Livefyre Profile

Activity Stream

@fan101 There wasnt a big gripe about Avengers because each character had strengths and weaknesses shown throughout. Captain America and Black Widow showed fatigue as they tried to clear Wall Street, Tony Stark almost died when he guided the missile into the portal. Then there was the villain Loki who was obviously rattled by Hulk as he was thrashed about like a rag doll. Plus New York wasnt atomized by a needless world engine. There was an attempt by the heroes to contain the fight in one square area to minimalize casulties. MOS didnt operate that way it was biggest explosions and super powered beings that showed no fatique or injury as they foguht each other. There was no real investment or worry for Superman as he was pummeled because he showed no such physical vulnerability that and everything was shown out of focus it was hard to make out exactly what was going on.

9 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Thatguy12345 Who fraking cares if my picks came after 1986? I never said I was against the character after that period. I simply said there are some good stories out there with Superman as he should be a man of the people doing good for goodness sake. The decade of the 90's almost ruined him, that was the decade I detested and most of the picks of yours were just gimmick stories that while entertaining had lil to no substance or portrayed the character like he should be. The early 2000's also had some wild and crazy ideas that were just wrong or misguided Jim Lee's For Tomorrow is one of them another one comes to mind is Terry austin's Action run. Superman didnt really become great again until Johns took over Action and Grant wrote the great All Star. As for definitive version of the character there is one and it's usually the silver or bronze age version because no matter how ma reboots or dropped plotlines everything eventually circles bac to those ideals and morals

9 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Thatguy12345 @trans8010 @rosslunney Ummmm I was born in 1987, my first Superman comic was Doomsday! aka Death of Superman. So your attempts to throw me for a fool were futile. Also by throwing books currently being plugged by DC and their New52 stance along with Red Son, Secret Origins, and Birthright. Birthright is usually to be the definitive origin story with most fans and is a crowd pleaser, Waid clearly knows the character and tries his hardest to do justice to Superman. Mark Waid was also among the very celeb talents that disliked MOS. Secret Origins tries to be birthright but comes across as a tedious redo by Geoff Johns who at the time was remaking Superman and restored many of the silver age elements, it was entertaining but a bit unneccesary. The Death and Return of Superman are good reads as well but are not definitive versions of the character either. For Tomorrow is a terrible read it goes nowhere real fast and has a anticlimatic conclusion. The covers were nice though. Earth One is can obvious push to gain younger readers by creating abn origin story that is relatable to those emo youngsters, it's decent but not a favorite. Red Son is an elseworlds tale and not one that should have been included here. If you want great Superman stories besides Birthright I would reccommend Superman Sandman Saga, Superman in the Sixties, Superman Vs. The Flash,  Superman: For the Man who has Everything, Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow, Man of Steel, All Star Superman, Last Son, Brainiac, and Action 775.

9 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Thatguy12345 @trans8010 @jmaldo85 @Juano Guzman 

Any General would brave the atmospheric pressures if it meant more power to best his opponent, even then as his body adapted to the changes forced on him in the climatic final battle. Kal was shown to have been in pain as he struggled to breathe as an infant, and how each power caused him pain and confusion as they manifested yet with Zod there was only pain in that brief moment when his armor as shattered in Smallville, during the fight in Metropolis the pain was suddenly gone. That comment now contridicts itself in hindsight since obviously the atmospheric changes only affect infants and young children in such a brutal fashion.


9 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Thatguy12345 @trans8010 @jmaldo85 @Juano Guzman It wasnt the world, he was making his way due north through Canada and the arctic. That's following what came before it, the original comic character trekked the world learning about humanity in all cultures because he knew once he was ready he would be a man of the people all people from all walks of life. I was expecting at long last THAT film to be made, so there's one of my disappointments with this film he just goes back to Kansas.  Which from a literary point of view doesnt add to the plot or anything yes he goes back home that's nice and natural which is something I didnt mind, however what does he do there? Washes dishes and watches football and talks about some girl he saved from sentry robots. Where's the reflection of time lost between a mother and her son? There were apart ten years and that's the way Goyer and Snyder decided to handle their reunion? Where's the cool stories he could tell to her about his journey, the opportunity to save a dying family from a flaming car wreck, or twarting a simple hold up from a trade mart or something. Add some bits of characterization about how he wants something more than just to be a Superman, these scenes would have helped the development of this character in the present and maybe we could have had a nice lil action scene told via flashback. Instead we had a potential bonding scene wasted.

9 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@rosslunney @trans8010 @Contrabardus My comment had nothing to do whether a successful film made a lot of money but was critically panned or if a critically acclaimed film makes no money and their merits on whether or not that's what makes a hit or flop. I simply said had the public been so in love with Man of Steel like everyone claims on RT and metacritic then it should have at least kept the top spot the next week or at least made more than a buddy cop film that appeals to a very niche audience and a Pixar sequel from a film that could very well be the black sheep of the catalog, It didnt. 

My point stands Man of Steel simply did not have the great word of mouth to influence a stronger second weekend. All that money made in week 1 only tells me that those who saw it simply paid for a ticket not if they enjoyed the picture. It doesnt matter if there's strong competition from other films if a film itself is good and the audience itself thinks it's good they will go out of their way to support it. Well the support asnt there. 

The theater in my area the views were polarizing. There were some that thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread and the other portion mainly families and older senior citizens (they were there) who considered it a betrayal to the source material. In fact after the lights went back up there was a kid one row down from me, the lights go up he stands and claps trying to start an applause. Every person in the surrounding area just turns and looks at him with puzzlement. That was Man of Steel in my area. 

10 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jmaldo85 @trans8010 @Contrabardus @rosslunney No the christ alligory came from the films. His origins were heavily based from the book of exodus and the stories of Moses feeing the israelites. Siegel and Shuster were jewish they wouldnt have used New Testament scripture in their tales. 

I'm sorry but not immediately going out to fight evil because Clark still had to figure out humanity is a ploy to excuse Goyer's bad writing. At ths point he's lived amongest us for 33 years. You are telling me in all that time he not once read a history book, or saw a movie or even talked to people and seen something other than darkness? 

All throughout the film you see or hear about Clark saving people throught out his trek across Canada, the oil platform, the guardian angel bit Lois immediately latches on to, even saving a bus load of children in his youth, yet that all stops after he puts on the suit. Why? 

Clark obviously has had the capacity to do good or else he wouldnt have even attempted such acts of kindness and heroism. At this point he's figured out humanity. Their capabilities and their passion for good. The world may be a dark place right now but the overall populace isnt. He should have known that.

10 months, 1 week ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jmaldo85 @trans8010 @Juano Guzman No you are missing the point, it's not what happened it's why it had to happen to begin with.

There you go throwing up banter on the original Superman film that while I enjoyed, did not ever in recent weeks resort to comparison. Yet that seems to be all that you are focusing on. You say that Superman flying up from nowhere catching Lois Lane and flying off with a cheering crowd made no sense? How? His exposure wasnt about acceptance it was about doing good for goodness sake, he saw he needed to help someone in peril and literally jumped at the chance. The public responed well to him because he came out of nowhere to save one person. That spoke volumes about this guy. He's not just for important geological disasters, or vips this guy will show up to foil a bank robbery, save kittens from trees and save a person from falling. The public was openly trusting of this guy because they WANTED to trust him. If that hokey and unrealistic well guess what it's not supposed to be realistic. You seem to forget that Superman is a FANTASY! I cannot stress this enough. 

MOS went a different route he was hiding for 33 years (augggh) only exposing himself to the world when Zod threatened to destroy it. He didnt go out of his way to help people or foil bank robberies after putting on that suit for the first time. It should have been after that scene pushing his limits flying for the fist time that he should have set out to help those in need. So when Superman was indeed exposed as that of kryptonian decent via Zod and his maniacal nature was known itself and he had to fight Zod to prove to us he's not like him I would accept the public trusting him a lot more because of his intial deeds.

Zod's endgame was illogical. Why terraform a planet, to mold it as a exact replica of Krypton if you had the knowledge of what such an atmosphere would do to your strength and prowess. They would all become like gods. All they needed to do was kill all humans and live on earth as it's sole inhabitants. The world engine was just unnecessary baggage written in to make big buildings tumble. Again why go this route to begin with when 3 or more kryptonian beings with the same strength and invulnerability factors should have been more than enough to engage viewers during the climax.

Why was Zod so pissed at Jor-El to begin with? His hatred of him spawned from the fact he and Lara concieved a child naturally. The very thought of copulation sickened him. That's interesting and could very well be a compelling way for Zod to extract vengence on the house of El yet it wasnt the reason. His overall insurrection was about reinstating order to Krypton and removing all the laws and ideals that crippled the planet over the past few millenia, yet he had a problem with copulation and called it sacrilege? Why? A nice little explanation as to why that one rule would become reinstated in your new dystopia would really have explained that lil error.



10 months, 1 week ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Juano Guzman For gods sake, if any of you bothered to read these reviews you would know it wasnt the action itself that critics complained about, it was how long and tedious the action scenes became and how Superman himself seemed to be more interested in causing more destruction than stopping the bad guys. Everyone expected mass destruction and chaos, that was never in question. The plot and characterizations were what critics mainly focused on. 

10 months, 1 week ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jmaldo85 @trans8010 @Contrabardus @rosslunney  To hell there isnt. I'm sorry but there is christian symbolism in Superman the Movie. You are a fool if you cant see it. The writer Tom Mankiweicz has gone on repeatedly about this. He deliberately wrote Jor-El and Superman as parallels to God and Christ. Hell, even Zod was depicted as Satan. Look at the film again, christian symbolism and christ allogories are everywhere.

Jor-El banishes Zod from Krypton imprisoning him in the phantom zone for eternity. In biblical text God punished Satan by casting him from heaven and into Hell for eternity.

