View Single Post
Old 09-23-2013, 09:30 AM   #35
The Question
Objectivism doesn't work.
The Question's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hub City
Posts: 40,519
Default Re: David S. Goyer IS the Script Writer! - Part 1

Originally Posted by Tempest View Post
Why should they have dealt with the death and destruction at all?
Because when the hero of your movie barely reacts at all to the likely death of hundreds of thousands of innocent people it kind of makes him look like a sociopath.

And, from a broader narrative standpoint, when the movie doesn't actually address the horror of what happened, when you have characters standing around in the charred remains of the downtown area of an enormous city with all of the horror and tension of first responders standing around at a car crash where mild injuries were sustained, it rings false. That level of devastation isn't something you just shrug off, you have to acknowledge it. If the movie doesn't seem to be emotionally invested in something that serious and significant then it weakens the audience's emotional investment. Plus, if the movie doesn't really treat the carnage going on as that big of a deal, it kind of deflates the stakes and tension of the climax.

And I'm not asking for Superman to give some long winded eulogy for the lives lost at the end of the battle. That would be a little better because it would at least be trying, but it would still ring false. I'm talking about reaction shots of looks for horror on the hero's face. I'm talking about actually recognizing that civilians are dying in this attack. Show the efforts to evacuate the area, show the hero at least make a token effort to save innocent people who aren't his love interest, show characters reacting to the aftermath and being emotionally effected by what happened. Little things that address what's going on on screen and ground the movie emotionally. It may seem small but it goes a long way toward making a film feel more sincere and mature about it's subject matter.

I know people are probably sick of comparing Man of Steel to The Avengers, but I think it's worth comparing here. The final fight in The Avengers was handled much better. They did all of these little things to actually engage the seriousness of what was happening. They showed people reacting to the horror of the situation, they showed the toll it was taking on the common person, they showed the steps being taken to minimize the loss of civilian life, they showed the heroes rescuing people in the midst of the battle, and they showed the heroes actively concerned for the fate of civilians and clearly stated that keeping the fighting contained to the area that was being evacuated to minimize civilian loss of life was a very deliberate part of their strategy. By the end of the battle, everyone involved is physically and emotionally drained. They're tired, they're angry, they're defiant, and it's because they've been effected by the accumulation of everything that's gone on in the climax. Superman pretty much stays in the same place emotionally throughout the climax, and the only thing that seems to change his emotional state is when he's forced to kill Zod (which is then forgotten in the next scene).

Despite being lighter in tone, The Avengers is, in this regard, a lot more mature than Man of Steel. Man of Steel tried to be more mature by going dark, but failed to engage it's subject matter in a mature way.

Originally Posted by Tempest View Post
Have you ever read "Superman Day of Doom"? You really should.
I don't know, maybe? What is it?

Originally Posted by slumcat View Post
Take Sucker Punch. Snyder said it is a feminist female empowerment film. And the film is filled with young girls in scanty and tight fitting lingerie kicking ass with numerous cleavage shots and ass shots and crotch shots. He basically did for women here what he did for men in 300, painted a glorious almost fascist picture.
I'd argue that you can't really do that effectively, because the public perception of men and the public perception of women aren't equal.

Originally Posted by slumcat View Post
But he is a most interesting film-maker and a very different voice today. He is essential to cinema I would say.
Please elaborate.

The world does not work the way you think it does:

Last edited by The Question; 09-23-2013 at 09:40 AM.
The Question is offline