The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > Superman > Man of Steel

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-23-2013, 03:31 PM   #626
PacificBoy
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,222
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Pleasury View Post
It would have been great and proper to have witnessed that moment in which Pa Kent's death had a consequence in Clark. For all they showed and explained, it's unbelievable they didn't show how come Clark started helping people after all the fuzz - suicide included - Pa Kent did to stop him to do exactly that.
Yeah, I'm trying to fully understand Pa Kent's sacrifice. Cos the world is as ready as it is in 2013 as it was when Clark was a kid -- some will fear him, some will accept him, some will distrust. Some will even worship him.

Just as the Kents accepted Clark into their family with little hesitation, so did Lois in the present.

PacificBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 04:48 PM   #627
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 16,496
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Question View Post
That's not an arc. An arc involves escalation. It involves rising and falling tension. It involves changes in the conflict. Their fight scene had one steady tone and one steady pace the whole way through until the very end.
This is an arc


Yes or no, was the tension raised when Zod revealed he could fly? If you say no, that's interesting, if you say yes, you have joined the the battle against detractors welcome aboard.
Quote:
Except the film did not demonstrate that the fight was becoming more desperate to the hero. Superman and Zod both still went through the fight relatively unharmed and on equal footing.
The longer the fight goes on in a populated city that the hero has demonstrated he wants to save, the more desperate the situation. Zod becoming more powerful, the more desperate the hero becomes...
Both combatants were harmed, zod dead superman blacked out for a beat. I'd say that's more harm done than when Cap fought Red Skull.
When neo fought smith in the subway, he took shots to the face and shook them off, they still hurt. The exact same thing happened here on multiple occasions, there was just no blood from mouth wiping.

Quote:
Yes it does. There's no sign that the fights are taking any kind of toll on him. There's no real sense that he might lose.
We will all draw our own conclusions I guess.
Quote:
And then he gets back up and he's fine, no worse for the wear.
Tell that to Doc Ock. Or bane. Or even spidey after having his his invulnerability tested as it is every time he receives several blows in spidey2 then promptly get's back to bouncing around. There is something to be said for shaking it off.
Superman, going down and staying down conveys the point in my opinion. Him fighting on while holding his gut and limping isn't needed.

Quote:
What people? People we never meet or are given a reason to care about?

Not once does Superman show concern for the people of Metropolis during that fight, not until the very end. We don't even SEE any civilians at all during the fight until the very end. Having civilians and Superman attempting to save them and Zod attacking them directly would have generated that kind of pathos and those kids of stakes. In the fight scene we got the film completely ignores the realities of civilians and civilian casualties until the very end, so how is that supposed to raise the stakes of the fight?
Yes those people. It's a city full of people that needs saving, if you need to care about each and every one(more than the ones you already met), that says more about you than it does the story telling I think. When spidey saved that trolly full of nameless kids faces I felt concern, just as when he saved a populated new york from the lizard. Moreover it's because that city was in immediate danger that I felt increased tension, again put that fight in a desert and it's different.

This is precisely why there is tension in the simple fact that batman needs to get a bomb out of a city of a hand full of familiar faces as the clock winds down. With superman it's a city and a planet with a hand full of familiar faces.

You keep saying he not once shows concern but that somewhat flies in the face of his actions doesn't it. Unless you mean to suggest he is fighting for some other purpose, such as glory or something.

Quote:
I have, and yet I still do. Maybe it's because there isn't that much there besides what we bring to it.
I guess we'll just have to wait till the footage get's released and we can have a more informed discussion about this. I hear they kept punching each other in a one note fight.
A fight that involved flying and space, shifting dominance and introduced new power sets....and ended with a real heart breaking decision. I just don't see it as one note. I mean there were kicks too

Quote:
It's not mid fight. It's at the very end of the fight. I'm saying that the fight could have benefited from this throughout it's run. Sticking it on the end doesn't making everything that came before it retroactively compelling.