Kal-El's spaceship is in the form of a twinkling star, not unlike the Star of Bethlehem that signaled the arrivial of Christ.

Jor-El sends to earth his only son in hopes not just to save him from Krypton's fate but to save us from damnnation. He also instructs him that while he can live amongst the humans he mustn't be one of them that his destiny and message is more important than physical wants. How is that not different from Jesus?

"Live as one of them, Kal-El, to discover where your strength and power are needed. But always hold in your heart the pride of your special heritage. They can be a great people, Kal-El, and they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you, my only son."

Perhaps why you cannot see them yourself is because it comes across as subtle. So while you claim I have no understanding of Man of Steel you had NO understanding yourself on Superman the Movie.

As for what my grandfather said about the film. He understood completely that this wasnt a Superman film and that's why he didnt enjoy it. They never cared to properly develop the character into the hero that will become Superman in the first film. It had nothing to do with misunderstanding. That was Man of Steel's greatest flaw. You're telling me you have all these powers and you're not gonna fly out to save your father because he told you not to. That's BS, it really is, it's not compelling or heartwrenching, nor does Clark learn a lesson about trust, he was an idiot who watched his father die from a preventable situation. 

The acting may have been fine but the writing was terrible. Using it's only part 1 as an excuse to ignore development is lazy and ignorant to the fans, and tells me the writers in charge have no idea who Superman is and chose to write a character that ISNT him in any way shape or form. This character lacks every trait even in his upbringing we didnt see Clark. The love story was also very tacked on, there was nothing about Lois that seemed necessary. Every scene she was in could have been done using a different character and there would have been little to nothing altered.



10 months, 1 week ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @trans8010 @rosslunney So I missed two minor points about ticket prices but everything else is right on. The film couldnt hold it's umph after the first weekend and profits dipped. Also only the buddy cop film was crushed by MOS Monsters University steamrolled over MOS, so I'm not the only one trying to use false data. lol 

Ok in all seriousness, the film didnt perform to Warner Bros. expectations, the word of mouth was sour, if the film was truly a great opus as many seem to think it should have kept climbing or held the no. 1 spot for at least another weekend. It didnt. Even Batman Begins a film also polarizing for fans kept the top spot longer and only dropped one spot per week and it had Star Wars and a (at the time) greatly anticipated Will Ferrell film as it's competition.  

MOS may have scored high on RT or Metacritic but those ratings are misleading as well since they only rate those who use the site, which not everyone uses. So roughly HALF if that of the movie going public were represented. Superman is a timeless character the people in the theater when I saw it ranged from 8-70. I doubt those 70 year olds were immediately on RT to submit their scores. My father disliked the film as did my grandparents. They apreciated the balls on approach in the action but were greatly disappointed at how little the film tried to showcase the characters and plot. 

I liked it, but I wasnt in love with it, I felt the human drama was there just not fleshed out properly, Cavill did a decent job as the title role, but Lois Lane, Perry White and many of the supporting cast had literally nothing to do but react to this or to exist solely to further the plot like Lois on the alien craft, no reason for her to really be there. They could have easily written the scene for Clark. The christ allogories were forced in with a spoon with no subtlety. The orignal film carried this notion with grace, you didnt need to see Christopher Reeve with his arms outstretched to get that he's a savior to humanity, he just saved people.

10 months, 1 week ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@rosslunney Those first weekend totals were misleading. It was revealed that almost half of those first weekend totals were IMAX screenings. Have you been to an IMAX showing tickets are in the 20-25 dollar price range depending on your area. That's more than half of a standard ticket.   That less patrons than you think that actually saw this film. It couldnt even hold the top spot for more than one weekend losing to a buddy film staring Sandra Bullock and Monsters University. Why? Word of mouth poisoned the potential profits this film could have made. The film suffered in subsequent weeks. The film was not nearly as successful as box office totals would want you to believe. 

10 months, 2 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@rosslunney No they dont. Superman has had everything unique stripped from him beginning in 1986. This current generation has no idea who Superman is. The current version is just another strongman the only thing unique is his massive set of powers and blue suit. Also not everyone has seen Smallville either so using that as a point of defense is just an excuse. I'm not saying let's remove that part entirely but use those scenes for something other than the same message over and over until Pa Kent dies. The codex also is a plot device and not a very good one. How will he be able to extract those cells from his DNA to create or give sentience to kryptonian beings? If there's no use for them rather than keeping Krypton alive is ato excuse his behavior. They are just cells within his body nothing more nothing less.

10 months, 2 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jwatkis @jJaay @sefy76 This wasnt like Batman Begins at all. Batman Begins was done as a stand alone film as an experiment by Warner Bros to see if the public was ready for another Batman film. 

Even narratively speaking it cannot compare with MOS. At the end of that film we knew Bruce had become Batman when the titles were revealed after the cut to black done deliberately to inform the audience that Bruce has been accepted by the public and Gordon and has evolved as Batman. By the end of MOS Clark still isnt Superman.


10 months, 3 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jwatkis Ahem, we like Superman the Movie because the character has heart. We know he lacks the power punch action but that's not at all as necessary as his need to do good, to save people, to foil any crime big or small. MOS decided that in order to make Superman work for the 21st century you had to strip what made him popular and unique amongst all heroes to begin with. Sure he has the powers accurately portrayed but without that heart he's only opporating at 50% capacity.

10 months, 3 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@rosslunney @trans8010 Why should it matter? It's a iconic power of his. It's like saying why do beams of light radiate from his eyes. It could be said that he freezes the air he breathes on the intake and blows it out at subzero temps. Either power makes no lick of sense, but that's one of the joys of Superman it's fantasy. It's not spposed to be taken seriously or realisticly.

10 months, 3 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jwatkis @Jet Set Willy Lois wasnt requested like when someone is handed a invite card with a check box under RSVP, her invite was more or less come with us willingly or be brought on board kicking and screaming. She chose to join Kal to prevent an incident.

Using the lack of development as an excuse because it's part one in a trilogy is weak. One part that makes a movie in itself great is the evolution and conflict of the characters. 

Superman had conflict in MOS but all of it was handled wrong. Clark couldnt save his father from a tornado why? As a sign of trust? That's illogical you have powers, so save him let Pa Kent see just how much he's been holding his son back have him struck by debris afterward or die from a heart attack something Clark couldnt save him from. Use that message on how even with those powers you cant  save someone from everything. His battle in Metropolis wouldnt have been so cold then.

 Clark finally finds his destiny as earth's protector and what does he do, he hides! Why? He has powers, a suit and the knowledge he can help people so why doesnt he? Hiding is not how a hero is born. It's not that someone was holding him back at this point his biological father told him to save people.

Why does he immediately kiss Lois Lane after touching down in Metropolis instead of greiving over what his culture has done? Had he realized just how much life was lost in that moment and vowed to Zod that he will stop him at any cost to prevent more unecessary death and destruction I could see his torment as Zod pinned a family with his heat vision. 

Also had Zod and Superman been shown with actual bruises and bits of fatique as two EQUALLY powerful people were fighting each other to give the fight that needed dramatic tension instead of just throwing themselves through glass and brick and mortar buildings without any once of pain or emotion that end fight may have been exciting.

That's the complete opposite of the direction he should be going. He needs to be the hero at the end of part 1 so we care about what happens at part 2.

10 months, 3 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@rosslunney First off no one was arguing over his Power levels. Why people incessantly believe this was the problem with naysayers is beyond me. What we had a problem with was how one dimensional the characters were written, how lazy the plot moves along and how overlong the action sequences were. Superman can punch things. That's great, but where's his heart? The power levels are only 50% of the character, his heart and constant need to do good and help others are what stands the character out from other superheroes in this film he's been resorted to just another superhero strongman. One scene I was especially dissapointed in was after he left the fortress I expected Kal to fly out of that arctic wasteland with a purpose to do good and help others, but he didnt. No, he resorted to more hiding only showing himself when Kryptonians were exposed via the dark maniacal Zod. Only then he takes action because he's forced to. The other most dissapointing scene was how easily and happily his disregards his kryptonian heritage by destroying Krypton's future. In no comic or any adaptation would that EVER be considered right in Superman's code.

10 months, 3 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @trans8010 @sefy76 @Batmandrew Superman killing Doomsday is irrelevant to the conversation. As Doomsday had no soul no conscious he existed as a living breathing weapon one that could not be stopped by normal means. It wouldnt have been till years later that the creature's origin be revealed and given sentience. It's not the same as Hank Henshaw at all. Hank was a man driven into insanity for refusing to believe his life was ended by nothing more than an accidental occurance. Also I believe in Adv. 468 when Hank went to retrieve his wife was confronted by Superman who then told him he was of living energy, and decided after the torment of his wife to leave and transferred his form to Superman's birthing matrix, and shot himself into space to hich Superman failed to prevent. In that case there is some familiarity of Hank's abilities to Superman. Which also gives little more evidence into my claim that Superman could have believed him when Cyborg told him he would be back.

11 months, 3 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @trans8010 @sefy76 @Batmandrew I see no reason why you cannot see my theory without stepping on it and throwing it away as rubbish. If you think Superman II is better with the original ending or not it doesnt change how it would have been considered canon at one point before it's home video release wihich I believe was only in rental form and pretty rare to come by before 1986, tv was how most people rewatched films, that's why ABC, CBS, and NBC's movies of the week became so freaking popular. Just because you never saw this film in it's varying states besides that of the original theatrical doesnt mean it didnt exist in some form. Even if that version was eliminated wouldnt it then be called a retcon.

Much in the same way Superman 466 a comic you've clearly not read tells me, and with that knowledge into Superman 82 proves to me that the intention was always to have Cyborg escape even if Superman did try to kill him, it wasnt gonna happen because I knew Cyborg would find a way out. All those subtle hints throughout the arc how he could transfer his essence to any computer he wanted at will or interface with any piece of machinery and control it. 

