View Single Post
Old 11-11-2013, 09:18 AM   #35
May the Force Be With You
DarthSkywalker's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 81,578
Default Re: Comparing the movies Thor and Man of Steel

Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
Yes, I read it and I didn't think it changed anything.

Jor-El training to fight in his spare time and still kicking the living crap out of Zod, who is genetically designed to be part of the military, indicates that the genetic manipulation wasn't very effective.
Why do you think Jor-El didn't have combat as a part of his genetic manipulation? It would make sense for all Kryptonians to have these basic functions. After all, Jor-El had battle armor. Zod is a warrior. What separates him from Jor-El isn't his ability to throw a punch, but his state of mind and how he thinks. He thinks in a very militaristic way.

Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
And how is Jor-El part of the problem on an intellectual level? He's identified the problems and he obviously has free will because he decides to act against the laws and culture of his planet. With all the right things Jor-El does it seems like his flaws must be really minor, which means that he should be able to live somewhere else without dooming the place. My point is that it's not enough to tell us how something is if they only ever show the other side.
What you are missing, is he isn't doing that. He is very much working within his culture's framework, just like Zod and the Council. He was breed to think the way he does, and it is why he comes to the conclusion that he does. It is a clean cut. The end of the corrupted Krypton.

It is pretty simple really.

Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
As for having flaws on a genetic level, their genes are passed on to Kal-El so the natural birth wouldn't make him any different from them. They can't pass on genes they don't have, unless they also manipulate the genes of their son.
I am not sure what this is reference to. The problem is how they think, what they represent, not their genetic material.

Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
That comment is also taken out of context. I said that the movie continuously chooses to go with something that makes Clark/Superman more negative than he needs to in my opinion. For him to choose not to save his father isn't sympathetic to me, regardless of the reason. Especially with the timing of the scene as he seemingly had time to act earlier. The Smallville part is just one of several points where they have him have a less than heroic aspect to his actions. I get why it happens but my point is the intent of the writers. Even when making him do that they could have had him reflect on that he put others in danger and he could have put that thought to use in the Metropolis fight. It doesn't matter if he succeeds, the intent is the important part there.
I don't see how these things are "negative". It isn't like Clark decides to not save his father. He is going to do it, and his father makes him pause. By the time Clark comprehends what he is being told, it is too late. There is no decision to be made. Pa Kent can't be saved.

Clark clearly reflects the danger he puts others in. He goes and sees a priest about it. He pauses before making the decision to destroy the scout ship.He goes out of his way to save two soldiers in the middle of battle with two Kryptonians. He breaks Zod's neck because of it.

It is very present.

"I've been running scams on the street since I was ten. I was kicked out of the flight academy for having a mind of my own. I'm going be a pilot. Best in the galaxy."
DarthSkywalker is offline   Reply With Quote