I'm not ignoring this. I have never ignored this. Please stop saying that I'm ignoring this. In what way am I ignoring this? My whole point has always been that there's a long stretch where stuff like that is noticeably absent.
I see now, so when you were saying that all the fight needed was one civilian life saved and it would have made all the difference(see our other debates), you didn't simply mean the fight needed that you meant it needed that earlier. Thanks for clarifying.

Superman saving a life makes the ordeal compelling in a way yes, but saving a life isn't like adding stakes. If the fight was all in good fun till the very end where zod said I'm going to take the world down. I would agree that adding stakes at the end doesn't retroactively make a fight engaging. However if you keep telling me that superman showed no regard for human life when he fought and that's why the film fails and I say he does show this regard constantly, just not in a stop and catch sort of way. It being there, beginning or end doesn't matter. The character cared, it's in his characterization and it informs every decision he made prior to. Walking away one can appreciate this. It's like finding out "so he in fact loved her the entire movie.." trope.

For example when you asserted that didn't he try to move the fight. I proved earlier that he did try and because of that train station, you should now are informed enough to understand the claim. Superman never stopped caring about human life, he just never got a chance to show you in that situation(more than he did anyways).

Quote:
You say that you don't get how saving faceless people improves a Superman fight, and yet you say that the desperation and tension of the fight escalates because Zod is a threat to civilians who we never see until the tail end. Adding that element would have added a face and a humanity to the tension.
Humanity already has a face, your asking for something more.
And my question isn't so much how it improves a superman fight but why it is needed to improve one. Batman fighting two villains at a time might "improve" a fight of his but that doesn't take away from the one's he is having in these films, that's my point.
Now imagine batman was coming from a place where in the comics he always fought two on one, and all of a sudden in his films he's fighting one on one. And people said his film fights left much to be desired. I would be equally suspicious of them.

Quote:
And the reason it's different for Batman is because Batman and Superman are different characters and Bane and Zod are different characters and the contexts are different. Genre movies aren't these modular things where you can swap elements in and out between two films and everything works out the same, every story requires a different approach based on it's characters and the structure of the narrative and the world the story takes place in.
The context may change but your understand as a logical person shouldn't. It's why superman didn't stop to save any lives during his fight with doomsday. Not because he didn't stop being superman or stopped caring. Do you see leap we are making? Superman fighting intergang with weapons is one thing I expect a certain style of fighting there, this is different.

I'm thinking the reason for this is something else, something more in line of 40 years of preconceived ideas of how superman fights. Which leads people to sub consciously needs checks and balances met for them to not feel off put. Like our friend here talking about superman not stopping the truck that served as literally nothing more than a distraction and fire, made him feel odd as an audience. Well of course superman would catch it. This isn't a matter of what does a hero do, but what does superman usually do. Preconceived notions help and hurts things. It's a scary thought as a film maker.
If thor hopped over that truck would any one have been the wiser? It Doubt there would be all that much debate about what was going on, but superman has a way about him in literature and film. It hurts the analysis of the here and now, and in the end is hurting people digest something they themselves paid good money for.

That's what I'm getting at. Why does superman need to be doing that to improve his fights, it's not something that fights generally need, powered up or not. "Because he's superman?" His fights need it, his fight needs it or the hero probably doesn't even care(even though he's technically fighting for all of them).

Quote:
The reason Batman saving civilians during his fight with Bane is is unnecessary because the scale of their fight is different and the nature of his opponent is different. They're not flying around at high speed, they can't lift superhuman weights and they don't have lightening fast reflexes. They're two dudes punching each other during a gang brawl outside of city hall. They're ability to move around and do things is limited by their very nature. Also, during that fight, Bane only poses a direct physical threat to Batman. Sure, he's the leader of the League of Shadows and his goons are ****ing stuff up, but in that moment he personally can only really hurt Batman. The whole notion of Zod as a threat is that he, personally, as an individual, can exterminate the population of Metropolis if Superman doesn't stop him. Actually involving the population of Metropolis in that conflict throughout the fight makes that threat tangible.
I see what you are saying, however the minute batman starts flying around and shooting missiles in a city, the scale changes. However your requirement of his approach is still the same. He can shoot missiles around a city because there is bomb he needs to stop to save millions. Don't see why this isn't being said about superman how isn't shooting anything anywhere but trying to grapple the bomb in question.