It may have been fan speculation or the readers perspective but that's what makes reading and collecting comics a fun passtime. 

11 months, 3 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @trans8010 @sefy76 @Batmandrew No the point is even if Superman wanted to kill Hank which isnt possible considering HE'S ALREADY DEAD by Superman 82, the writers made sure to write him a way out, something the film failed to do. 

Even if Superman tried to kill Hank, again with his super intellect and eidetic memory (powers he clearly has) he must have known deep down that Hank could have the capability to come back. He had to destroy the physical body in order to stop him, I wasnt disputing that but there was no way to kill him, and Superman knew of Hank's resourcefulness to survive the impossible he should have known that Hank would have found a way out.

I've also said Superman has killed in the source material, however I also said when he does it's an act of desperation of the writer to give him an edge that ultimately backfires with fans for coming across as out of character. Superman 22 got away with it kind of simply because of the ramafications of the act mirror Zod pulled on his pocket dimensions citizens.

Also stop throwing that scene back at me from Superman II. I have a valid reason why people would think of it as canon, and you are too ignorant to see through my point of view. Superman II was broadcast on TV many times and the film had that scene to expand the run time to 3 or 4 hours. It's the ending I remember from my childhood as it probably is for a lot of fans. The ending may not exist anymore but that doesnt erase it from those who can. In a world where VHS was expensive and hime recordings from TV broadcasts were the cheaper alternative this was the canon to a lot of people.

11 months, 3 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@rosslunney Besides building walls with his mind which didnt make an appearance til 1987's bomb of a sequel most if not all of those traits and powers came from comic books of the era. In that respect those films were a faithful adaptation of the characters of Superman. Yes Superman even had the power kiss in his arsenal in the comics. Also where does this inqury about him having freeze breath and heat vision bother you? He's always had both!

11 months, 3 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @trans8010 @sefy76 @Batmandrew Adventures 466 which I have right in front of me has Hank dying of radiation sickness suffered from a space mission gone horribly wrong. As he's dying he constructs a robotic body and implants his essence into it very similar to how Doc Ock implanted his into Peter's brain in Amazing Spider-Man 698-700. Back on topic, his body now dust all that lives on is memories inside a memory chip. After the death of his wife he uploads himself into Superman's own bithing matrix and shoots himself into space. 

Going back to The Return of Superman trade specifically Superman 82 again another comic I have right in front of me. Hank controls Steel's armor choking Irons with it, he goes on to say that anything metal he can control and maipulate, he does so multiple times throughout the run before the climatic battle at Engine City, forging video survilence showing doctored images of the Eradicator wiping out Coast City and duplicating Superboy as a witness backing up Cyborg's claims. He even explains how he becomes a cyborg. You see the kryptonian DNA inside the matrix allowed Hank to shapeshift his metal parts into a hmanoid robot and fill in the gaps using Superman's own DNA. His biology is not that of Hank Henshaw but that of Superman's. With that said he's more a computer than that of a lifeform. 

Going back to Superman 82 Hank says as Superman punches through him that he couldnt destroy him that he'll live on, Superman replies and if that happens I'll stop you. With all the subtle hints throughout the run of Hank's abilities there's no reason to think that the writers were willing to kill the character off for good. When he vibrates his arm at super speeds to destroy the body, he was still concerned if Hank was still around, Hal Jordan scanning with his ring found no trace of him. Superman with a sigh of relief says it's over. Not he's gone forever or dead just that it's over, deep down he knew Hank would be back. In fact not even a year passes when Superman met up with the Cyborg in Superman/Doomsday: Hunter Prey. Proving Hank was indeed correct and Superman didnt kill him he simply uploaded his essence again on a tracking meter he placed on Doomsday's body when he hurled it into space in Superman 78. 

Also to further my point it's been revealed that Cyborg is immortal and therefore anything that happens to his physical body he continues to live on thanks to his Kryptonian DNA that he absorbed from Superman's birthing matrix, and the ability to download himself onto any computer or memory unit .

11 months, 4 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @sefy76 @Batmandrew As I have said repeatedly Superman knew the Cyborg was not dead and even if he did, Hank Henshaw was already dead, he died from radiation poisoning back in Adventures of... 466. Superman merely destroyed a carbon copy. Hank even told him that he would return, and Superman replied if that was the case he then would stop him again. It's all in Superman Vol. 2 82. He never once believed he was killed.

11 months, 4 weeks ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@sefy76 @jparlee321 For a short time Superman did deny his Kryptonian heritage when John Byrne rebooted the character in 1986. However when he left the books in 1988 whatever changes that stined the character were resolved within ten years. Fans were outraged by Superman's suddenly betrayal of his heritage and DC realized the mistake and corrected it.

The only comics that ever showed Clark being raised in angst was Earth One vol. 1 a out of continuity graphic novel published as a what if Superman was an angsty realistic teen. It's not that popular with fans either.

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@sefy76 @trans8010 @rosslunney @Fingerkane I didnt disagree I simply added that it wasnt just fatigue. Superman also wanted the carnage to stop and leaving Metropoils was the only thing he could do to ensure Zod would stop what he was doing.

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @sefy76 @trans8010 @jparlee321"If you ever got what you wanted, it would no doubt turn out to be the Batman Forever of Superman movies."

Switch around the overall tones and you know what, that's what's happening right now. Batman Returns was too dark for the mass audience and Warner Bros wanted a more lighter tone to appeal to those soccer moms that protested a penguin happy meal toy. So what came of it was Batman Forever starring the Flamboyant Riddler, and overzealous Two-Face. The film opened to massive box office success breaking all records for an opening except it was met with mixed critical reviews and as a result of bad word to mouth from those fanboys who detested this new Batman as a result the film couldnt keep the top spot and fell to 2nd behind Pocahontas, and then fell to third behind Apollo 13. It kept dropping spots until being pulled from theaters. The film made well over 336 million worldwide making a 236 million profit which was good enough for Warner Bros to greenlight a sequel. We all know what happened there right? Warner is on the verge of repeating history. 

Superman went over budget with 50 million dollars, that was a HUGE budget. In fact none of the original Star Wars adaptations ever exceeded that in terms of budget. So I have no idea where you get off that Superman had a small budget. 50 Million in 1977 was a ton of money. They shot the film at Pinewood on the famed 007 stage, a stage used exclusively for big budget extravaganzas.

The visual effects in Superman were revolutionary for the time, they depicted for the first time a Superman who could move freely as he glided across the air, arms raised, lowered, loop de loops right turns, left turns. Such a concievable feat couldnt even be attempted years prior. The academy was impressed they gave a special Oscar award for best visual effects a category that wouldnt even exist until the late 90's. So have respect for the film's technical achievements.

Superman was never considered a kids film after it was released it may have been intended as one but from what I read and heard from Donner what they wanted to do was create a Superman film that was respectful to it's comic book roots while creating a more vulnerable side that audiences of all ages could connect to. The film was rated PG which as we all know was given to films that suggested parental guidance for children under a certain age. It was also the more widely accepted and popular rating at the time much like PG-13 is today. There was only three ratings G, PG and R. Superman had dark moments to reflect that rating but there was also a refernece to drugs, sexual innuendos, and dark moments used to create conflict and tension but it was in no way a dark film. There was a sense of awe and wonderment. The spirt of the character was kept in tact.


12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @jparlee321 Superman spent 9 weeks at the top spot in 1978-1979 this film only held that coveted spot for one week that is a fact. The film also had only 817 theaters or so playing it compared to the 1400 or so of today. Yes comparing both films seems tedious but every way you look at it in a decade crammed full of sorrow and the world betting against Superman that movie succeeded, exceeding all expectations and then some. It was the highest grossing film Warner Bros ever released at that time, made mega stars out of it's cast and crew, and made Gene Hackman a bigger star. With the height of the Cold War, the political corruption, and soring energy prices people were willing to go see a fun lighthearted Superman picture. So it's my belief that had Superman been respected with a lil darkness thrown in just because of modern times we may have had another phenomenon.

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @jparlee321 Comic books are not kiddie fare anymore but they are being published with teenagers in mind not adults. As adults we realize Comic books are fantasy and we can believe that a person can survive in that world wearing spandex or a very tight armor suit that looks like a bodyglove. It's the teens or the non readers that scoff at the hobby that these publishers are aiming the books at. They want them to watch the movies and then buy the books, problem is they dont want to buy the books because of preconcieved notions about the character sthat are just wrong or foolish so the New 52 era was made to cater to them exclusively. 

"Batman cant wear spandex in a make believe world because it's not realistic." They said

Poof the spandex is gone and now Batman wears armor. "

Superman is gay, he's ultra powerful with nothing that can hurt him, and those red underwear he wears are super gay."

 Well poof he wears armor that was desgined exclusively to  be movie friendly, in fact all the characters wear armor now even the Flash because we all know that nothing would tire out or create more drag than 40 lb armor right? 

The adult readers hate this idea and DC Comics sales after a slight surge have suffered because of it. Only Green Lantern and Batman seem to have the strong sales. Marvel followed suit with a black Nick Fury (his son but whatever) a Avengers movie inspired Captain America complete with helmet cowl, and Jean Grey's sort of ressurrection a character that long time fans grew tired of. These changes were made because they're catering to non fans trying to get them to buy these books. What happens they try them out grow bored and dump them and sales plummet as a result.

You say that a Boy Scout Superman wouldnt sell well guess what Superman's comic sales are lower now than they were before the reboot, so what does that tell you? Warner Bros. is actively listening to people that dont give a damn about Superman, and making those changes based off their opinions, not the rest of the world that likes Superman to stay what he is and how he's remembered best. As an icon a symbol that stands for the truths and justices of every one of us. A man willing to put himself on the line to do whats right no matter how unpopular it may seem. A person that puts everyones well being into mind and not a select few. A person that inspires us to achieve those great and powerful things that better ourselves as a person and ultimately a race.

