|
I wish more had been made of Zod's adherence to the idea that everybody has a set purpose in life that they MUST follow - his reaction to Jor-El revealing that Kal is free from those restrictions is one of the better moments in the movie, he's just so horrified and disgusted by the very concept ("HERESY!") but other than one brief line towards the end of the film "What is YOUR purpose!?" it basically doesn't come into play at all.
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 07:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 15:39 |
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I wish more had been made of Zod's adherence to the idea that everybody has a set purpose in life that they MUST follow - his reaction to Jor-El revealing that Kal is free from those restrictions is one of the better moments in the movie, he's just so horrified and disgusted by the very concept ("HERESY!") but other than one brief line towards the end of the film "What is YOUR purpose!?" it basically doesn't come into play at all. Considering that a major part of Superman's dilemma is determining his purpose in life, with or without Zod in his way. . .
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 07:20
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:Considering that a major part of Superman's dilemma is determining his purpose in life, with or without Zod in his way. . . Jerusalem posted:I wish more had been made of Zod's adherence to the idea Considering his early reaction, I fully expected him to be obsessed with the idea of destroying Superman as an abomination or forcing him to conform to Zod's expectation of what a Kryptonian should be. Something that played up his idea that everybody/everything must have a specific purpose or be destroyed. Jor-El saw Kal as the embodiment of hope for their people, Zod should have seen him as a disgusting aberration whose very existence made a mockery of what being Kryptonian was supposed to be (he doesn't even breathe the right air!), something to be destroyed at all costs - a monster. Edit: I also don't really feel that Superman does face a dilemma about his purpose in life, he's always known what he wants to do - use his powers to help people. He's just held back from doing so by his adopted father's fear (mirroring his biological mother) that humanity isn't ready to know that somebody like him is out there. He spends his pre-Superman life going around under assumed names and using his powers to help people, then gets the costume and eventually the name to give him a chance to do it out in the open. His upbringing helped him to determine what was right and wrong, but it was always his desire to save people. More could have been made of the fact that he ends up having to decide between Krypton and Earth, but it was hardly a difficult decision considering all the surviving Kryptonians are war criminals who literally show him that the foundation for their survival will be built on the dead remains of the human race. Jerusalem fucked around with this message at 08:02 on Jun 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 07:42
|
|
|
Just saw the movie. I thought it was awesome. A bit solemn, sure, but the amount of humor was just about perfect. Destroying the guy's truck by impaling it on lumber logs, cautioning Louis to take a few steps back and then telling her to step back a bit more, etc. It was well done. I also liked that Louis was hot and single. Because gently caress the previous Superman movie - gosh that was awkward as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 08:23
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:More could have been made of the fact that he ends up having to decide between Krypton and Earth, but it was hardly a difficult decision considering all the surviving Kryptonians are war criminals who literally show him that the foundation for their survival will be built on the dead remains of the human race. I thought this was one of the few poorly written parts of the movie. Zod's entire reason for wanting to destroy humans was literally because he thought it would be difficult for the two people to assimilate and learn to live together. I think they could have written it more strongly. For instance, he could have said he doesn't believe that a species whose members choose their own fate would be compatible with one where the fate of newly borns are chosen for for them. It just felt like the writers just had to make it a matter of life and death for the planet (because it wouldn't be a superhero movie otherwise) and they made up a reason for it as an afterthought.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 08:31
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:I also liked that Louis was hot and single. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnQoq07ej_M&t=65s
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 09:41
|
|
|
IBentMyWookie posted:Him holding back is more for secrecy than anything else. The movie depicts Clark basically being a shut-in and sheltered kid who wasn't able to go out and make friends even. He could control his powers to the point where his parents weren't hurt so I'm not sure that it really defends the no-killing mantra as being why he holds back. I mean he uses his heat vision on the janitor closet's doorknob so it isn't really established that he doesn't use them to not hurt. He saved people's lives but then left to maintain safety in secret. The major theme to me is the whole secrecy angle. He zapped the doorknob to stop the teacher from opening the door, not to injure her. Secrecy played a big part, but in the flashback when Clark was bullied, his father asks him if hitting back would really make him feel any better and tells him that he has to decide what type of man to grow up to be because he was eventually going to change the world. I think all of this tied into his anguish after killing Zod, in addition to Zod being the last link to his people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 09:57
|
|
|