I also try and have an objective appreciation for the situation as pragmatic as that may be. If you put bane and batman in a china shop and each cup and dish and window represents the equivalent amount of civilian damage. I don't expect any better of batman than I did when bane first kicked his ass. And I expect alot of broken dishes, the alternative being an out and out loss. I simply don't expect any different from superman, 40 years of film be damned. He always simply does his best.


Quote:
I'd say it succeeded by quite a bit more.
I suppose that's a debate for another day then.

Quote:
It's a pretty cheap rhetorical tactic to imply that people only dislike a director you like because of an irrational bias. I mean, that doesn't even make a whole lot of sense. Who dislikes a director for absolutely no reason?
Sure I guess.
Who? Tasha Robinson has expressed such thoughts for one, an adamant Zack Snyder non fan, professional film journalist and critic. Then we have Armond White who does similar. It happens.

My point was that bat pod deployment was self indulgent fluff if you will. Whatever reasoning you have to forgive it, that's fine.

__________________
1992's Universal soldier is my favorite Wolverine vs Sabretooth movie.
Marvin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 04:58 PM   #628
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 16,496
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
I gotta disagree man. In what way was Superman killing Zod meat? What I mean is, what purpose did it serve? How did it relate to what the story was about? How did it relate to anything? What of the movie's themes did it actually convey? What did it say and what was it saying things about? How did it effect the rest of the film? How did it change Superman as a person and how did that change carry through with the rest of the film? This all boils down to two questions, really:

What was the point of it?

What did you actually get out of it?


And that leads me to ask another question, the big question that I ask of every work of fiction I see:

What was this movie about? And try to answer that question without naming any characters or describing the plot. What was this movie about thematically? And how did it reflect that in every scene?


I don't think Man of Steel has any meat. I think it has a lot of serious scenes where people are conflicted and upset, but I don't think any of them really say anything about anything and I don't think they have a cohesive point.
I assume this is Zod's death you are asking about..

One of superman's most prominent themes is that of being alone. Last son of krypton and all that. I would argue that Killing his last remaining kin fulfills that premise and doing so by his own hand solidifies his choice in humanity, over all else. He will always choose humanity.

I highlight choose because the first frame of the film dramatizes a natural birth and all it signifies to the test tube baby culture he is born into. One that represents the societal logical end point of removing choice from existences by way of the often used genetic manipulation theme/trope. A thought echoed by both of his fathers during the course of the film. Zod gives him a final choice and it's not one he enjoys but struggles to make, its' a great payoff to place this as the technical resolution to the conflict.
The killing itself is justified by the damage done in the battle, like many a revenge flick, the audience isn't satisfied till killers and rapists get what's coming to them or rather a harsh end to the killers is justified by their earlier brutality towards the innocent.
It also sets up for great character examination going forward.

As for what I personally get out of it, dramatic fulfillment and bold direction. A refreshing dramatization of the modern hero's condition. On two fronts. One, always seeing the good guy given a back door isn't as filling to me as seeing a hero actually have to make an follow through on a choice. How many times do I need to see spiderman catch the kids and save the girl before choice means absolutely nothing at all?
Secondly, seeing heroes kill with no moral weight is grating to me(see batman and ironman films). In this film there is a weight on the character, and on one the audience, given how many people were talking about how they felt about it.

Lastly, it's given me a moment to self reflect, is our gov't killing bad guys and saving lives actually something I endorse or does it bother me, is the greater good any better than just the good. This has gotten me asking questions such as this. Alot more that that ironman ilk.
For me a film that makes you ask questions and debate real world dilemma is very purposeful. It's also why I like TDK.

__________________
1992's Universal soldier is my favorite Wolverine vs Sabretooth movie.
Marvin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 05:30 PM   #629
The Question
Objectivism doesn't work.
 