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 Corporations paid Warner 160 million to feature their products 100 in all from Sears, to 7-Eleven. So that 600 million in profit is more like 440 million. Warner tacked the profits made from IHOP and added that to the first weeks totals, in that respect MOS didnt even make that much at the total box office that week.

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 Superman the Movie is still the most successful when adjusted for inflation that's 1978 dollars converted to todays money for those who havent the slightest clue about that) If Superman had been released in 2013 and played it's final showing the domestic end totals are $468,042,300. That's at least 150 million more.


12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @sefy76 @rosslunney @Fingerkane Singer's Superman didnt work because Warner felt Superman was supposed to fit with modern times to be this dark and moody soul because uplifting and chipper was so 70's well guess what Superman was moody, quiet, and turned into a deadbeat stalker who screwed Lois and took away her memories of that encounter therefore one could view it as rape since Lois certainly doesnt remember consumating her relationship with Superman. Shortly after he left earth for 5 FREAKING YEARS for what he thought was Krypton which was a ruse planted by Lex Luthor to get out of jail and with Superman the character witness off planet, Lex went free. When he returns and surprise there's a kid with powers he acknowledges the kid but doesnt plan to help raise him nope its fly across the earth and wink at the camera time. Fans hated what SInger did to Superman and wanted not just action but the return of that beacon of light. That is why Superman Returns failed! 

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@sefy76 @rosslunney @Fingerkane Superman fled not just because he was tired from having a bus slam into him, he had to divert the three away from the populace. After he gets out from the wreckage he surveys the area and sees just how devoted Zod is to creating mayhem and destruction and comes to the realization if he doesnt leave Metropolis would be smashed, he was counting on Zod to follow him because his thrist for revenge against the house of El was too great. 

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Contrabardus @sefy76 @rosslunney @Fingerkane Actually it was mid to late eighties and on syndication networks as late as the mid nineties. Even if it wasnt canon I and others grew up watching those TV cuts. A lot of people remember the film this way as a result. Stop being so ignorant of those like Sefy and myself who remembers watching that version of Superman II. I also remember that pig head scene from Roger Rabbit and STILL have the VHS recording with it.


12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@rosslunney @sefy76 @Contrabardus Stop being so darn ignorant. Superman II when originally broadcast on ABC in 1984, 17 minutes of footage was reinserted, including the scene in question with Luthor confronted by arctic police as the three outcasts were carted away, this was the cut a lot of people saw, and thanks to my father recording everything off TV with his Super VHS back then, this was the cut of Superman II I grew up watching. It was common practice to add scenes previously deleted to increase the runtime from 2 to 3 or 4 hours by networks. So because of this common practice by the big three networks these scenes were considered canon by those who remember them. Hell when I bought the Ultimate Superman boxset and watched Superman II I was amazed those scenes werent there.

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 MOS made 600 million worldwide but Warner Bros will be lucky if they make half of that 300 million that comes from overseas. You see Warner has to share with financial backers, distributors and overseas merchandisers, also they still owe hundreds of thousands of movie profits to the Seigels which was the whole point of that lawsuit. With a large fraction of those international totals tied up in those investments Warner Bros will be lucky if they get half of that. You also fail to read up on Warner Bros. financial troubles with 3 films not meeting studio projections and Hangover III bombing domestically only making 111 million in the US, MOS making slightly more at 280 million against a 220 million budget and rule 43 which the less said the better. Warner is spending more money on products aimed at the 18-25 demographic and they are failing big time, Warner forgot how much families enjoy films and Disney, and Dreamworks are reeling in the money off of their output, they're also ignoring the comic book fan which has become more nostalgic and tired of these over sophisticated over complicated action heroes and would care to see their Superheroes in a much lighter tone, something Marvel is more than willing to offer. If you think I'm lying look up Warner Bros. downsizing and you'll see the truth.

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@charlieboy2 Yeah ur mom. She says hi by the way. :)

12 months ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@charlieboy2 @trans8010 @MichaelRTrice @marc1913 This is a thread about a comic book movie. Honestly what else did you expect from these comments?

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@charlieboy2 @trans8010 No your mummy dresses me after I reared her for several hours. Bazinga!


1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@CoreyV Stop comparing the fantasy embracing Superman from the TImm animated cartoons to that of a live action film that ignored the fantasy elements in favor of the dark and gritty realism. You simply cannot compare the two in any shape or form. 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@ty19c @Dannybohy @trans8010 It's not that we're running out of complaints, transitioning scenes or wipes are neccessary in film. Ignoring these makes the finished product unprofessional. So they are valid complaints.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@ty19c @trans8010 I carefully explained this in my comment. If you and I were to fight just fist and fist punching and kicking each other there will be open wounds and bruising and after awhile we will tire ourselves out as our energy depletes. Well two kryptonians sharing the same biology should be able to hurt each other, they both get their energy from the sun now, and are using up that energy faster than they could gain it. Hell even in the comics when Superman fought Zod or those with equal or greater power they were able to bruise him. Look at the picture above there's clear bruising and blemmishes on Jim Lee's Superman in that fight scene. Doomsday a Kryptonian weapon a bastardization of science was able to KILL him. In a film where realism sacrificed majesty and awe, the one on one battle should have depleted and bruised both combatants because that's how real biology works.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@ty19c @sefy76 No Zod was genetically engineered to be a leader a general one that fights for his people, and protects them, that's what he should have done. Also he rebeled against those of Krypton because of their current society and their bogus laws, yet he had a problem with human procreation? What sense does that make? This whole my new purpose is to kill mankind wasnt at all neccessary consideirng Faora was there. The species could live on that way. 

Superman had been on earth for 33 years but due to Jonathan's constant reassurance the world would take him away he cloested his abilities and never once decided it was time to put on the hero pants even after saving a barge of men, his selfish acts of petty vengence against a trucker, and many others he saved as a silent guardian not once did he say to himself I could do more for earth. No he had to wait until his "Space-Dad" told him to do so. Even after he put the suit on and had his father say to him you were put on this earth to help mankind not once did he even attempt to help others in need, before Zod's arrivial forced him in that position. SO in that respect he didnt earn the suit nor the responsibilities of being a hero, nor acknowledged how much of a screw up he was or had been to himself or to others about the sudden weight on his shoulders is forcing him to change his ways. That's is damming to the character before he even begins.

As for Captain America's Avengers suit what exactly didnt you like about it? I and many others felt it was a perfect modernization of the classic red white and blue colors. While it wasnt like the classic costume, which no one was expecting, it had the needed armor look while still keeping the traditional look. It was the perfect example of how non armored characters should look in comic book adaptations.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 You realize how implausible that scenario is? With two kryptonians fighting each other it would be the same if you and I started trading blows. Either one of them would have been depleted in some form by the end of it. Also with their biologies the same Kal should have been able to bruise Zod at least which didnt happen. Kal's energy level would have been much greater so he should have been able to exert more power compared to Zod. The whole end fight defied even Superhero logics.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@DrakeJaeger Superman is a character EVERYONE knows and adores and for that reason he should have been well respected. This film was geared towards one audience and one audience only the tweens and 18-25 year olds, and after that first wave of moviegoers saw it, and moved on the die hards and older generation became exposed to it and tat's where your dwindling numbers come from. My father who is a huge Superman fan and has been collecting comics since the 1960's thought this film was an utter embarrassment to the character, much in the same way my grandfather thought of the Lone Ranger. There comes a point when you have to look at what you're doing and reflect if this is the right direction for a character that's touched so many. 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@ty19c @trans8010 Batman Begins had Star Wars and the memory of Batman and Robin as it's biggest obstacle. There was no way that film was ever gonna get any more money that summer because of those two factors. In the month of June there was nothing holding MOS back. Had they been proud of his superhero heritage this film would have made more. 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@CoreyV @trans8010 Imagine you pay for a ticket for MOS and you are so bored with the action sequences because all it is was deafening explosions, tedious punching that added no damage or fatique to the other characters. So, there became no point in contiuing on the fight that lasted 90 mins or so and the one thing you craved while watching it was Superman going out of his way to save people never once happened unless it was Lois, or one or two pilots. I'm sorry but I and many others found that equally as boring. I'm not saying that Superman cant punch anything but when that's all he does, it got boring!

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@VinceC Al Pacino's lack of exploration into the roles he's given tells me just how lazy he's become as an actor, and also explains his failure to bring about a box office success because of said lazyness, using that to defend your arguement shows just how misguided you are when it comes to film. Superman is more than just space aliens punching each other, there's a heart in him that was missing in this picture, and the film it's message, even the forced Christ parallels suffered because of it.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@VinceC Using Fast and the Furious is irrelevant because everyone knew what to expect from that film franchise. Superman has 75 + years of history and with that a wide fanbase spanning generations, those who went to see it opening weekend may have enjoyd it but there were some who didnt were very vocal about their dislikes and as a result spread the word, people obviously listened, with MOS's returns dwindling and dwindling. We are vocal cause we care. Using ASS and MUSCLE in your arguements may work for Fast and Furious but for Superman it's an entirely different entity one that should have been respected by the filmmakers.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@MichaelRTrice @jparlee321 @trans8010 In my honest opinion Batman is there to clean up a mess WB is not making the profit they projected on MOS so all the problems will be solved by just putting the Dark Knight Detective in there. That's another lazy fix. I expected a World's Finest film but not as a direct result of MOS. 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

It's been announced by the man himself Man of Steel will move forward but with one big addition BATMAN! Yes the upcoming sequel will feature the Dark Knight himself. So I'm holding no hopes for this franchise. Zack wants to focus on Superman's woes with killing Zod, and the reaction from the Twitter universe while continuing on with the Lois/Clark romance, while adding Lex Luthor and Batman. With all that and the audience's and therefore Warner heads' expectations of bigger action pieces, do you see the damn problems growing here? 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@marcel @trans8010 @MichaelRTrice @marc1913 Ummmm what does this have to do with ANYTHING I said in the previous comment. I said a real world Superman would not look as heroic with the Twitter and social media generation ragging on his faults more than his heroic deeds. CNN would show videos of him smashing through buildings and analysts commenting how much more of a threat he is compared to our nations common enemies. Snyder says they want to fit that into the sequel and I say how can they accomplish this? Considering how badly the story was written this time, how can they incorporate public reactions of the hero while telling a story they most likely want Lex Luthor and Metallo a part in?

