|
|
Post by SupermanUF on Jun 12, 2013 18:24:39 GMT -5
To look at the "superman kills zod" scene again- and please please understand that no one is "wrong" for being stunned, aghast or irritated- But as eccentric pointed out, what happens in superman 2 has superman almost cavalier about it. Don't get me wrong, I love it- its beautifully done, but superman HAS powers, zod does NOT - superman could effortlessly arrested them and taken them into custody. Instead he smiles, and throws zod over the edge. If zod survives the fall he will die of starvation or freeze to death. Superman is more concerned about lois being heartbroken about the "break up" than any anxiety over killing zod. In byrnes classic, it isn't at all cavalier- but it IS absolutely premeditated. He has to do it because he's fighting a pre-crisis version kryptonian. But it is planned and deliberate. In MOS the editing may have lacked subtlety but it isn't like cavills superman says to the holo-jor "imma break his neck time I see him!" So, I get why people will be taken aback. We don't want superman to be a killer. Iron man kills terrorists. Captain america kills nazis ( and the attack of the clones cricket people). Wolverine and punisher don't give a flip. But superman and captain marvel are different. I won't be surprised if MOS 2 has some fallout from that event. That's the thing, Jor. The moment carries with it such gravitas--there is definitely a Reeve-esque super-scream involved--that we're willing to understand that Superman values human life so highly he is willing to kill one of his own to protect US. He did what he had to do, as much as it hurt him to do it. You SEE it. It's all there in his reaction. I'm fine with it, honestly.  |
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Jun 13, 2013 8:41:48 GMT -5
I find the Zod murder to be inexcusable, actually. It's the ONLY thing in the movie I truly dislike. And it's not so much that he DOES it, it's the fact that it never really feels like there aren't a dozen other options. Fly away. Put your hand over his eyes. Suplex him. Buy time until you can get your hands on some more Kryptonian tech from the ship...none of that is any more far-fetched than anything else we had already seen in the course of the film. I'd be willing to accept it, but from a storytelling standpoint I don't buy that it was his only option the way that it was presented.
I also found the act itself to be needlessly graphic. And THIS was the only moment that got cheers at our screening. That disturbs me. It's a poor storytelling choice, it's a disservice to the character, and it upsets me that this is what they feel they needed to do to make Superman more appealing to the general public. You NEVER saw Nolan's Batman dispatch a villain with that kind of "hands-on" brutality.
I'm no prude or purist, but I don't like it, and the more I think about it, I like it even less.
|
|
|
|
Post by eccentricbeing on Jun 13, 2013 9:19:41 GMT -5
Maybe that scene is really sensitive to you, but the way it played out for me wasn't that severe. It felt like it was in the heat of the moment, very emotional. Superman wasn't thinking from the rush and urgency of the matter and lost control of his strength which resulted in him breaking Zod's neck. I mean, this scene was constructed to showcase the morality behind Superman's quick emotional decision by having him break down after the incident. It's totally different from Superman smiling at a weak and broken-hand Zod in 2 before tossing him down an abyss. If Zod's death in Man of Steel bothers some, why doesn't Zod's death in 2 bother? And if Zod did survive the fall, he certainly didn't survive when Superman DESTROYS the Fortress!!! So yeah. I think they knew what they were trying to do behind the scene in Man of Steel. There is a proper context within Superman's choice unlike in 2 where it's played for gags! Come on now. Superman kills someone for gags!
|
|
|
|
Post by SupermanUF on Jun 13, 2013 10:09:51 GMT -5
I find the Zod murder to be inexcusable, actually. It's the ONLY thing in the movie I truly dislike. And it's not so much that he DOES it, it's the fact that it never really feels like there aren't a dozen other options. Fly away. Put your hand over his eyes. Suplex him. Buy time until you can get your hands on some more Kryptonian tech from the ship...none of that is any more far-fetched than anything else we had already seen in the course of the film. I'd be willing to accept it, but from a storytelling standpoint I don't buy that it was his only option the way that it was presented. I also found the act itself to be needlessly graphic. And THIS was the only moment that got cheers at our screening. That disturbs me. It's a poor storytelling choice, it's a disservice to the character, and it upsets me that this is what they feel they needed to do to make Superman more appealing to the general public. You NEVER saw Nolan's Batman dispatch a villain with that kind of "hands-on" brutality. I'm no prude or purist, but I don't like it, and the more I think about it, I like it even less. Good points, but I feel like it's not inexcusable if we are to believe the only choice he had was between saving humans or killing Zod... I would WANT Superman to break his code if that was the choice he had to make. The problem is, although Im sure that's what they wanted us to believe, they didn't do enough to SHOW it was his only choice and that he couldn't simply deflect the beams. Maybe we we were supposed to glean from some point in the fight that Heat Vision hurts Kryptonians. But like I said, it's clear what the intention was, so Im ok with it. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 13, 2013 11:38:33 GMT -5
I never got the impression from the theatrical that Superman killed the villains- we see the Fortress sits on top of water in the first one, I always assumed that (especially with the tone of the film) Zod and company were tossed into the equivalent of a pool, out of frame.