The Question's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hub City
Posts: 39,162
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
This is an arc


Yes or no, was the tension raised when Zod revealed he could fly?
No.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
If you say no, that's interesting, if you say yes, you have joined the the battle against detractors welcome aboard.
Why do you view it as a battle?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
The longer the fight goes on in a populated city that the hero has demonstrated he wants to save, the more desperate the situation. Zod becoming more powerful, the more desperate the hero becomes...
At no point did it seem like Zod becoming more powerful was making things harder for Superman. He was struggling just as much against Zod before as he was after.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Tell that to Doc Ock. Or bane.
They're the villains, the tension isn't with the threat of their losing it's with the threat of their victory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Or even spidey after having his his invulnerability tested as it is every time he receives several blows in spidey2 then promptly get's back to bouncing around. There is something to be said for shaking it off.
Spider-Man got progressively more tired and injured over the course of his fights in the first two Sam Raimi movies. That's not simply shaking it off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Superman, going down and staying down conveys the point in my opinion. Him fighting on while holding his gut and limping isn't needed.
But he didn't stay down. He got back up and was completely unfazed. Showing actual signs of injury conveys the possibility that he might lose, showing him shrugging off titanic blows like they're nothing deflates the tension.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Yes those people. It's a city full of people that needs saving, if you need to care about each and every one(more than the ones you already met), that says more about you than it does the story telling I think. When spidey saved that trolly full of nameless kids faces I felt concern, just as when he saved a populated new york from the lizard. Moreover it's because that city was in immediate danger that I felt increased tension, again put that fight in a desert and it's different.
Here's the thing: The movie isn't real. It's pretend. I go into the movie knowing this. It's the movie's job to make me forget that. Simply having the city be in danger and expecting me to care doesn't work, because the logical part of my brain knows that it's not really happening. It needs to ad some kind of human element for me to get invested.

The scene in Spider-Man 1 is actually an example that proves my point, not yours. That scene takes it's time to show the kids in danger, to show their fear, and it creates an enormous amount of tension by making it seem entirely possible that Spider-Man will fail to save them and draws out that uncertainty for just the right amount of time. Neither of these things happen in Man of Steel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
This is precisely why there is tension in the simple fact that batman needs to get a bomb out of a city of a hand full of familiar faces as the clock winds down. With superman it's a city and a planet with a hand full of familiar faces.
The Dark Knight Trilogy spent three films getting us to care about Gotham city and the people who lived in it. It established Batman's very personal connection to the city and why he was emotionally invested in keeping it safe. By that point the city had become a character in it's own right. That's why we care. None of that is the case with Metropolis in Man of Steel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
You keep saying he not once shows concern but that somewhat flies in the face of his actions doesn't it. Unless you mean to suggest he is fighting for some other purpose, such as glory or something.
That's not what I mean. I've made it very very clear what I mean. Buildings blow up around him and he doesn't show concern that there might be people inside. The only thing he's concerned with is the completely evenly matched fight he's having with Zod. Yes, it's because Zod wants to destroy the city, but it's hard to build an emotional investment onto what is actually displayed on screen. We don't see caring, we see two dudes punching.

