View Single Post
Old 09-23-2013, 01:39 PM   #68
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
No, sweetheart. That wasn't the only thing posed to Superman in Day of Doom, but thanks for playing. ;-) I have a link to all four books, if you need a refresher on it.
There's no need to be condescending.

Originally Posted by Tempest View Post
One of the reasons Day of Doom was written was because in the previous comics, not enough had been done to suggest that Superman even paused to think about all the death that had occurred.

This is why Day of Doom is relevant, both in the questions is poses and tries to answer, and how comics in general deal with death and destruction.
Yeah, but that was on Day of Doom. Not Man of Steel.

Originally Posted by Tempest View Post
MOS unfolded mostly from Clark's POV. So we the audience feel over-whelmed and breathless from the battles. Imagine then what Clark would be feeling in that moment.
I really don't think that was communicated by the movie, at least not very well. The movie was so disconnected from the reality of what was happening, in part because they didn't actually address the destruction, and instead focusing mostly on the spectacle of the action, that it was very hard to establish that kind of emotional connection with what was going on.

And, in any event, I would think that one of the things Clark would be feeling in that moment would be "oh my god, so much destruction and death, this is the most horrible thing I've ever seen." If the goal is for the audience to feel what he's feeling, that's more reason to address the carnage, not less.

Originally Posted by Tempest View Post
No, we didn't get a news report on the number of dead or injured. We didn't see Clark pulling people out of the rubble. I don't really see a need for it. What would be the point? To demonstrate that, what, he's a good guy? I mean, I don't get the obsession with the idea that the destruction had to be acknowledged.
Yes, to demonstrate he's a good guy. Because without that it feels like he isn't.

In addition, it's needed because that much destruction is a huge deal, and not addressing it rings very false. To have something that significant happen and then not have the characters or the movie actually address it is incredibly distracting.

To show something that horrible and not pay even the slightest bit of reverence to it feels fake, it feels hollow, it feels cynical, and frankly it feels more than a little offensive.

On top of all that, ignoring all of that destruction and loss of life lowers the stakes and the sense of tension. If the stakes of the conflict are the lives and safety of the human race, and yet the characters and movie breeze through destruction on an enormous scale and the deaths of hundreds of thousands like it ain't no thing, the audience is less inclined to care because the movie clearly doesn't.

Originally Posted by Tempest View Post
If we're going to fall back on comic book characterizations, in Day of Doom, Superman is totally self-absorbed at first about what happens. It doesn't even occur to him at first to look beyond his own death.

Time and again in comics, we see Superman sometimes be thoughtless, not because he's a jerk, but just because he sometimes misses things. It doesn't make him horrible -- on the contrary, it makes him more interesting, because those mistakes allow his character to grow and change.
That would be great if any of that were actually in the movie. But it's not. None of those ideas about Superman being thoughtless or making rookie mistakes were introduced in the film. None of his mistakes were acknowledged as mistakes.

Originally Posted by Tempest View Post
So I didn't expect or need MOS to do angst p0rn for us over the devastation of the battles. That isn't the story we were being told. We were being told the epic beginnings of our greatest modern fairy tale.
Addressing the destruction and "telling the epic beginnings of our greatest modern fairy tale" aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, they kind of go hand in hand. Without addressing the loss, the epic modern fairy tale is just loud dumb and kind of cynical. If what Superman is fighting for doesn't matter to the story, then it's not a very worthwhile story.

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

The Question is offline