With the RDC, that thing is such an editing mess.....ough. (Whether the blame should go to Thau or Donner or a combo is anyone's guess now)
The deleted scenes with the prisoners being taken away by the arctic police first before it's destroyed at least show that it was not the original intention to ever show Superman killing anyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Jun 13, 2013 11:55:22 GMT -5
Good points, but I feel like it's not inexcusable if we are to believe the only choice he had was between saving humans or killing Zod... I would WANT Superman to break his code if that was the choice he had to make. The problem is, although Im sure that's what they wanted us to believe, they didn't do enough to SHOW it was his only choice and that he couldn't simply deflect the beams. Maybe we we were supposed to glean from some point in the fight that Heat Vision hurts Kryptonians. But like I said, it's clear what the intention was, so Im ok with it.[/quote]
You make a good point, and I'm also fine with the intent/reasoning. Yes, given the choice between letting those people die, and killing Zod, the choice is clear. But what was preventing him from flying off with both of them? What was preventing him from putting his hands over Zod's eyes (and yes, injuring himself severely), or flipping him over on his back until he can buy more time? He can snap Zod's neck, but he can't flip him over and beat him into unconsciousness? I think given what we see on screen and what they had already established, it's a lazy storytelling choice, and the act itself was surprisingly gruesome. It's not even an "I don't have to save you" moment like Batman Begins. I don't like it, and I don't think I will ever really make peace with it. There just wasn't enough there to show me that it was his last/only choice. Maybe I'll see something on my second viewing that will change my mind, when I'm not so caught up in the moment.
By no means does it ruin the movie, but I do feel like it casts a shadow over this version of the character. Cavill sells it well, but Cavill (and the rest of the cast) REALLY elevates a lot of this movie. Without this particular cast in place giving it their all, I'm not sure that the whole thing would work as well as it does.
And CAM's right, SII's Zod issue is a victim of the...well...of being part of SII.
|
|
|
|
Post by SupermanUF on Jun 13, 2013 13:04:20 GMT -5
Good points, but I feel like it's not inexcusable if we are to believe the only choice he had was between saving humans or killing Zod... I would WANT Superman to break his code if that was the choice he had to make. The problem is, although Im sure that's what they wanted us to believe, they didn't do enough to SHOW it was his only choice and that he couldn't simply deflect the beams. Maybe we we were supposed to glean from some point in the fight that Heat Vision hurts Kryptonians. But like I said, it's clear what the intention was, so Im ok with it. You make a good point, and I'm also fine with the intent/reasoning. Yes, given the choice between letting those people die, and killing Zod, the choice is clear. But what was preventing him from flying off with both of them? What was preventing him from putting his hands over Zod's eyes (and yes, injuring himself severely), or flipping him over on his back until he can buy more time? He can snap Zod's neck, but he can't flip him over and beat him into unconsciousness? I think given what we see on screen and what they had already established, it's a lazy storytelling choice, and the act itself was surprisingly gruesome. It's not even an "I don't have to save you" moment like Batman Begins. I don't like it, and I don't think I will ever really make peace with it. There just wasn't enough there to show me that it was his last/only choice. Maybe I'll see something on my second viewing that will change my mind, when I'm not so caught up in the moment. By no means does it ruin the movie, but I do feel like it casts a shadow over this version of the character. Cavill sells it well, but Cavill (and the rest of the cast) REALLY elevates a lot of this movie. Without this particular cast in place giving it their all, I'm not sure that the whole thing would work as well as it does. And CAM's right, SII's Zod issue is a victim of the...well...of being part of SII.[/quote] To be honest, I really thought they were gonna bust out the good ol' Kryptonite as a surprise plot device at the end to stop Zod. |
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Jun 13, 2013 14:34:01 GMT -5
i knew this would be contentious, and im glad i knew about it before i see it.