I've made it clear that at no point have I been commenting on any interpretation of Superman's motivations, I've been commenting on how that scene failed to convey it's information effectively.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I guess we'll just have to wait till the footage get's released and we can have a more informed discussion about this. I hear they kept punching each other in a one note fight.
A fight that involved flying and space, shifting dominance and introduced new power sets....and ended with a real heart breaking decision. I just don't see it as one note. I mean there were kicks too
There was no shifting dominance. The new power sets didn't effect anything. They were just as evenly matched when the fight started as when it ended.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Superman saving a life makes the ordeal compelling in a way yes, but saving a life isn't like adding stakes. If the fight was all in good fun till the very end where zod said I'm going to take the world down. I would agree that adding stakes at the end doesn't retroactively make a fight engaging. However if you keep telling me that superman showed no regard for human life when he fought and that's why the film fails and I say he does show this regard constantly, just not in a stop and catch sort of way. It being there, beginning or end doesn't matter. The character cared, it's in his characterization and it informs every decision he made prior to.
But the stop and catch sort of way is the effective way to show that he cares, because it makes what he's fighting for real. Fighting for the lives of the city of Metropolis when we barely see anyone in Metropolis is abstract. Seeing the actual threat Zod poses to the civilian population, showing him attack them, showing Superman try to save people from debris knocked over by Zod, even showing him try and fail at one point, that would have made the threat Zod poses infinitely more real to the audience and it would have made Superman seem even more sympathetic. It would have enhanced the fight scene in so many ways and it would have detracted nothing from it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
For example when you asserted that didn't he try to move the fight. I proved earlier that he did try and because of that train station, you should now are informed enough to understand the claim. Superman never stopped caring about human life, he just never got a chance to show you in that situation(more than he did anyways).
And the movie would have been better if he got a chance to show it in that situation. That's my point. If he doesn't get a chance to show it, we don't get a chance to feel it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Humanity already has a face, your asking for something more.
And my question isn't so much how it improves a superman fight but why it is needed to improve one. Batman fighting two villains at a time might "improve" a fight of his but that doesn't take away from the one's he is having in these films, that's my point.
Now imagine batman was coming from a place where in the comics he always fought two on one, and all of a sudden in his films he's fighting one on one. And people said his film fights left much to be desired. I would be equally suspicious of them.
That's really not the reason. I explained above why including more of a human element in the fight scene would have enhanced the fight.

Although, that raises a point: Have you ever thought that maybe the reason Superman traditionally fights that way is because it's the better way to portray the character because it brings the narrative strengths I mentioned above?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
The context may change but your understand as a logical person shouldn't.
Yes it should. It absolutely should. Why shouldn't it? If the context is different, that means there are different factors you have to take into account when assessing the situation. There's nothing logical about applying the same rigid standards to every situation regardless of context.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I'm thinking the reason for this is something else, something more in line of 40 years of preconceived ideas of how superman fights. Which leads people to sub consciously needs checks and balances met for them to not feel off put. Like our friend here talking about superman not stopping the truck that served as literally nothing more than a distraction and fire, made him feel odd as an audience. Well of course superman would catch it. This isn't a matter of what does a hero do, but what does superman usually do. Preconceived notions help and hurts things. It's a scary thought as a film maker.
If thor hopped over that truck would any one have been the wiser? It Doubt there would be all that much debate about what was going on, but superman has a way about him in literature and film. It hurts the analysis of the here and now, and in the end is hurting people digest something they themselves paid good money for.
He said that the reason the truck thing made him uncomfortable is because it crashed into and blew up a building that probably had people in it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
That's what I'm getting at. Why does superman need to be doing that to improve his fights, it's not something that fights generally need, powered up or not. "Because he's superman?" His fights need it, his fight needs it or the hero probably doesn't even care(even though he's technically fighting for all of them).
This fight needed it because it would have made the conflict and the stakes tangible and human as opposed to abstract.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I see what you are saying, however the minute batman starts flying around and shooting missiles in a city, the scale changes. However your requirement of his approach is still the same. He can shoot missiles around a city because there is bomb he needs to stop to save millions. Don't see why this isn't being said about superman how isn't shooting anything anywhere but trying to grapple the bomb in question.
It's still different. Batman doesn't have super speed, he can't just get out of his plane and save people during that chase seen the way Superman would be able to.

And, on a more narrative level, as I said, the audience's emotional investment in Gotham City had already been well established by that point. We'd gotten to know it's people and it's culture in Begins, we'd watched an ideological battle for it's soul in The Dark Knight, and we watched it's downfall and the human toll that took in Rises. We already cared about what happened to it, so the stakes were well established in that chase seen.