IBentMyWookie posted:Him holding back is more for secrecy than anything else. The movie depicts Clark basically being a shut-in and sheltered kid who wasn't able to go out and make friends even. He could control his powers to the point where his parents weren't hurt so I'm not sure that it really defends the no-killing mantra as being why he holds back. I mean he uses his heat vision on the janitor closet's doorknob so it isn't really established that he doesn't use them to not hurt. He saved people's lives but then left to maintain safety in secret. The major theme to me is the whole secrecy angle. It seems kind of silly to hold the door knob sequence as evidence of Superman being willing to hurt people since he was a terrified little kid at the time, and their were multiple other scenes afterward where he refused to hurt push back at all when people attacked him. Did you watch Superman Returns and assume his kid uses his powers to go around killing henchmen? At least in that movie, we're never given evidence to the contrary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH74qXqPPE0 And I really find it odd that people act like Clark was some sort of cruel rear end in a top hat in Man of Steel when we have multiple examples of Christopher Reeve's Superman being a much bigger dick. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nu3CLQm-SI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVsdDSKWykY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUORL-bvwA0 I figured I'd throw in another example of Superman not appearing to care about life: From All Star Superman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE9K0DlCF6g
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 13:36
|
|
|
I'm getting a "Optimus Prime is a father figure" vibe from some of this stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 15:09
|
|
|
Toady posted:He zapped the doorknob to stop the teacher from opening the door, not to injure her. Secrecy played a big part, but in the flashback when Clark was bullied, his father asks him if hitting back would really make him feel any better and tells him that he has to decide what type of man to grow up to be because he was eventually going to change the world. I think all of this tied into his anguish after killing Zod, in addition to Zod being the last link to his people. So the movie pretty much made Kandor a part of Superman's genetic code right? Is Jor-El plan to just have Krypton bloodline supplant Earth's?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 15:31
|
|
|
Saw it finally. One hand in the air at finale. Good thing was the music.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 15:38
|
|
|
Toady posted:He zapped the doorknob to stop the teacher from opening the door, not to injure her. Secrecy played a big part, but in the flashback when Clark was bullied, his father asks him if hitting back would really make him feel any better and tells him that he has to decide what type of man to grow up to be because he was eventually going to change the world. I think all of this tied into his anguish after killing Zod, in addition to Zod being the last link to his people. Would you think the same from a kid using a blowtorch instead? It was maladjusted. But yeah it's a quibble as there isn't much evidence of anything of Clark's upbringing just a few flashbacks. The bully scenes aren't clear one way or another. How is "change the world" a call for Clark to respect life or to do anything in particular? It's open ended. Superman doesn't change the world in this movie, Zod does by coming to earth and forcing his hand. This could all be setup for the next film but they are putting a lot of onus on the next one to establish some real Superman qualities. There really isn't a lot to point to in this movie except for the establishment of Clark in the Daily Planet and Lois will know his secret and glasses don't fool anyone. Only issue with this change is that if they are getting rid of the glasses conceit how can Clark maintain anything like a normal life? If Martha is still living on the farm for the next film then it is really strange if she isn't hounded. I mean the people of Smallville know who Superman is and his real name. IBentMyWookie fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Jun 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 16:19
|
|
|
Honest Thief posted:With that 1 second clip where Snyder superimposes Reeves's face on Cavill's it feels like this Superman is a maladjusted kid trying to be the ideal Superman- Is there confirmation that this is a real thing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
IBentMyWookie posted:Would you think the same from a kid using a blowtorch instead? It was maladjusted. But yeah it's a quibble as there isn't much evidence of anything of Clark's upbringing just a few flashbacks. Well before Zod and the others show up Clark has found the ship, talked with Jor-El about his origins, acquired the Suit and has learned to fly. I think we can assume that he had a plan forming in his head about what he was going to be doing from this point on, and considering that he's spent his life helping people in secret and that he was unafraid to show his power while wearing the suit that it might be something along the traditional Superman line. Zod showing up just forced his hand at revealing himself to humanity sooner than he might have otherwise done. Hey, did anyone else think that maybe the suit hidden in the scout ship (considering that it was 200,000 years old or some absurd length of time like that) was perhaps incredibly out of fashion in the eyes of Zod and the other Kryptonians? Like the fight with him would be our equivalent of being pummeled by a dude dressed up in a Rennaisance Faire costume?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 16:51
|
|
|
The point of the bullying/rough upbrining was that it was meant to communicate that despite growing up in a way that sometimes results in people taking bad paths in life, if you are shown love and compassion from anyone, especially your parents, you are just as likely to end up a good person. The point being that Clark chose to believe in the better in humans. Valuing life wasn't automatically ingrained in him, it wasnt some automatic Superman quality forced in by the writers because its how Superman is supposed to be.He had a choice and the writers had him make one. They said "despite a rough upbringing Clark was shown love by his parents and chose to believe in the better of people". He's an optimist in this movies eyes. The moment when the bully he becomes friends with sees him and recognizes its Clark in the IHOP is key to this theme. Hes fighting Kryptonian bullies to(indirectly) protect someone who used to bully him. And directly after fighting these Kryptonian bullies, he goes back home to get some comfort from his mother. This Clark is so drat relatable in my opinion. I've said this before but as someone who was intensely bullied as a kid and has every reason to be pessimistic about human nature, like Clark I had loving parents and choose to believe in the good in people because of this and this film really really resonated with me because of that. And seriously, gently caress any of you who result to calling Clark "emo". Jesus christ, grow up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 16:53