there is no "wrong" opinion on the matter, as i have said. there IS a precedent (more than one) and we have accepted/compartmentalized superman killing zod in, what i strongly believe, a much more cavalier way because it was "our guy" and we grew up with that version.
also- i think "accidental death" is different from "murder". murder is a DELIBERATE act. "man-slaughter" would, i think be more apt. could superman have found a better way? frankly- easy for us to say. if we are to accept an "end of the world" battle to (someones inevitable) death, then there is a "heat of battle" element that, imo, softens the severity of supermans actions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Jun 13, 2013 22:59:25 GMT -5
The weakest element of the plot was clarks discovery of the plot and lois being right there.
Felt very truncated. And why does the robot attack him? Isn't it built by jor to ...y'know... serve kryptonians?
Dumb.
Otherwise I'm beside myself with the awesome.
The death of jon kent was a tear jerker. Costner brought his A-game. Right up there with glenn ford.
Needed more perry white. He had a lot of gravitas. Hope to heck we get part 2 (its not a sure thing).
I love that lois knows. Just take that old saw off the table right there.
I thought we were to get a referance to brainiac? Did I miss it?
Zod said they found kryptonian g host towns- maybe brainiac did them in?
So much for the theory that meloni is metallo! Lol
He was badass. Blaze of glory.
Nice easter eggs for batman and lex. Worlds finest should be next.
|
|
Keith
New Member
Posts: 3,238
|
Post by Keith on Jun 13, 2013 23:39:12 GMT -5
There is a cameo buy a past superman related actor, I guess it goes by so quick.. I missed it I think, I think I know what it might be but not for sure. did anyone catch it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2013 1:13:13 GMT -5
I noticed that one of the guys in the arctic was the Emil Hamilton from "Smallville." Is that the one or did I miss something else?
I have to admit I was pleasantly surprised at the turnout. I was really afraid of low turnout, as my local Walmart didn't do shit to promote the exclusive showing. But out of the alleged 150 tickets (I went to 2D, don't know how 3D did) I'd say 100 people showed up. Lots of T-shirt-wearing fans like me and my wife, too. I'm thinking the giant theater in Boise did better, as I saw it in a suburb of Boise, technically.
Anyway ...
It is SO refreshing to get a new take on Superman on the big screen. At times, it was like watching Byrne's MAN OF STEEL mini-series come to life.
I LOVE that Lois tracks him down and we do away with 75 years of her being the dumbest fucking reporter on Earth. I like that their relationship is built more than her just being doe-eyed at his powers. He tells her some deeply personal shit, and she respects him enough to not blow his cover.
I also loved that Fishburne played Perry White as a real person, and not as a cigar-chomping caricature. I'm glad that we were introduced to Clark joining the Planet at the end. It's just one less story beat that we have to labor through when everybody knows how it goes. Superman the Franchise is so overexposed that everyone knows that Clark Kent works at the Daily Planet.
Getting the new Krypton stuff, of which we wouldn't have seen a fraction of without technology, was the point of a new origin tale. Russell Crowe was bad-ass in this. He really made the movie, and it was great that the story allowed him to have more than a glorified cameo like Brando.
I love that Clark is more of a regular guy. When he's not doing anything in particular, he's having a beer and watching football. It's the most human Superman's been. He's not a damn stick in the mud, like Reeve. Seriously, what American male sits around with no TV reading Dickens? Give me a break.
Now, for the big one: Superman kills Zod. I'm fine with it. About time Superman grew a pair of balls and handled his business. Ah, but like others have pointed out, deep down, we all know beloved Chris Reeve killed Zod in "Superman II." Try to argue around it all you want in regards to alternate cuts, but to the general population who have probably only seen the theatrical cut, he totally threw Zod to his death even though he could have confined a powerless Zod. Reeve killed Nuclear Man, too. Keaton killed Nicholson and DeVito. Kilmer killed Jones. Clooney didn't kill anyone but that movie sucked balls anyway. Bale killed Neeson, Eckhart, and Cotillard. The Avengers kill all kinds of people. It's not like it's a big deal. And if the filmmakers get to do a sequel and spin off an emotional tale of the fallout of Zod's murder on Clark's consious, heck that sounds like great drama. If it becomes the catalyst for the "no killing" rule, that's fine. Because it would make sense.