We didn't have that with Metropolis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I also try and have an objective appreciation for the situation as pragmatic as that may be. If you put bane and batman in a china shop and each cup and dish and window represents the equivalent amount of civilian damage. I don't expect any better of batman than I did when bane first kicked his ass. And I expect alot of broken dishes, the alternative being an out and out loss. I simply don't expect any different from superman, 40 years of film be damned. He always simply does his best.
Here's the problem we're having in this dialogue:

You're talking from a purely logical standpoint. Does Superman's fight with Zod make sense on a logical level? Yes? Good.

I'm talking about how effectively the film communicated it's information and themes to the audience. The fight sequence feels cold and tensionless because the film fails to emotionally engage the audience in it and to address the human element of what's going on, in favor of focusing on the spectacle of the fight. I'm not talking about what Superman should have done differently in those circumstances, I'm talking about how those circumstances, including but not limited to Superman's actions, could have been written in a way that was more effective.

__________________
VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Last edited by The Question; 07-23-2013 at 07:44 PM.
The Question is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 06:56 PM   #630
PacificBoy
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,222
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I'm thinking the reason for this is something else, something more in line of 40 years of preconceived ideas of how superman fights. Which leads people to sub consciously needs checks and balances met for them to not feel off put. Like our friend here talking about superman not stopping the truck that served as literally nothing more than a distraction and fire, made him feel odd as an audience. Well of course superman would catch it. This isn't a matter of what does a hero do, but what does superman usually do. Preconceived notions help and hurts things. It's a scary thought as a film maker.
If thor hopped over that truck would any one have been the wiser? It Doubt there would be all that much debate about what was going on, but superman has a way about him in literature and film. It hurts the analysis of the here and now, and in the end is hurting people digest something they themselves paid good money for.
I can see you're obviously clued in and know more about cinema and comics than me, and while I may not agree with all of your points, I appreciate them because they're an informative read. I enjoy my popcorn movies and the occasional indies. I'm a casual comic reader who is unable to cite any volume or issue or page to recall a comic moment; I'm as casual as they come.

So I'm reporting my feelings to MoS pretty much as a general member of the audience would. I know (and love) my Donner films, but trust me when I say I didn't bring any "40 years of preconceived ideas of how superman fights" into the theatre as I watched the movie.

re the truck scene. I would have been equally disconcerted if Thor, Thor-El or whoever is the titular character, glided over the tanker as it erupted in a fiery ball of devastation behind him, where innocents are clearly shown to be about.

Not stopping the tanker, when he could, is problematic to me because it is a matter of what a hero does in MoS. And Clark is a hero, isn't he? It's established in the beginning that his first instinct is to save lives at his own expense.

In your words, the character cared, it's in his characterization and it informs every decision he made prior to. Shouldn't his decision, then, with the incoming tanker, be in character, to show that he cares that an explosion caused by letting the tanker go past him might hurt people?


Last edited by PacificBoy; 07-23-2013 at 07:14 PM.
PacificBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 07:24 PM   #631
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 16,496
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by PacificBoy View Post
I can see you're obviously clued in and know more about cinema and comics than me, and while I may not agree with all of your points, I appreciate them because they're an informative read. I enjoy my popcorn movies and the occasional indies. I'm a casual comic reader who is unable to cite any volume or issue or page to recall a comic moment; I'm as casual as they come.

So I'm reporting my feelings to MoS pretty much as a general member of the audience would. I know (and love) my Donner films, but trust me when I say I didn't bring any "40 years of preconceived ideas of how superman fights" into the theatre as I watched the movie.

re the truck scene. I would have been equally disconcerted if Thor, Thor-El or whoever is the titular character, glided over the tanker as it erupted in a fiery ball of devastation behind him, where innocents are clearly shown to be about.

Not stopping the tanker, when he could, is problematic to me because it is a matter of what a hero does in MoS. And Clark is a hero, isn't he? It's established in the beginning that his first instinct is to save lives at his own expense.

In your words, the character cared, it's in his characterization and it informs every decision he made prior to. Shouldn't his decision, then, with the incoming tanker, be in character, to show that he cares that the explosion caused by letting the tanker go past him might hurt people?
1. If it in fact hurt people perhaps(however I recall it was that empty parking garage).