|
|
|
Bob Quixote posted:Hey, did anyone else think that maybe the suit hidden in the scout ship (considering that it was 200,000 years old or some absurd length of time like that) was perhaps incredibly out of fashion in the eyes of Zod and the other Kryptonians? Like the fight with him would be our equivalent of being pummeled by a dude dressed up in a Rennaisance Faire costume? It was 18,000 years but with FTL travel it could be less due to the relativity of time from the perspective of the kryptonians. Eighteen thousand years on earth could be left Krypton 15 mins ago. Besides Zod had the same style under his armor. AccountSupervisor posted:The point of the bullying/rough upbrining was that it was meant to communicate that despite growing up in a way that sometimes results in people taking bad paths in life, if you are shown love and compassion from anyone, especially your parents, you are just as likely to end up a good person. Whoa, chill out man it's just a movie and comic book character. It's cool you think this movie parallels your life but Superman would respect my opinion. So think about that. edit: I know this is what they intended but did they show that in the film? You are making several assumptions on their intent. I still don't see him becoming friends with Pete Ross. They just reached an understanding. IBentMyWookie fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Jun 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 16:58
|
|
|
IBentMyWookie posted:Would you think the same from a kid using a blowtorch instead? It was maladjusted. But yeah it's a quibble as there isn't much evidence of anything of Clark's upbringing just a few flashbacks. I assumed that the heat vision there was more of an instinctual defense-mechanism, which isn't the same as actively picking up a blow torch, turning it on, and burning someone. All kids have tantrums at some point or another, but evidently Clark was disciplined enough to never unleash his full destructive potential during one of his.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
Reading this thread and I think I must've seen a different movie than some of the people here. The deconstructions of Kal here are loving hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:I assumed that the heat vision there was more of an instinctual defense-mechanism, which isn't the same as actively picking up a blow torch, turning it on, and burning someone. All kids have tantrums at some point or another, but evidently Clark was disciplined enough to never unleash his full destructive potential during one of his. The door was already locked.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
Clark didn't know he had heat vision yet and used it by accident, what are you people talking about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Carl Seitan posted:Reading this thread and I think I must've seen a different movie than some of the people here. The deconstructions of Kal here are loving hilarious. Cinema Discusso > Man of Steel: The deconstructions of Kal here are loving hilarious
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
IBentMyWookie posted:The door was already locked. Ok, but did his instincts know that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Darko posted:Clark didn't know he had heat vision yet and used it by accident, what are you people talking about. Honestly, did some people not get that scene was showing a manifestation of his abilities that he couldn't control until his mom showed up? It was pretty clear Clark just wanted the teacher to go away, so "instinctively" the heat vision power came about to make that happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:Ok, but did his instincts know that? That's one highly evolved instinct. I'd hate to be checking if a bathroom stall is free if this guy is taking a dump.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
IBentMyWookie posted:That's one highly evolved instinct. I'd hate to be checking if a bathroom stall is free if this guy is taking a dump. Which is the whole loving point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
Snak posted:Which is the whole loving point. What that it wasn't intended? That's fine, I wasn't making some declaration that Clark is evil based on what I already admitted was a quibble. The fact you guys are taking issue with this one sentence means I guess I'm right about the other stuff. quote:Him holding back is more for secrecy than anything else. The movie depicts Clark basically being a shut-in and sheltered kid who wasn't able to go out and make friends even. He could control his powers to the point where his parents weren't hurt so I'm not sure that it really defends the no-killing mantra as being why he holds back. I mean he uses his heat vision on the janitor closet's doorknob so it isn't really established that he doesn't use them to not hurt. He saved people's lives but then left to maintain safety in secret. The major theme to me is the whole secrecy angle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
teagone posted:Honestly, did some people not get that scene was showing a manifestation of his abilities that he couldn't control until his mom showed up? It was pretty clear Clark just wanted the teacher to go away, so "instinctively" the heat vision power came about to make that happen. Silly teagone, obviously it was an early manifestation of Kal-El's narcissistic god-king desire to get whatever he wants through force and not care if he hurts them in the process. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
AdjectiveNoun posted:Silly teagone, obviously it was an early manifestation of Kal-El's narcissistic god-king desire to get whatever he wants through force and not care if he hurts them in the process. Oh yeah, sorry. How could I forget that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 18:53
|
|
|
AdjectiveNoun posted:Silly teagone, obviously it was an early manifestation of Kal-El's narcissistic god-king desire to get whatever he wants through force and not care if he hurts them in the process. Kal-El's desires and needs always come before the health and safety of others. This unhealthy attitude is reinforced by the constant racist rhetoric extolled by his birth-father Jor-El, which cements the selfish behavior already established.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
God-king? Racist? Narcissist? Messiah? Nobody said these things about Iron Man, Spider-Man, or Thor (the last of whom actually IS a god). I rarely hear these kinds of deconstructions with Marvel heroes (except perhaps Captain America).
