacting to unavoidable casualties. It's actually kind of weird to me that people are so strenuously asserting that the emotional moment at the end of the last fight scene wasn't "earned" or whatever, because, like... you're not supposed to have to make a big song and dance about not wanting to kill people! Of course you don't want to kill anyone, that's called being minimally decent! Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Well, I think the Donner version is being dumped on right now by people who want to defend MoS, and maybe unfairly. I didn't mean to sound like I was dumping on the film. Just that by 1978, Superman was clearly an anachronism, and the movie pokes fun at it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
One other thing the new movie has is that Superman's tale actually describes the plight of a muslim in the US after 9/11. Viewed with suspicion and fear, America attacked by his old countrymen, tears him up that he has to defend America against his own race to the point of using lethal force. Historically Superman was coded as a Jew. Jews had a pretty tough time when they first assimilated into America as well, but previous film versions of Superman never thought to address this since the Jewish subtext kind of got replaced by Christian subtext. So, if for nothing else, MoS at least deserves credit for adding this twist to the film mythos. Not being an avid comic reader, have they touched on this in the comics before? The idea of him being feared at first? Steve Yun fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
I wonder at the parallels between Krypton and Earth. Will Earth also be destroyed by the overuse of 5 gum technology?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Not being an avid comic reader, have they touched on this in the comics before? The idea of him being feared at first?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:10
|
|
|
My sister who got tired of my Superman obsession 20 years ago just saw MoS and she loving loved it. And this is a girl who pretty much hates everything related to the S because of me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:My sister who got tired of my Superman obsession 20 years ago just saw MoS and she loving loved it. And this is a girl who pretty much hates everything related to the S because of me. I bet Henry Cavill had a lot to do with her liking the movie. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
teagone posted:I bet Henry Cavill had a lot to do with her liking the movie. She only went because Amy Adams was in it but I'm sure you're right. Stupid Sexy Superman.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:She only went because Amy Adams was in it but I'm sure you're right. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Historically Superman was coded as a Jew. Jews had a pretty tough time when they first assimilated into America as well, but previous film versions of Superman never thought to address this since the Jewish subtext kind of got replaced by Christian subtext. So, if for nothing else, MoS at least deserves credit for adding this twist to the film mythos. Oh please, everyone knows that Superman is actually a modern Solar Deity, who experiences periodic suffering, death, and rebirth. But yeah, a Christian interpretation of Superman is just the result of Jesus Christ being the dominant messianic figure of modern Western culture. "Superman-as-Christ" misses the fact that as a character, Superman is nothing like Jesus. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:44
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Oh please, everyone knows that Superman is actually a modern Solar Deity, who experiences periodic suffering, death, and rebirth. They both have way too many bullshit powers that a writer used once and then it never showed up again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:She only went because Amy Adams was in it but I'm sure you're right. My teenage sister liked Amy Adams for coming off like a real person. She previously thought Superman was too perfect and invulnerable, but this movie made her a fan. Toady fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:He had it coming and it was kinda funny, though I acknowledge it's torture and murder some obviously don't. Go watch Touching the Void if you want to see what it takes to live after falling into a chasm. Like, seriously. Go watch it. It's on Netflix streaming, why are you still reading this? Dolphin posted:Plus it was badass to watch Superman break a Kryptonian's neck. It raises the stakes when you know that Superman CAN be killed by brute force. None of this easy way out, find a way for the villains to destroy themselves bullshit. Just snap. SNAP. When I was watching Zod and Clark fight, the one thought that kept coming up as they tossed eachother through (hopefully empty) buildings was that there is nothing solid enough in the world to stop one of these creatures, other than the other one of them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:58
|
|
|
It would have been badass to see him take the fight underground, closer and closer to the center of the earth to try to get away from people (since Zod kept stopping him from going up). Would have been pretty dark though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:14
|
|
|
Darko posted:Which Morrison basically recreated last year in the Action Comics reboot in the New 52. So, not only is it part of Superman's history, it's part of what current Superman is, right now. Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I saw a bit more of the Morrison All-star/Action Comics Superman here than I expected. Superman is silly, yes, but so is the entire concept of a super hero. They emulated the idea of Superman as mythical hero all while making him feel pretty human. I still felt let-down by the Clark glasses reveal at the end. Nobody will be able to pull off the Clark/Superman dichotomy like Christopher Reeve. Then again, that dichotomy doesn't really exist in the new movies so far.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
Toady posted:My teenage sister liked Amy Adams for coming off like a real person. She previously thought Superman was too perfect and invulnerable, but this movie made her a fan. I keep hearing this from more and more people. I think word of mouth is going to be a major game changer on this film.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
Spoilers. It's already going to be a very different Clark/Superman dynamic. Lois is in on the secret from the start and Goyer has hinted that Perry knows what's up too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
In that case, I expect to see a scene in Justice League with Morgan Freeman and Larry Fishburne giving each other sideways glances as Bruce and Clark talk to each other.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:44
|
|
|
Bird Law posted:Spoilers. I am thoroughly in love with this idea. There was a plot in the Batman comics towards the tail end of No Man's Land where Bruce unmasked to Commissioner Gordon. Gordon flips out and refuses to look, saying that for all Batman knows Gordon figured it out years before. I like the idea of their close allies knowing the secret but keeping mum.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:48
|
|
|
Retardog posted:In that case, I expect to see a scene in Justice League with Morgan Freeman and Larry Fishburne giving each other sideways glances as Bruce and Clark talk to each other. Holy poo poo that would be amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I keep hearing this from more and more people. I think word of mouth is going to be a major game changer on this film. It's already earned its keep as a record-breaking hit, but certainly it's awesome how it makes new fans. DC has struggled for a long time to do that for Superman. Lois being in on the Daily Planet alter ego from the start and possibly helping him set it up is so appealing to me that the comic premise of being unable to see past the glasses disguise feels really stale, despite my reverence for Reeve's Clark Kent performance. Goyer also suggested that there were about a dozen people in Smallville who obviously know his secret, and that they'll keep it out of protectiveness. There are lots of neat updates to the mythos like that which I like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Concept illustrations by Warren Manser used for designing the suits in the movie: Man of Steel concept and style guide Here are a few:   
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
Oh wow, it would have been cool to see Faora break out of her armor looking like that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:21 |
|
|
AgentHaiTo posted:Oh wow, it would have been cool to see Faora break out of her armor looking like that. There are a few shots in the film of her in just the undergarment suit: on Krypton, when Zod and co. are being tried, and then later in the flashback when they're freed from The Phantom Zone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 01:47
|
|