2. He has been shown to care yes, however it has never been shown how pragmatic he is. Not that I'm suggesting this is Spock but, that is what my own words would assert. He's never been shown to save people in the face of another even more immediate and consistent cause of threat. There are some people that assume he's reeve levels of non logical about I know that much, but this film has never set that in stone.

3. This is obviously a depowered incarnation of the character. Considering how close that taker was to impact it's safe to assume there would have been an explosion before he stopped it, thus all it would have done is let people know that "he really cares"(missed opportunity) and or "he's kinda stupid".


I'm curious if no one was directly hurt by the flames, would you still want superman to do such a thing(considering the stakes that is)? Just because it would have been the civil thing to do.

Sry if I presumed to speak for you. I try not to do that directly. I am speaking about the people who may have done that. Whether it be you or some other one person, if the phenomena exists, this is me addressing it.

__________________
1992's Universal soldier is my favorite Wolverine vs Sabretooth movie.
Marvin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 07:36 PM   #632
PacificBoy
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,222
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
1. If it in fact hurt people perhaps(however I recall it was that empty parking garage).

2. He has been shown to care yes, however it has never been shown how pragmatic he is. Not that I'm suggesting this is Spock but, that is what my own words would assert. He's never been shown to save people in the face of another even more immediate and consistent cause of threat. There are some people that assume he's reeve levels of non logical about I know that much, but this film has never set that in stone.

3. This is obviously a depowered incarnation of the character. Considering how close that taker was to impact it's safe to assume there would have been an explosion before he stopped it, thus all it would have done is let people know that "he really cares"(missed opportunity) and or "he's kinda stupid".


I'm curious if no one was directly hurt by the flames, would you still want superman to do such a thing(considering the stakes that is)? Just because it would have been the civil thing to do.

Sry if I presumed to speak for you. I try not to do that directly. I am speaking about the people who may have done that. Whether it be you or some other one person, if the phenomena exists, this is me addressing it.
Well, stopping the tanker, in my opinion, would have required the same effort as him gliding over it -- just reach out with both hands and stop it. I understand it's an easter egg moment (the LexCorp logo on the tanker) but I feel it's a wasted character moment. Anyway, I said my piece and am now at the risk of belaboring the point. But cheers for your explanation.

And you don't have to apologize; nothing to apologize for. The discussions have been enlightening and always amicable.

PacificBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 08:16 PM   #633
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 16,496
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

I'm only going to try and answer a few of these if you don't mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Question View Post
No.
I see, cause I'm pretty sure Zod talking away superman's advantage and showing that he is in fact a physical match was the purpose of that. Guess they failed.
Quote:
Why do you view it as a battle?
Joking.
Quote:
At no point did it seem like Zod becoming more powerful was making things harder for Superman. He was struggling just as much against Zod before as he was after.
1. Superman had to fly around the city to find him.
2. Superman got thrown though 8 buildings by his cape after an arial twirl move
3. zod no longer had to shimmy at walls to engage
4. The fight went into space(and superman couldn't leave him there).
5. Superman couldn't simply fly him out of the city
5.3. Superman couldn't move him away from the family at the end.
etc.
Quote:
Spider-Man got progressively more tired and injured over the course of his fights in the first two Sam Raimi movies. That's not simply shaking it off.
I'm talking about the damage after the blows by the metal tentacles. He shook those off.
As for fatigue, superman has a different fatigue system I'll admit.

Quote:
But he didn't stay down. He got back up and was completely unfazed. Showing actual signs of injury conveys the possibility that he might lose, showing him shrugging off titanic blows like they're nothing deflates the tension.
Fast recovery doesn't betray tangible hero. He can be put down he can be killed/stopped or taken prisoner. The kryptonians were put down big time a few times(twice in smallville)
Quote:
Here's the thing: The movie isn't real. It's pretend. I go into the movie knowing this. It's the movie's job to make me forget that. Simply having the city be in danger and expecting me to care doesn't work, because the logical part of my brain knows that it's not really happening. It needs to ad some kind of human element for me to get invested.
This is an interesting prospect I must say. I personally see what you are getting at but I'm not as absolute as you. If a green lantern is struggling to save a planet I don't need any info other than that it's full of a human like intelligent life and I'm right there with him. If his girlfriend and superman are on the planet and in danger, things go up from there. But I start from the former. That's probably people care about the people in "The battle for HongKong," without seeing a single one of them in Prim.
Different stokes.