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@CoreyV You cannot compare the average movie goer with that of the fanbase or those too wrapped up in social media. What we may find to be a more satisfactory ending as shown by HISHS may be a welcome surprise to others, because not everyone has seen that clip. As long as there is care to the plot, and exploration of the characters this could have been a box office phenomenon. We could see MOS making 14-17 million dollars in it's 5th week instead of the 7 it currently made.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Rogersjyg The world will always be in choas, that's why Superman has been relevant for 75 years. He was born at a time of the great depression, he was a beacon of hope for readers looking to escape in a fictional world of heroes fighting for the oppressed, and exposing scam artists, wife beaters, and other common forms of crime and corruption of the 30's and 40's. The 1950's had the world thrown into utter brink of nuclear annhilation with the cold war, Superman was still a champion of peace. It's even here his blue boy scout mentality developed. The publishers wanted the readers to know that the world could change for the better, and by following Superman's code you could too. The first film of the 1970's was in perhaps one of America's darkest times, Veitnam was still on everyones minds, the gas crisis, political scandal and economic woes had everyone down, Superman the Movie with it's optimism was a great escape and with one man's self sacrifice to save everyone, you came out of that film in awe. Today we are in the worst economic crisis since the 1930's, political corruption is at an all time high, and violence and murder across the nation seems to be the no. 1 priority for national news. The country is even more divided. I'm sorry but an optimist take on Superman the proper way with the boyscout mentality is the only logical approach for the character. The filmmakers were ashamed they were making a Superman picture and stripped away everything that made him 'super'.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@sefy76 @Rogersjyg That's exactly why we needed an optimist take on Superman! The world will always be in choas. 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@MichaelRTrice @marc1913 Well said. In the real world even if Superman did save us from Zod's attempted genocide, the acts Superman accomplished would be minor when compared to the acts of destruction he took apart in, thanks to the media. In 21st century America everyone has cell phones with cameras attached. With our addiction for social media, (this site included) we all have the rights and liberties to post videos about current events and voice our opinions. The media would play out only one scenario and that would be the one that's more liely to gain the better ratings. 

Look at the Trayvon case, self defense or murder that case was on every station, and it was on America's mind. The media's focus shaped our very opinions on the matter so much that when the verdict was read there was rioting. Who's to say CNN wouldnt have focused on only showing vids of Superman commiting Zod's murder or a ground view of Superman pushing Zod through a skyscraper and the debris falling down in it's news coverage. America would see this and the reaction would be split half for Superman as a savior and half for Superman as a menace no different from Zod. 

Funny though our views on this film seem to be the same. Half for it and half against it. This is why Superman cannot exist in a real cynical world.


1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Dannybohy @trans8010 @Another_Dude_Abides Or how Jor escpaes from Zod and the film immediately cuts to the action outside the council chambers. Seriously a transition shot of Jor running outside from his pov or the camera following him must have been boring to Zack. He must have filmed the script as it was without any clever manipulations that didnt involve explosions

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 That's like comparing ant hills to mole hills. Kal could have saved them and kept them in a suspended animation and when the time was right and earth's tech was advanced enough he could give them purpose. I'm sure by that time the earthlings would have responded better to the race and if they didnt Superman would have found a new hospitable home for them. That's what the geniuine article would do. Wanna know why? Superman prefers to see the goodness in all of humanity and would not cast out a collective if there were some bad apples. 

The film even talks about the preservation of life, in fact that's the main conflict. Zod wants to preserve Krypton and Kal earth. Really given the origins of the character in this film he should have been open to BOTH. Why? The symbol of the house of El stands for hope, hope for Krypton's survival. Originally Superman was that beacon of hope, Jor-El didnt want to have his son die, so he blasted him to earth. In this film Jor-El sent his son with the Codex integrated among his cells so he could preserve the heritage and the very essence of Krypton. With that said and with the chance to bring back Krypton via the embryos had Jor-El still been alive and saw what his son did destroying those living organisms because he simply didnt care about his homeworld would be the ultimate betrayal. Where's the logic in only saving one race when your being there with the codex clearly meant your family believes in the hope for Krypton's survival? It goes against everything Jor-El stood for.

It's never logical to destroy a species simply because of a few bad apples. Superman would take the chance and heck he did several times whenever he found evidence of kryptonian life. Superman hates the fact he's alone in this universe. He cannot fully connect to anyone via his powers and biology. If nature found a way for them to survive obviously that's a risk worth taking to revive them. To remove them out of fear goes against the very principals of Superman. Superman himself stands for two cultures, he wears the suit because he is from Krypton and the bright blue suit represents the hope that Krypton was, a planet of peace and tranquility, something humanity was striving for. His good nature and midwestern values were instilled by his human parentage. Superman pains for Krypton's lost and makes sure the same never befalls earth. 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Another_Dude_Abides @Dannybohy Even then the cut was horrendous we go from a sudden cut to a crab boat across choppy waters. From a moviegoers point of view this comes across as lazy filmmaking a much needed transition of Clark opening his eyes on the deck below as if he'd been dreaming the camera then follows him as he treks through the corridors of the ship up on deck and we see just where he is. That would have been so much better.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Rogersjyg @sefy76 @jparlee321 A kryptonian vessel was reconstituted as a bomb that would have destroyed any living being inside when detonated, if the bomb had not killed the kryptonians, being sucked out into the cold voids of space or another dimension with no other way out surely would have killed them eventually. Kal and the people of earth doomed their survival, and Jor who built the projector/vessel and who claimed to have been a guardian of his people who instilled his son with the codex as a way to preserve Krypton's people was perfectly all right with this plan as well or at least the A.I. was.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Gabadabba @sefy76 You dont need the codex to repopulate kryptonian life. The codex gave purpose to the fetus by instilling personality traits based on the decoding of the genetic materials by both parents. The only purpose the codex had on earth would have been to those living organisms in the scout ship. 

All Kal needs is a willing partner to concieve the old fashioned way, but as we all know it's impossible for Superman to concieve with an earthling, especially in a realistic approach such as this. Therefore the whole reason behind the codex was to bring Zod to earth to erupt a conflict.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 You fail to realize that embryos are in fact living organisms. They are without the consciousness the codex would have instilled but they are living nevertheless. Superman's body also ages slowly so who's to say a kryptonian's gestation period isnt 20,000 earth years?

Getting back to the codex and it's use on Krypton. The embryos were in fact created using the genetic materials from both parents as that's the only way it can be done anywhere! The codex only decodes the genetic makeup of each embryo and then dictates what exactly the life functions of that embryo is instilling whatever of the 6,000,000 cells it posesses. In Jor-El's case he was a scientist, and Zod was a warrior. The embryos cannot exist without any genetic coding by two donors. Therefore to clarify they are alive.

If the codex was to serve any purpose Superman could have saved the embryos and in a later film perhaps when our techology advances thanks to kryptonian science that we discover amongst the wreckage of the downed craft we then could decode and find a solution to bring back Kryptonian life. The movie not once asked this question and the codex became nothing more than a badly utilized macguffin.

"You destroy this ship, you destroy Krypton!"

"Krypton had it's chance!"

(proceeds to cut the ship in two using powerful focused beams of his heat vision)

How can you not read this and think Kal did anything but murder his own people? Zod warned him by destroying the ship all hope for Krypton was doomed and Kal simply didnt care his heritage was worthless to him and simply cast it aside, and slaughtered those aboard. The embryos could have been awaiting genetic decoding by the codex and were blank slates but alive or were simply in the gestation period. Either way you look at it Kal killed them.


1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Dannybohy @jparlee321 Why? Simple because the parallels Superman shares with the son of god was all the filmmakers wanted to focus on as his motive to become a hero, to save us from Zod. Was it logical? No. This priest has no knowlege on Zod nor his motives for coming to earth. All he could do was listen to Clark as he vented this frustration. Was it important to the plot? Again no. The same speech could have been given by Martha, or Lois or hell Space Dad Jor-El because those characters are essential.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 @sefy76 The codex will never be utilized in future stories so Superman did in fact commit genocide of the Kryptonian race. Even if so without any kryptonian tech to extract the cells from Superman's body the cells are just that cells. How can you not see this?


1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@sefy76 @trans8010 @jparlee321 Oh I wasnt directing this to you. I saw your comments and agreed with every single one. They're insightful and well thought out clever responses. My further elaborations were directed at jp. The comments thread works differently with an email sent to every responder not just the one the comment was directed at. I suppose I could have erased your screen name when I was typing down my comment.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@ranting_swede @jparlee321 I remember a Lois and Clark episode that actually parodies that notion. After Superman caught some thugs he's stopped by the police.

Metropolis Police Officer: "You didnt read them their miranda rights did you Superman?"

Superman: "No, I didnt. I never do, you guys ALWAYS do that. You cant let them walk out of here! I caught them in the act!

Police Officer: "Thats your word against theirs Im afraid Superman."

Superman: "What? They have guns and ski masks a-and..."

Police Officer: "The constitution allows them the right to bare arms and the last time I heard skiing was still legal."

