I saw " Man Of Steel " at a midnight show last night/this ayem .
Briefly , I have sort of a liking for super-hero stuff that follows a litle bit more a " real ' science fiction approach - While , admittedly , basically still sticking to the structure of fights and conflict in the story .
MOS rather fulfilled that .
It explored how the Superman concept might've been set up , the whole Krypotn thing , and how it might work out down on Earth , pretty well .
Well , i thought so .
Replies
Okay, I saw Man of Steel yesterday for Father's Day, and will offer some thoughts. I would begin with the usual disclaimer that I am commenting without having read other people's observations, but nobody else has made any!
Anyway ...
Thems for starters. I didn't hate it, but I wish the writers of this movie had read the Superman comics I did. Clearly, they didn't.
...As for " that " plot twist , at the end , not nessecarily in order of importanc:
(1) Byrne .
(2) Superman is , clearly , shaken up by his killing of General Zod (he just didn';t have an OD handbook nearby !!!!!!!!!) , who is someone on equal terms of strength , remember , with him who he is fighting to the death with . Who has , wot' , ESPECIALLY if w take into account what would have happened when all there buildings in downtown Metropolis collapses (We aren't shown that...PG-13 , remember , so that's why Pete Ross?? can say " dickhead "??)
(3) The 1938-39 " Captain Cleveland " Superman stories . WHERE SUPERMAN KILLS (when ~ basically ~ nessecary/" rules of the game ") .
I don't know exactly what you mean, Emerkeith, but my take on it is this: Superman always finds a way. That's why he's Superman and not "Really Strong Guy."
As for Byrne, I'll repeat what I said over here:
But even in the movie, though, Superman knows that killing is a bad thing. He just doesn't see another way. Perhaps a more mature Superman would have found a way to avoid it. And I wish the movie hadn't put him in that position, or put him in that position with a secret way out. But ultimately, I can only hold the circumstances against the writers, and not as a black mark on the character of this version of Superman. According to the timeline of the movie, he's only been operating publicly for a couple of days, right?
I know he's Superman, and Superman should always find a way. But we're asking him to be perfect right out of the gate.
Rob Staeger (Grodd Mod) said:
Not exactly ... I'm asking him to live up to the name "Superman." I'm asking him to be more than just "Really Strong Guy." The answer this movie Superman came up with is the answer any really strong guy would come up with.
One thing that's truly been lost since the Bronze Age is that Superman isn't just really strong, he's really smart, too. And he is capable of thinking his way through things.
Not only that, Superman is an aspirational figure, one who represents the best in ourselves. There are plenty of people who don't have to kill somebody to understand that killing is bad; shouldn't we think, at minimum, that somebody called "Superman" is one of them?
...What Rod said .
Look , Superman is fighting someone of equal strength to him , a demonstrated Bad Guy and said Bad Guy is not exactly showing up at the County Jail door asking to be booked ( Ahemph !!!!!!!!! )...( Were they in Zod's ship with the ship clipping both Supes' and Zod's powers ????? )...They fight full-out .
Superman is doing what Superman rarely does , fighting someone of essentially EQUAL STRENGTH to him .
By the story's logic , there was really nothing else that can be done , this not being the Adventures Of St. Francis of Asissi or Gandhi :-) !!!!!!!!!!!
The story quite emphasizes Superman's difficulty in restraining himself , his contniuous strain in dealing with weaker Earthians .
It balances it well , I think , that at the end he lets in out for once , allowed to do it by the circumstances .
Yes - he is sad at the end , not happy to have killed . It was a rule that should not be broken - But , it had to be done .
[ Even before then I was noting how Jor-El and Lois Lane were willing to kill Zod's soldiers in their escape/self-defense . ]
I respectfully disagree that it "had" to be done. I was not persuaded by what I saw to accept that conclusion. Moreover, I think it's poor scriptwriting that the writers failed to convincingly sell that conclusion.
Your mileage may vary.
...The point was made that Kal was killing the last remnant of Krypton ( Well ,unless the sequel !!!!!!!!! You know...) , now , binding himself to his new home, Earth forevermore .
BY the way , do you consider the killings in action by C-C 1938/-39 Superman - which even include letting , a whole munitions factory , presumably full of civilian munitons workers , blow up (If not perhaps " actively " doing so - In the same story , I think Supes actively knocks down a military plane from said " warlike country "...) , relevant ?
No, I don't think the 1938-39 Superman is at all relevant to this discussion.
Did Churchilland FDR think it was????????? M<aybe they read funny books (E.g.,considering civilian munitions empolyees 2 bee...)! (considered legit-ly in the line of fire...)
Take It Easy m POPPA LOU
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 15 Next