A lot of people sat through 10 minutes of credits, as Marvel has ruined us. To our dismay, no post-credit scene. Ha!
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul (ral) on Jun 14, 2013 2:28:04 GMT -5
There is a cameo buy a past superman related actor, I guess it goes by so quick.. I missed it I think, I think I know what it might be but not for sure. did anyone catch it? I missed it, but he's listed on IMDB. It's Aaron Smolinski. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Tripper on Jun 14, 2013 2:28:33 GMT -5
Just got back from the midnight showing and I gotta say I'm disappointed. Maybe my opinion will change with a second viewing, I don't know, but right now I feel let down. The whole time I felt like I was watching style over substance. For an almost 2 1/2 hour movie, it felt like nothing happened. All this action but no emotion or heart to back it up. There was no joy. Superman isn't a somber character.
Superman killing is wrong. That's not Superman. I get why he did it. Zod was just going to keep causing more death but that's not the answer. Also, for such a somber movie it ended way too upbeat. Hey thousands of people died but I've got a smile on my face and I don't have to answer to anyone.
Did anyone else think Superman was just way to careless when it came to fighting the Kryptonians? Needlessly flying through buildings and crashing into everything when he didn't have to. I betting he caused some deaths too.
There were no holy shit or wow moments. This is Superman. He can practically do anything. Showcase that. Like I said, maybe my opinion will change, but this movie just felt like a mess. Everything felt rushed and underdeveloped.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2013 2:32:26 GMT -5
Those are all things I also said after viewing it the first time, while still liking it.
Upon seeing it a second time, my complaints are almost completely gone. I absolutely love it now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Tripper on Jun 14, 2013 2:49:10 GMT -5
Those are all things I also said after viewing it the first time, while still liking it. Upon seeing it a second time, my complaints are almost completely gone. I absolutely love it now. I don't know man. I'll definitely give it another shot but I don't see how it'll overturn all those negatives. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2013 3:44:16 GMT -5
My initial reaction, probably 8 out of 10.
2011-2012 me would be surprised to find that the script, not Snyder's direction, was by far my biggest gripe. They did well grabbing some of the best material and themes from the comics, and overall it gives the cast enough to work with, but the nonlinear arrangement hurt more than it helped. It robbed the narrative of momentum and dulled the emotional impact of certain scenes; the deaths of his two fathers are pretty emotionally charged, but they each show up 2 minutes later (exaggeration) in flashbacks. The benefit is that they can pick and choose flashbacks to underscore whatever theme they're hitting at a certain moment, but it amounts to unnecessary spoonfeeding IMO. The Smallville material in particular should have been allowed to play out in a more linear fashion; Costner's performance was strong, and his story deserved to have its own emotional beats. It's too fragmented as is, and it does the film a disservice.
Snyder's direction was very strong. He knows when to bring a camera in tight to create a sense of urgency, and he knows when to pull back to give a feeling of awe. The movie's full of powerful images. I have no real complaints about the job he did putting this film together. He left his time ramping gimmicks at home and delivered a great-looking film. Kudos.
The cast is the best thing this movie has going for it, though. I'll just say this in its own line, to be clear:
Henry Cavill is Superman. Simple as that.