FAA Agent Smithers: "Excuse me Superman, I'm Smithers with the FAA. Was that you flying overhead a few minutes ago?"

Superman: "Wuh-what? Yeah."

FAA Agent Smithers: "I need to see your license."

Superman: "My what?"

FAA Agent Smithers: "Your license... to fly. You do have one?"

Superman: "No, I dont."

IRS Agent Bower: "Superman, Agent Bower, I.R.S. We've been trying to contact you. We need your social security number."

Superman: "I don't have one."

IRS Agent Bower: "Everyone has a social security number."

Superman: "Well, I don't."

IRS Agent Bower: "I guess that explains why we can't locate any of your tax returns. It doesn't appear you've actually ever filed. That can't be, can it? Superman a tax dodger? Should we be looking under "S" for Super or "M" for Man?"

Emily Stevens: "Superman! Emily Stevens with immigration and naturalization. We just need a quick look at your green card."

Superman: "Green card?"

Emily Stevens: "You are an alien are you not?"

FAA Agent Smith: "Superman I'm afraid until we get this cleared up, I'm gonna have to ground you."

Now that poked fun at Superman if he lived in a cynical realistic world like ours, just imagine if those played out in MOS 2, oh boy!

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 @sefy76 A 62.3% drop is not doing great that's doing fair. MOS dropped from 1st in it's opening week to 3rd to 5th, to 7th and finally to 10th. It was popular for one weekend.


1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 You are missing the entire point of Superman. He's not supposed to be relatable he's supposed to be idolized looked up to, because his actions inspire those to do better themselves. He fights for the little guy not just the big space aliens. Superman is not just a powered up strongman he has a huge heart and is willing to do what's right and morally just. He's not about personal vendettas, or putting civilians in harms way. It's those morals and do good attitude that's exactly what we need in a world of turmoil.  

This isnt even the youngest Superman we've seen. Henry Cavill was 29 when cast and 30 when the film premiered. Superman's age is 33 in the film.

Christopher Reeve however was 24 when he was cast and 28 when the original film premiered. Lex even says that Krypton exploded in 1948 that would have made Superman 30.

Dean Cain was 27 when he was cast as Clark Kent in Lois and Clark: the New Adventures of Superman. The second season even had a time travel episode where Superman and Lois are sent back to 1966 to save him from a maniac bent on killing him which would make him the same age as his counterpart.



1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 @trans8010 No it's a cop out when the filmmakers clearly state that this Kal isnt the Superman we know because it's part one and additional characterization is reserved for sequels. That's pathetic on the filmmakers part. At the end of Batman Begins Bruce is Batman. We see him evolve through flashbacks as a scared child to a vindictive self destructive angry man and with guidance and training from Ra's becomes a confident, strong warrior who feels obligated to save Gotham and not destroy it as Ra's wishes. With Superman they went the opposite way and to say that was the point of part one is insulting for a superhero film.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 That's thin. I cannot look at an explanation by the filmmakers that was posted the day the film premiered and after all the contorversy broke out and take it as truth. It was damage control by WB to please fanboys. You want a naive Superman then write him as such. There was no moment of reflection for Kal after everything was done but a generic scream that could have just been written to excuse Kal for murdering Zod. An extended scene with his mother should have provided just how much he's learned from the experience, about how he needs to keep his powers in check.  It wasnt written anywhere that he learned anything. All we got was the fanfare as he walks up to the Daily Planet for a reporters job, that he probably got because one of the staffers was atomized. I understand that Clark needed to make mistakes as he becomes the hero but the movie never clarifies that he made any besides killing Zod. That's reckless.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Beyonder Wow just wow. Someone looked to far into the bad writing to see a political message. As for Zod he had a choice mate with Faora and the other females and the kryptonian race would once again flourish. I'm sorry but this planetary reshaping to fit Kryptons needs was completely unnecessary, since they would be like gods under earth's atmosphere and yellow sun.  However you're more than likely to pick this comment apart and find some other political agenda so why bother?

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Rollingfox39 Not only that but Superman throws away his own heritage by commiting near genocide of his people. In any comic besides the John Byrne era Superman would never EVER scream "Krypton had it's chance!" and destroy his past despite how disjointed the society had become.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@FrankieAddiego Problems with the film aside you wanna hear in detailed reasons why this film  was rejected by Purist Superman fans. Well here goes.

Superman doesnt work as a Christ figure. Jesus was sent to teach mankind to obey and follow the word of God and be kind unto others, and by doing this we would achieve an everlasting life. Jesus was also non violent aside form an outburst in a temple he was very passive and gentile. Superman is not a teacher he is a doer. Superman doesnt preach to mankind on how to solve their problems. His actions speak far more volumes. By saving cats out of trees helping old ladies cross streets or exposing corrupt politicians and foiling bank robberies and it's his actions he influences us to be better to achieve greater things and to become Super in our own right. Also you cant have a SuperChrist who allows his rocket to become a gigantic bomb, and snaps the neck of another. 

Superman is not a destiny it's a choice. Superman is who he is not because someone told him so, but because of the good morals of the Kents who raised him and the heritage of his parents of Krypton. Clark puts on the costume in tribute to them not because it was Kryptonian underwar. The Kents spent their lives holding him back instead of embracing his differences now realistically that's human nature to protect those you love but it's not of the Kents they were different from the other families and it's because of them Clark uses his abilities for good and not for selfish reasons. 

Superman shouldnt be running home to mommy every chance he gets. This one is a problem for older fans but for those that embrace the character's history it's understandable. Superman makes decisions he knows are right no matter if there's doubt by others its that quality that makes him Superman, he learned these as a kid in Smallville and uses that wisdom as an adult to help him in his adventures. To have someone there as a crutch makes him look like a wuss who cant solve anything on his own. It may humanize the character a bit but for Superman its unneccesary.

All this wussy emo stuff should have been taken care of in the adolecent stages of the film. Clark as an adult should have been confident in his abilities and we have the Kents to blame for this. As Superboy Clark was able to shed those self doubts and other insecurities so when he became Superman all he needed to do was kick ass take names and always assume he had made the right decisions. Instead the film treats his adolecense as this trainwreck of a life, with one depressing moment after another with lil to no joy or heartfelt talk that didnt end up with hide yourself the worlds not ready. Keeping true to the character, the Kents would have said "If you think no one is ready, well change their minds." So when this Superman does grow into adulthood he's so insecure about everything he makes the wrong decisions everytime. As a fan it's dispicable to see this happen, since he should have been over this depression with good parenting, he's 33 for crying out loud!

Superman proves to Zod he is right therefore the villain wins in the end. Superman kills Zod because Superman told him to. Has anyone ever thought of a lobotomy? Zod is using heat vision Clark has X-Ray vision simply use that and focus on the areas of the brain that seems to be using the most power and disconnect. No killing done and zod is stopped. It's a bit ruthless but it's slightly better than killing, or Freeze him use freeze breath for the first time (Jor is always telling him to test his limits you know, this could be one of those limits pushed.) The point is Superman always finds the alternative to any situation that includes the subject of killing, despite what happened in the past (the 1930's prototype, the 1980's iron age) it's always against character.

The supporting cast is worthless. Perry White a respected journalist that harkens back to the good ol days of news reporting, and always pushes for his employees to find great stories is now a pencil pusher who spends all his time acting like a dick rejecting proposals, suspending Lois for said rejection, and when it comes to helping out Jenny from a tight spot no one cares because he was given no time to interact with anyone outside of Lois who he was a dick to. Then there's the others Jenny, intern who speaks the obvious, the captain who speaks useless dialogue that amounts to nothing but cheap laughs, the Kents who speak in cookie cutter logic but have no character of their own, and there's Lois who is swept off her feet by a man who in actuality would scare the bejeezus out of her. There's no chemistry, no development of the relationship or character. Lois is an independent woman who kicks ass and takes names and then reports those names and simple dick jokes or discovering a spaceship do not make her a strong character. 

The majesty and wonder are replaced with explosions and horror. Now this was a huge problem simply because there was no need to do it. You want to show something huge on a global scale use one world engine and Superman's struggles to stop it as it pummels Metropolis, not fly him across the world to stop another one when it's revealed stopping one stops the other. so really what was the point here? You already have an army of superpowered kryptonians that can pummel Kal on their own that's a huge conflict the world engine was complete overkill anyway and that served no purpose other than "What if Superman was around during 9/11?" Smallville was completely destroyed and that was another avoidable occurance fly to a damn cornfield at this point they're after you not the townsfolk.

Why does Zod want to use the codex for the repopulation of Krypton when Faora and other females are present? At this point it's all about survival and those instincts override that of a lost culture he deemed to be corrupt anyhow. Wasnt that the point of his Insurrection, to rid Krypton of a corrupt morally bankrupt government? Why would a world engine be needed to terraform a planet then? If he had a personal disqust towards the act of sex well someone articulate that cause it's not in the damn film.



1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@CoreyV @trans8010 @AlexVidal The realistic tone of this film would prevent any such controlled evacuation as the city was hit. NYC has 8 million people and Chicago has 2. You are telling me every person was able to evacuate those buildings as the city was attacked? Geeze and you say I have a lack of understanding. The streets were clogged as choas ensued, there was no time for emergency response units to arrive, no disaster protocols would have been followed. elevators would be of no use the stairways all would have been clogged, and some would have stayed put to tape everything on their phones or would have panicked and stayed put. We already saw people in cars as they tried to escape the city in crowd reaction shots and others that were running from falling debris, so they were there.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@CCEkeke @jparlee321 @MichaelRTrice 

1.) Superman never used his powers in such a extent, this is true. Yet he was never surprised or relayed any other kind of emotional response after testing his limits. He stopped a world engine, and downed a vessel and there was nothing. He wasnt frightened or excited at such feats. To me that was a bit odd.

