Harry Lennix Joins The Man of Steel

[Showtime]

I actually like how Battle: Los Angeles played the military vs alien invasion angle. You wonder if the military is going to get involved because of the arrival of Superman or the arrival of Zod and company.

[TheIncredibleSk]

His name is Clark Kent. He was raised on earth as CLARK KENT. So his name is Clark Kent. Why should his name be Kal-El on earth when he wasn't raised by that name. Him going as Kal-El would be disrespectful to the people who raised him.

[Kurosawa]

Originally Posted by TheIncredibleSk

His name is Clark Kent. He was raised on earth as CLARK KENT. So his name is Clark Kent. Why should his name be Kal-El on earth when he wasn't raised by that name. Him going as Kal-El would be disrespectful to the people who raised him.

Because the real Clark Kent died when the Kents died. What is left is the nebbish act Clark Kent.

[TheIncredibleSk]

Im good. I feel one of his parents should die and Clark Kent shouldn't die when they die. Thats stupid.

[AntMan]

Originally Posted by KyleDW2

But don't you see?! They're two movies! About comic book characters! With vaguely similar characters! Ripoff! Exclamation points!!!

I wouldn't really say that the similarities are that vague, but agree to disagree I guess. Anyway, hopefully they will surprise me with how they handle Sam Lane.

IF he's in the film.

[Kurosawa]

Originally Posted by TheIncredibleSk

Im good. I feel one of his parents should die and Clark Kent shouldn't die when they die. Thats stupid.

It wasn't stupid when they both died for the first 50 years of Superman's existence-the years when he was actually popular.

[KyleDW2]

Originally Posted by Kurosawa

It wasn't stupid when they both died for the first 50 years of Superman's existence-the years when he was actually popular.

Yes, it was stupid. No, you're still wrong about his popularity. Yes, WB is going to make a post-Crisis inspired Superman movie because they want it to be good. Lather, rinse, repeat, same arguments, etc.

[KyleDW2]

Originally Posted by AntMan

I wouldn't really say that the similarities are that vague, but agree to disagree I guess. Anyway, hopefully they will surprise me with how they handle Sam Lane.

IF he's in the film.

Actually, Thunderbolt and Sam Lane do have one key difference. Thunderbolt is reacting to something he had a hand in creating. He, in part, feels guilt over the existence of the Hulk and the damnation of Bruce Banner. Sam Lane, meanwhile, is responding to something completely unknown to him. He doesn't have to be evil in the movie, but the military going after an invincible super being, especially after a bad invincible super being shows up, is not that unrealistic.

[TheIncredibleSk]

Just because it was popular at one time doesn't make any less stupid. He was raised human not alien so he shouldn't give up his human side just because his parents die. That would a disservice to his parents.

[HighFivingMF]

Originally Posted by TheIncredibleSk

he shouldn't give up his human side just because his parents die.

Who said that?

[TheIncredibleSk]

Kuro

[Rowsdower!]

Originally Posted by I SEE SPIDEY

So just because this movie might have General Lane in it means that it's going to be ripping off the Hulk? Wow, I wish I could understand that huge leap in logic.

Well, General Lane is pretty much a rip-off of Thunderbolt Ross, so if he's in the movie, I don't know that it's any huge leap i logic to assume he'll act like himself.

As for the rest of the plot, who knows... but if Lane is hunting down Supes with a bunch of soldiers, that's going to feel a lot like the Hulk movies.

[AntMan]

Originally Posted by KyleDW2

Actually, Thunderbolt and Sam Lane do have one key difference. Thunderbolt is reacting to something he had a hand in creating. He, in part, feels guilt over the existence of the Hulk and the damnation of Bruce Banner. Sam Lane, meanwhile, is responding to something completely unknown to him. He doesn't have to be evil in the movie, but the military going after an invincible super being, especially after a bad invincible super being shows up, is not that unrealistic.

I never said it was unrealistic, but I just don't don't want to see the xenophobe military father who wants to lock up all the freaks. I would hope they play it differently. You do have a point about Ross feeling he's responsible for The Hulk.