I know the death of Zod is controversial, but to me it's one of the moments that made this version of Superman. Yes, he kills; but for all the speculation over what he could have done, I think the scene sold the idea that he was being forced to make a terrible choice. It was either let Zod kill innocents, or kill Zod to save innocents. Superman does what he has to- what he's forced to do- and it tears him up inside. To see Superman cry out in anguish, even when he was given one of the clearest moral choices you can imagine, shows his compassion and respect for life in a way that's more meaningful than saving a kitten from a tree. Any ordinary person would have made that choice and slept like a baby; for Superman, it's torturous. His respect for life runs that deep. When he embraces Lois, hunched on his knees, he seems almost child-like; as if he accidentally killed a bird with a slingshot. There's a naive innocence there that, to me, cuts to the heart of the character and demonstrates what they're trying to accomplish with this take. I'm not sure how I feel about what they're trying to accomplish quite yet- this film seemed dead set on putting Superman in positions where he clearly has to decide who lives and who dies, with no third option- but I'll leave that discussion for tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
Post by Costa del Lex on Jun 14, 2013 8:55:20 GMT -5
2011-2012 me would be surprised to find that the script, not Snyder's direction, was by far my biggest gripe. I was shocked at this too. I'm no fan of Snyder's but I had no issues with his directing, I think he did an overall excellent job. The script just lacked some needed heart. It could have gone an extra half hour or so for me... just to give a bit more balance. I wasn't as worked up over Superman's killing Zod as Val was, but I definitely think there were other options available to him. Killing Zod also makes the whole banishing of the other Kryptonian insurgents to the phantom zone meaningless. Without Zod in play, we're never going to see or hear from them again. But aside from that, I think it was a bad move to include such a moment in an origin story. If you are going to go that route, it would have more weight in a second or third film, after this new incarnation of Superman has been more established. I think one of my gripes with the film is that the filmmakers assume audiences have a built in familiarity with the character(s), so they sidestep a lot character development. |
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Jun 14, 2013 9:40:22 GMT -5
I think the biggest smile I got was the last two lines of dialogue in the movie. I really thought that was cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Jun 14, 2013 9:54:36 GMT -5
I haven't gone for my second viewing yet, but it's a good sign that I'm not getting HARSHER on it as time passes. My problems are still my problems, and I imagine some of them will remain, but it's not one of those "the more I think about this, the less I like it" situations like I had with the Abrams Trek movies or Watchmen.
And the theme hasn't left my head for a second.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 14, 2013 10:25:50 GMT -5
Haven't seen this yet, (have to wait until Sunday) but have read all the spoilers.
Sad but not suprised if the movie is lacking heart.... looking at Goyer's larger body of work (Blade the tv series in particular, where he was the showrunner)- he's a screenwriter who has a lot of great ideas.... but consistently his work seems to lack a lot of humanity for his characters.
I've always said that when I look at movie credits, if I see Goyer's name as screenwriter, then I always hope/wonder if there's another name on the screenplay as a 'counterbalance' to some of his weaknesses. Will see how it goes...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2013 10:46:53 GMT -5
The heart is there. The spectacle could be blinding people to what else is really there, and this movie is full of heart, depth and emotion. Especially with Costner and Lane.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using proboards
|
|
Keith
New Member
Posts: 3,238
|
Post by Keith on Jun 14, 2013 12:40:27 GMT -5
I could have sworn they, for a split second or two put Reeve's face over Cavill's when Supes was under that ship that was pushing out that gravity beam things.. When it showed the close up of his face, I swear Reeve was there, even Cassie noticed it.
the scene with Cavill on his hands and knees after him and Zod crashed through 7-11, the profile view of Cavill looked so much like Dean Cain to me and then toward the end with Daily Planet Clark, he looked like Tom Welling.. it was weird that I was seeing all of the previous Superman actors in Cavill.
|
|
|
|
Post by Costa del Lex on Jun 14, 2013 12:45:03 GMT -5
Anyone catch how bad Cavill's bottom teeth are in this shot? I noticed it on Tuesday, but didn't dwell on it much. I just think Warner Bros. could have sprung for some dental work for a guy who's portraying Superman!  |
|
|
|
Post by Paul (ral) on Jun 14, 2013 13:16:15 GMT -5
I could have sworn they, for a split second or two put Reeve's face over Cavill's when Supes was under that ship that was pushing out that gravity beam things.. When it showed the close up of his face, I swear Reeve was there, even Cassie noticed it. I noticed it on Monday. It still stood out this morning. My wife also saw it. It's like a flash. I spoke to Jim Bowers about it cause I thought it was the cameo he was talking about...obviously it wasn't. He is going to see it tonight. Will be interesting to hear his thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by SupermanUF on Jun 14, 2013 13:22:02 GMT -5
I could have sworn they, for a split second or two put Reeve's face over Cavill's when Supes was under that ship that was pushing out that gravity beam things.. When it showed the close up of his face, I swear Reeve was there, even Cassie noticed it. I noticed it on Monday. It still stood out this morning. My wife also saw it. It's like a flash. I spoke to Jim Bowers about it cause I thought it was the cameo he was talking about...obviously it wasn't. He is going to see it tonight. Will be interesting to hear his thoughts. They're alien teeth! |
|