2.) Personally after given the whole you can save them all speech he saved one colonel, a gunner, a family of 4 and Lois from instant death while some burned alive or were crushed to death in smallville a battle he could have prevented by flying away. That's seven people.

3.) Reeve wasnt brainwashed, he had those wholesome values and selfless nature instilled upon him by his adopted father, he simply amassed 26 galaxies worth of information and education by Jor-El. If anything he was brainwashed by Crowe just as much, I sent you here to live your life with free will but..... I have a suit for you to wear as a symbol of hope so you can fulfill a destiny to save mankind. Uhhhh yeah.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@AlexVidal @trans8010 @CoreyV Hmmmmm so what your saying is by keeping the public away from Zod's line of sight and protecting them by focusing all his intentions on Zod, Superman instead decided to throw him into buildings that no doubt had a bunch of scared survivors hiding in possibly killing them as debris fell on them from above, or as the floors or ceilings collapsed on them from within, you had no problem with this? 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 Oh that reminds me that fight in smallville who knows how many died during that battle and all Superman had to do was fly away. The air force and the kryptonians were only after him so just fly out of town take the battle elsewhere. Seriously how did this not bother people? This film was supposed to be a gritty realistic take on the character as if he actually existed yet no one had a problem with such needless destruction either the characters in the film nor the audience. That's not what a superhero film nor a Superman film should ever have. 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Niall R The other thing that was missing, Supes didnt wrazzle that Polar bear. they must have really wanted to please the Peta people.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@CoreyV @trans8010 There could always be an attempt by Goyer to write a line of dialogue or have Superman attempt to fly down to stop the debris from hitting anyone if Zod catches him and throws him around that's something. What we got was nothing. Here's your sequence 

people on the street scared in their cars, Superman flies up the bulidings side as bait for Zod, feeding on his weakness Zod wildly punches at the structure pulling out massive pieces sending them falling down towards the paniced public. Superman flies down in an attempt to catch the rubble before they hit Zod anticipated his move and grabs him by the leg throwing him skyward. Superman angered has no other choice finishing the fight is his priority. 

Pretty much the same thing as what actually transpired. However that little added detail shows just how much the humans safety meant, even if it was hopeless he was going to try. Superman cares for all life not just a majority all life and if there's a chance to save them no matter how miniscule he will.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@FrankieAddiego @trans8010 @jparlee321 Yet when Metropolis was shown on radar screens as the world engine discended it was in the spot where New York is. So clearly Metropolis is New York, they used Chicago as the base because the actual island of Manhattan was overused in film adaptations. 

Mentioning 9/11 wasnt supposed to be deep or moving it's realistic account of the carnage Zod and Superman create as the city was attacked. Someone actually did the math. Sorry if you thought my being a purist which by the way has no basis in any arguement simply because there can be no such thing Superman is 75 years old with many eras and retellings of origins and first fights. So exactly what can I be a purist of? The defender of the innocent and repressed prototype of the 1930's? Or the fun and fantasy filled 50's and 60's where the big blue boy scout emerged? Can it be the modern 1980's or 90's when Clark was more focused and Superman the costumed identity? Or the New 52 version that seems to want to be a mix of every interpretation thats come before yet favors the golden age prototype in powers and character.

Or perhaps it's adaptations of the character in film and TV for which are numerous. The George Reeves version was a fighter bashing skulls and taking names while his Clark Kent viscously reported on gang activity in the Planet. The Chris Reeve interpretation that painted Superman as a christ like figure who had a deep vulnerability of a human being, while his Clark was an effective disquise or perhaps too effective ot be believable as the bumbling meek reporter, or Tom Welling the Superman going through puberty who has to tackle his growing powers and his social status? Dean Cain was a personal favorite of mine because he was Clark with home grown values persuing the love of another while fighting crime as Superman. 

So exactly which Superman am I a purist of then?

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@CoreyV If you knew there was debris falling on top of a person and you had all these powers the world now knows about would you think that maybe just maybe helping those in direct risk in front of you or at least trying would set a better example than ignoring him. That was my main focal point. It's impossible for Superman to save everybody  but he could have tried to help those directly in front of him or below him. That's what Superman does. He goes out of his way to save those in need even in battle, because if he can save them he will.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@FrankieAddiego @trans8010 @idol1506 @AlexVidal Oh boy here we go. Adventures of Superman 465, Hank Henshaw after suffering through massive radiation poisoning literally fell apart in front of Superman. Before he died he transfered his consciousness to that of a robotic body. However those were just memories data not the living self, Hank is dead. Superman knows this. He also knows that Hank transfered himself again to that of Superman's birthing matrix and shot itself into space. There could have been doubt in Superman's mind that Hank transferred his self once again to that of another component once this Superman copy was compromised which he did as revealed in Superman Hunter/Prey #1. With his computer brain now transfered the rubble comes across as just metal shards. Green Lantern scaned the area ture, but to scan for any lifesigns of the Cyborg but traces of Hank. The ring failed to do so and therefore Superman knew Cyborg wasnt gone forever.

Why do people assume I had a problem with Superman killing Zod? I had no problem with it upon multiple viewings, I had a problem with his lack of empathy during those battle scenes. Two very different things. I have Superman 22 and it's a very controversial tale that was heavily criticized in it's day almost as much as the Superman Porn issue. However it's not the first time he's killed either he killed Mxypltlk with the Phantom Zone projector as it tore the imp to shreds, there was also an issue where Superman allowed a gunman to fire a weapon on him that Supes knew would misfire and without warning the dude was killed. However my problem has never been has Superman killed my problem was and always is SHOULD he? In my opinion no he shouldnt. It happened and possibly the events will transpire in sequels to develop this Superman into that big blue boy scout. Who knows.


1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 I cant qualify that any human lives were lost? Really a film that was supposed to take Superman and ground him so deep in reality that anything that transpired would be believeable, would have New York errrr Metropolis completely eveacuated during the disaster. Okay have fun believing that one. The collateral damage alone would be higher than 9/11 tolls. I'm sorry but you seriously lost credibility there. The people were there even if they werent in the buildings they would have been on the streets running away and a city with 12 million or so people would not evacuate that fast.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@FrankieAddiego @trans8010 @AlexVidal Once again not helping your case by taking my words and offering commentary in such a negative. I disliked the film because it wasnt more than it was. I was expecting more. Also since you clearly cannot read anything other than my opinions I have stated time and again that I so dearly wanted to LOVE this film. I as excited with every trailer, but as I sat down I found myself betrayed by the filmmakers, I saw it twice once my "Superman doesnt kill EVER! phase faded, and I still found a film with so many missed opportunities and because you fail to see just why I wanted Superman to save more than two pilots, and Lois during the final two seiges it's because the character I know and love has a regard for all life he wouldnt just stare at a gas station fire or falling debris he would scoop up the people before the debris would hit them and put out the fire. You all keep saying bigger picture that he saved the entire world and only 2-3 million probably died. Superman even the one from the 1930's would never have accepted that. he's a complete picture kind of guy not just the bigger portion it's one of the things that makes him Superman. Origin or not that's a lazy way to write a movie, just to get the characters introduced but not really use them to their full potential.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@FrankieAddiego @idol1506 @trans8010 @AlexVidal Technically Hank Henshaw died a long time ago so Superman didnt exactly kill him, he destroyed a robot body, and much like Braniac the Cyborg Superman has imprints of his consciousness hidden all over the place, one of them was Doomsdays own body. 

By disliking the so called true fans with more heavy criticisms doesnt make you a bigger fan for liking a film either. Whatever point you tried to make is moot.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@AlexVidal @trans8010 @jparlee321 ahem the phantom zone doesnt kill people, yes. However a bomb that detonated inside the ship possibly could. It's quite possible given how Zod actually grieved for his people openly and how the Colonel acted "A good death is it's own reward." one could be led to believe that the kryptonians in the ship were killed. As for the genesis chamber, yes they were not alive but they were kryptonian dna that was preserved over centuries and given the tech that was supposed to be so advanced how could you not believe that any life could be given to them. 

I never said anything about the character in Iron Man 2 or 3, which I still believe Robert still anchored those films well and it's problems were with the scripts more than anything else. I guess you are one of those people that hated the bait and switch idea too. 

As for hating the film. I did not hate it. I liked it for what it was a generic blockbuster on par with Transformers except without the racist themes but it was not nearly a great film with the obvious flaws of character. You cant save a rig full of people willingly yet ignore a gas station fire or people from falling debris. The writers clearly ignored character there and actually regressed him. What I saw was someone who only cares about human life unless there's someone to fight and then it's every man for himself. Oh and before you go on to say there's no reason to believe that there were innocents in harms way, I should tell you how rediculous you are in saying that given how there were reaction shots of the crowd below and when Superman and Zod's fight was at street level there were scared citizens in the background running away from camera. Watch it again they're there.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@AlexVidal @trans8010 You do realize Superman II followed different rules right. Superman was a fantasy adventure focusing on the sci-fi elements when needed, for the origin and special effects. In that regard it is still a sci-fi film, because it uses sciences no matter how irrational to explain plot elements. With that in mind someone being lifted up so effortlessly onto a countertop and pushed with such force he slides across the room or having a chair spin so rediculously fast that in reality one would have been thrown from it is so fantastic that if you can believe no one looked at this guy and immediately shouted this guy is Superman then well you can buy that falling into a chasm that has no specific depth would render the person unharmed. 

You thought it was boring that's your opinion and I respect that. You are obviously someone who cannot stand to sit through a superhero picture unless there's an action beat every ten minutes or so. That's fine, I tend to think just the discovery of Superman and how the world reacted so positively to this symbol of peace and hope to be much more effective.

