Originally Posted by Mjölnir
I agree. I really liked the movie but it looks and sounds like there were more of the good things to be had. Unfortunately I don't think there's any chance of seeing a different cut since they haven't done that before and the movie is supposed to work in a larger story, so it kind of has to be consistent.
I agree with this as well. Not only was it invulnerable beings fighting on and on without anything happening to them, they also avoided to break up the monotony with proper character elements, challenges or humor.
Superman is a very compassionate hero so it would have been so much better if Zod was the only one bent on death and destruction, and Superman instead did his best to try to save people and avoid destruction. He could have failed, because being compassionate is not being the most effective, but he'd be much more of a character for it and he would have a visible challenge instead of them both just being invulnerable and uncaring. Humor would have been too much to ask for since the entire movie takes itself very seriously (too seriously imo).
I could have done without some of Darcy's stuff but I'd sooner take that dynamic on top of the rest rather than none at all. I find the train scene brilliant. It fits with the plot and it's a great little wink to how everything works out just so right in most movies.
Not, really. MOS actually made you see the full horror of what Zod was doing and what the stakes were. Not making constant jokes while the world is freaking ending. No stupid comic-relief character making lame attempts at comedy while an entire city is on the brink of annihilation Also, Superman DID try and save people, by stopping the genocidal super-powered alien warlord. 99% of the destruction was done BEFORE Superman even got there, and 99% of the remaining destruction was done by Zod. So yes, MOS handled it's climax much better. Oh and there were actual consequences to that battle, unlike in TDW.