[XEdge]

so another name added to the cast. and I guess this confirms some kind of military angle in the story.......

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Originally Posted by Rowsdower!

Well, General Lane is pretty much a rip-off of Thunderbolt Ross, so if he's in the movie, I don't know that it's any huge leap i logic to assume he'll act like himself.

As for the rest of the plot, who knows... but if Lane is hunting down Supes with a bunch of soldiers, that's going to feel a lot like the Hulk movies.

But Clark Kent/Superman isn't going to be on the run like Bruce Banner/Hulk is portrayed as being and we don't know how they would handle the story until we know what the story is exactly.

I'm sorry but I can't leap into calling The Man of Steel a rip off of two movies very few people cared about until I get proof.

[Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by I SEE SPIDEY

But Clark Kent/Superman isn't going to be on the run like Bruce Banner/Hulk is portrayed as being and we don't know how they would handle the story until we know what the story is exactly.

I'm sorry but I can't leap into calling The Man of Steel a rip off of two movies very few people cared about until I get proof.

Exactly. We don't even know if General Lane is even in this film. I don't think he is actually. General Zod, General Swanwick AND General Lane??

No reason to have all three.

[Kurosawa]

Originally Posted by TheIncredibleSk

Kuro

Nope, he doesn't lose his humanity but he does lose the only people that knew the real him. Now all that is left is Superman and the Clark that is an act.

[TheIncredibleSk]

If Clark is the act then he loses his humanity. He can't be Superman all the time and if Clark is the act then their is no human side. Also they weren't just the only people that knew the real him. What about Lana, Pete, etc. Those were his friends so im damned sure they knew the real him also.

[Kurosawa]

Originally Posted by TheIncredibleSk

If Clark is the act then he loses his humanity. He can't be Superman all the time and if Clark is the act then their is no human side. Also they weren't just the only people that knew the real him. What about Lana, Pete, etc. Those were his friends so im damned sure they knew the real him also.

Lana didn't know Pre-Crisis. Pete Ross knew but Superman didn't know that Pete knew Clark Kent was really Superman.

[herolee10]

Originally Posted by Kurosawa

Nope, he doesn't lose his humanity but he does lose the only people that knew the real him. Now all that is left is Superman and the Clark that is an act.

Aside from the crappy reboot that'll be taking place soon, prior before then, Lois (especially after marrying him) has KNOWN the real Clark as well.

And theoretically speaking, just because his parents die, doesn't mean that he can't bond with someone to the point where he allows that said person to know the real him. It's his choice.

Superman was the persona that was created for Clark to help others, not the other way around.

[Kurosawa]

Originally Posted by herolee10

Aside from the crappy reboot that'll be taking place soon, prior before then, Lois (especially after marrying him) has KNOWN the real Clark as well.

And theoretically speaking, just because his parents die, doesn't mean that he can't bond with someone to the point where he allows that said person to know the real him. It's his choice.

Superman was the persona that was created for Clark to help others, not the other way around.

I'm not opposed to the marriage in principle, but none of that stuff ever worked. The only person that knew his secrets Pre-Crisis was Batman (and later on the rest of the JLA), and they knew and considered him to be Superman/Kal-El, not "Clark Kent".

And Clark Kent was created by Superman to conceal his true identity. The real Clark Kent died when the Kents did.

[TheIncredibleSk]

Im not even a Smallville fan but Lana should know that Clark has powers.

[sf2]

love to know that military is involved in MOS.

we could see missiles, heavy machineries and weaponries...

mmm... it should be grand... action... scene...

love!!!

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by TheIncredibleSk

Just because it was popular at one time doesn't make any less stupid. He was raised human not alien so he shouldn't give up his human side just because his parents die. That would a disservice to his parents.

Exactly.
Look at it like an adoption: if/when a kid's foster parents die, s/he doesn't generally drop their last name (unless s/he hated their guts, of course, but n/a in the Kents' case).

[TheIncredibleSk]

Clark Kent created Superman to help people. Not the other way around. Clark came first so he should create Superman.