As for his origin, it doesnt matter if this is Superman begins, he should have reacted to the deaths of millions period. It was bad writing to interpret Kal-El as this uber powerful being who commits near genocide. The Kryptonians in the phantom zone probably died as a result of the craft's explosion and Kal mudered the rest when he sent the ship plummeting into the Atlantic. You see the genesis chamber shatter and the fetuses spill out, they have to be dead. I'm sorry but if he felt no pain for killing Kryptonian fetuses but felt an immense senstation for Zod how will this guy be Superman?

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 and here's the problem we have here. You cannot group the acting of MOS to those of Iron Man or Avengers films where the actors portray their characters so well I dont see Robert Downey Jr or Chris Evans on the screen I see Tony Stark and Captain Rogers. The passion those actors brought to their roles far exceeded my expectations of the character in that regard. they also had great directors used to ensamble casts, everything was in perfect balance. Henry Cavill filled out the suit nicely and Amy Adams looked like an attractive woman in a pants suit but that's all they were. No actor embodied the characters and that blame goes to Zack Snyder who felt that their "not like reading off the page" approach was good enough. 

This is Superman this film was never supposed to be grouped with the other comic book films. He's supposed to be the one that steps into the light rather than embrace darkness just because it's previlent in the current crop of hero spectacles. This was supposed to be the next watershed comic book adapatation. I wanted the world to be this dark place and SUperman be the one that brightens it. I was sorely let down in ways that have already been described. Superman became no more than a blood hungry power mad being, he's not the protector we deserve and watching him on the screen I became fearful for everyone's safety from him as well as Zod and his armada. 

In the end Superman was no different from Zod, that's where Michael was going at. You simply cannot have a Superman film where he's more concerned at beating up bad guys than saving innocent lives. It's one thing to show cookie cutter logic and message bestowed upon Clark in the flashback sequences but if he doesnt act upon that somewhere in the adult portions then what seperates him from Zod? Nothing the film paints them as two very similar people both willing to protect their people from genocide they're willing to kill for it. Superman actually commits genocide in this film the genesis chamber inside the ship is destroyed and along with it Krypton's race. Zod only attempts it. 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@AlexVidal The reason why it divided fans was because it focused more on telling an action story than a Superman one. This Superman was generic with lil to none of the traits that made him who he is. His symbolism with that of hope became muddled during that last fight and no I'm not talking about the snap heard round the world. I'm talking about his ill regard towards all life. To Superman all life not just the ones he can save is precious to him. There was a huge groan when I saw it as he landed in the crater that was Metropolis and did not weep or emote any grief. The Superman I know would have fell to his knees sobbed or just shed a tear and used that pain as his motivation to defeat Zod, had he just stopped and grieved before that final fight that impact of that break would be more justified. Had he put out that gas station fire, or save others from falling debris Zod threw down at the streets, I would have had no problem with this overly violent explosion porn.

The 1978 film was boring well that's your opinion. The rotating the earth bogus well it's was taken seriously but still had a majestic charm and wit to it so you were drawn in to the story it wasnt until years later with advanced sciences that people began to nitpick the ending. Lex stole two missiles and had one sent to New Jersey and the other to California yes it was near immpossible to catch both because he had yet to push his limits to see how fast he could go. When Lois died he pushed those limits to save her because it was that incentive that drove him to push harder and harder. Once again Zod did NOT die in Superman II he fell through a chasm under the fortress, there's deleted scenes with arctic police picking them up, that shows the intentions were not of death and suffering but to depower. The problem 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@bigman001 @Dull Wow really? I just read several Superman comics and not one has Superman throwing people through buildings, he was thrown through some by other baddies but he always made sure the publics safety was priority so he would move the battlefield elsewhere if he could, or he would save the citizens in peril before trading blows. This Superman was disjointed. He would save those off a burning platform, but wouldnt put out a gas station fire that could have had people inside, or save people from falling debris. By the last hour or so the whole damn film was all about explosion explosion explosion

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@donjack152 @championsguru @ChristopherLairdriver How about holding someone down and punching them several times in the face screaming "Dont you touch my mother!" You dont think that could be easily emulated?

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@D head Limited budget??????? The film cost 55 million dollars to produce thats a ton of cash for a film produced in 1977. Star Wars was produced for 11 million dollars in 1976 and that was considered a ton of money. 

Sucker Punch was terrible not because it was Zack Snyder but because there's not one redeeming quality in his script direction or character. All his females exist to be tortured, beaten, exploited and this shoot em up action are fantasies Babydoll creates to feel empowered but in the end she nor do any of the other female protagonists ever are nor display acts of heroism or empowerment and anyone who thinks that needs their heads examined. To even compare this with Sailor Moon just boggles my mind.

Superman the Movie is a better achievement because there were no computers everything was done using trick photography and insanely detailed modelwork look at the Krypton sequences again someone built that by hand and it's gorgeous! Hundreds of labor and man hours made that woderful alien looking model, unlike Krypton which by the way isnt as colorful or advanced looking as the Krypton in the comics is still imprssive only a few sets were actually produced and the rest were complete cgi. It looks impressive but since it's done via computer there's no magic of the experience. By using Crystals as memory retrieval brilliant. Why? We do that today all microchips and memory processors use quartz crystals in data storage now imagine hundreds of worlds spanning 28 known galaxies and a lifetime of earth's history in just a few crystals. Mindblowing! It's innovative details like these that make the film a timeless wonder not a dated 

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@jparlee321 Yet not as Superman, not while actually wearing the symbol. He's more worried about beating up Zod and his minions then to go out of his way to help people in need. As I said the film got lost in the action and completely forgot who Superman was at this point. Sure he saved those men and maybe defended a waitress at the Ihop but what about the citizens on the streets being crushed by debris, or putting out a gas station fire in Smallville thse should have been priority for someone who's father told him he can save them all.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@GeorgeCandice @trans8010 @Big GOAT Yet you cannot deny or refute anything I just said can you? Nope, face it there's more Donner influence in this reboot to keep it from being completely original. Now if you'll get off that high horse of yours you'll see it.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@GeorgeCandice @trans8010 @Joshcervera Superman's rights issue with the Seigels. Superman has to have movies coming out or on the production schedule to keep the heirs at bay from stealing the movie rights. There's a court case going on right now.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@GeorgeCandice @Big GOAT Donner's Superman was a reboot of sorts, technically Superman and the Mole Men was the first feature length film starring the man of steel. So he has some merit in comparing the two films. They both have smilar plotpoints, Jor-El sent Kal to earth to save mankind, he taught him about Krypton in the fortress, his arth father died when he was a teenager, some of the quotes are referenced though not word for word. Zod has a female commander and a mute strongman. Lois is probing the identity of Superman though in different ways and Superman first flies in the arctic circle. Also the biggest one the huge similarity Superman is viewed as a christ like figure in forced christ poses and the confessional sequence where the stained glass window is convienently placed in the shot to Superman's right side.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@GeorgeCandice @Joshcervera Considering Dark Knight's box office reign in 2008, Man of Steel's numbers should be worrying WB who still considers Superman DC's flagship character and the most recognizable of all superheroes. Had this movie retained those traits and shortened the action sequences a bit we would have a movie worthy of the Superman name.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Rogersjyg Once Superman shows the same compassion for life as shown in the Donner films and Superman Returns then I'll think of him as Superman. Also it's not officially said or shown Superman or Lois killed the Krypton outcasts in Superman II. They fell into a chasm, and for all intents and purposes simply fell beneath the fortress. The first rule of comic books and sci/fi horror films 


NO BODY NO DEATH

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Fingerkane Star Wars had wide universal acclaim during it's release in 1977. True the initial reviews from Los Angeles were bad but once the Vareity, Village Voice and Roger Ebert reviews were put out, as the film spread from region to region the film really exploded in critical praise. As for the character true aspects of the character have changed but one thing hasnt his compassion for life ALL LIFE not just Lois and a select few. This Superman not once cared for the safety of others nor weep for the lost souls of Metropolis, even the New 52 character shares the ideals morals and character of Superman.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@CediePrincipe No what made Superman the Movie a great script was the essence of the character his ideals and morals were kept, while making him vulnerable and human. The whole you can live among them but can never be one of them was impactful. The only thing that impacted this MOS film was the force of his punches and explosions. Superman in Superman: the Movie was also one who helped others no matter what the circumstance or small the job you got how much the world meant to him when he saves Air Force One or the school bus or rescuing a small cat in a tree and you wouldnt have seen Superman ignore a gas station fire or falling debris in the Donner films. The script for Man of Steel also suffers one major flaw. Superman was sent to earth to save the human race, yet when he indirectly set off a homing beacon (that AI Jor-El didnt think to turn off) that brought Zod to earth he sets things up for disaster. Had Kal-El not reached earth Zod would never have come. Superman never comes to grips with this nor does he feel responsible for the deaths of millions. I'm open to changes but this wasnt Superman and some bad polarizing writing. Heck you could argue that Zod spent 33 years searching for Kal and the ship's sensors picked up a Kryptonian lifeform on earth. This way Superman isnt at fault for Zod's arrival sine Zod was already in the galaxy searching.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply

@Fingerkane Had that been true baby Superman wouldnt have been launched in a rocket from a dying planet to earth. He wouldnt have a red cape, no blue suit, and no S emblazoned on his chest. There would be no Clark Kent identity nor would he be a reporter. Lois Lane wouldnt be used as a love interest nor would he have super strength, or leap long distances like he did very briefly in the film. Those are all aspects of the character the Seigels could own, which in my opinion is BS, because she had no hand in creating the character she wasnt even alive in 1938. What is she entitled to? The copyright battles only had minor influence in the film and that was to have it released by 2013. That's it. The red underwear is gone because Nolan, Snyder and WB wanted it gone. The origin was changed slightly because they didnt want to tell the Donner version and in typical Snyder fashion action packed.

1 year ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman

Reply