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
I think people are trying to muscle in on SMG's sthick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:God-king? Racist? Narcissist? Messiah? Nobody said these things about Iron Man, Spider-Man, or Thor (the last of whom actually IS a god). I rarely hear these kinds of deconstructions with Marvel heroes (except perhaps Captain America). Probably because they are so simple without a lot of baggage. Iron Man makes a suit but he's a human being, Spider-man gets bitten by a spider, and Thor is a stupid character (not really he actually should be complex). DC heroes are all much more complex in their origins and don't get their powers through a gimmick of some sort. Who is SMG?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:19
|
|
|
IBentMyWookie posted:The door was already locked.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
Carl Seitan posted:Reading this thread and I think I must've seen a different movie than some of the people here. The deconstructions of Kal here are loving hilarious. It's, like, so weird how people have different opinions of a famous character, man.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:There was no lock on door in the closet that little Clark hid behind. I think the lock was actually on the outside. I saw the movie twice. I don't know how Clark could have locked himself in. It was locked though the teacher jiggles the handle. I'm watching the movie again next week with a different set of friends who know nothing about Superman at all. So I'll see if I'm just crazy in thinking the movie is terribly written or not based on what they take from it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:I think people are trying to muscle in on SMG's sthick. And at least one is clearly Lex Luthor. Yeah, I'm calling you out, IBentMyWookiee! You don't fool me!
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:There was no lock on door in the closet that little Clark hid behind. I think the lock was actually on the outside. I saw the movie twice. I don't know how Clark could have locked himself in. From what I remember, you couldn't clearly see any lock on the outside or inside. Though some doorknobs have like a secondary lock on the inside that's small that's not actually on the face of the knob. This argument is really dumb though, just my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
IBentMyWookie posted:Whoa, chill out man it's just a movie and comic book character. It's cool you think this movie parallels your life but Superman would respect my opinion. So think about that. What kind of response is that? "Whoa, man, the movie worked in making you relate to it. It's just a fictional character, you weirdo." quote:The fact you guys are taking issue with this one sentence means I guess I'm right about the other stuff. You're ignoring the scenes which established that Clark holds back on using his powers to harm people and instead focusing on the closet scene as proof that he's willing to kill. That's probably why people are replying to it. If you think making the doorknob hot so the teacher stops using it is equivalent to trying to injure people, well, we'll never agree on that interpretation. Toady fucked around with this message at 19:46 on Jun 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
Toady posted:What kind of response is that? "Whoa, man, the movie worked in making you relate to it. It's just a fictional character, you weirdo." Guy was cursing people out for calling a fictional character emo. I think some snark is appropriate. I didn't ignore those scenes I said you could interpret it either way. Obviously I felt they led more to strengthening the need to maintain secrecy. Let's just agree that the doorknob fixation is dumb. I just cited it because it was the only thing that would support a point about Clark not being taught that he shouldn't use his powers to hurt. It is flimsy but there isn't much evidence on the other side of him using his powers to help either. The movie actually shows that Clark shouldn't use his powers at all. His parent's kept him away from other children. They were ambivalent about the use of his powers to save people's lives because of fear that he would be found out. His dad wanted him to stay on the farm and become a farmer. His father even sacrifices himself to keep it. There isn't all that much emphasis to support the point that he was taught to use his powers for good. Clark just decides to do it himself which is kind of a lovely message from the old one, where he was taught to be a good person. IBentMyWookie fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Jun 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 15:39 |
|
|
I'm kind of sick of the idea to twist the superhero genre in this way, the whole notion of either showing them learning the ropes making them ineffectual or straight up morally dubious; Reeves's Superman might have some dark contours but his character was immediately appealing while Cavill's is, repulsive is too strong a word but unappealing to say the least.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 20:22
|
|