Quote:
The scene in Spider-Man 1 is actually an example that proves my point, not yours. That scene takes it's time to show the kids in danger, to show their fear, and it creates an enormous amount of tension by making it seem entirely possible that Spider-Man will fail to save them. Neither of these things happen in Man of Steel.
I saw a few kids on that tram for 3 seconds each. I don't know any of their names or even what kinda shoes they got on, yet I'm invested. I look at metropolis and I'm I see just as many nameless people. No reason why it doesn't work both ways. Kinda sad that you got all these people arguing about not feeling anything for Perry and jenny, but a trolly full of kids eh.

I never thought spidey might fail, super hero movies are usually about about the hero saving everyone. Till nolan showed up.

Quote:
The Dark Knight Trilogy spent three films getting us to care about Gotham city and the people who lived in it. It established Batman's very personal connection to the city and why he was emotionally invested in keeping it safe. By that point the city had become a character in it's own right. That's why we care. None of that is the case with Metropolis in Man of Steel.
I suppose that means as a singular film(tdkr) this element fails.
Where batman has gotham as something he's invested in, Superman has the world he's been investing in emotionally. He can't lose it, the dream sequence does a good job at selling this to me.
I would concede that metropolis lack in identity at that point.

Quote:
That's not what I mean. I've made it very very clear what I mean. Buildings blow up around him and he doesn't show concern that there might be people inside. The only thing he's concerned with is the completely evenly matched fight he's having with Zod. Yes, it's because Zod wants to destroy the city, but it's hard to build an emotional investment onto what is actually displayed on screen. We don't see caring, we see two dudes punching.

I've made it clear that at no point have I been commenting on any interpretation of Superman's motivations, I've been commenting on how that scene failed to convey it's information effectively.
My mistake.
Again superman doesn't witness any buildings blow up and is then directly shown to have no reaction. That would be one thing. But it doesn't happen. I feel like you are being disturbed by things you yourself are putting into the film rather than just things that are lacking.

There are no innocents superman has a missed opportunity of saving in that last scene(consciously anyways). I would equate it to batman carrying that nuke out of the city, blowing up the top of that empty building and continuing on in righteous purpose. It's just damage.

Quote:
There was no shifting dominance. The new power sets didn't effect anything. They were just as evenly matched when the fight started as when it ended.
6. Zod has heat vision too now not only can he now bring down a building but later it comes into play in a particular way.

Quote:
But the stop and catch sort of way is the effective way to show that he cares, because it makes what he's fighting for real. Fighting for the lives of the city of Metropolis when we barely see anyone in Metropolis is abstract. Seeing the actual threat Zod poses to the civilian population, showing him attack them, showing Superman try to save people from debris knocked over by Zod, even showing him try and fail at one point, that would have made the threat Zod poses infinitely more real to the audience and it would have made Superman see even more sympathetic. It would have enhanced the fight scene in so many ways and it would have detracted nothing from it.
Ignoring that he does this on 3 separate occasions in smallville so you know it's established in his characterization already. I can see how it adds things but it not being there is like you subtracting a bonus, it adds, no one can argue that I guess, but it's not necessary for a fight to be compelling. Again see the fight where superman is killed by doomsday, for compelling stop and catch free action all that fight took was the possibility that superman finally met a match he couldn't beat and alot of lois.

I really don't agree about this abstract assertion. Him fighting in a holo-deck is abstract, him eating a bowl of cheerios for the fate of the planet..The very ugly decision to have Superman fight for the fate of the planet in a populated city with real casualties(especially the ending) is not abstract by my measure. The fact that people claim they were disturbed by the film is a testament to how present it was. I think it's pretty clear who and what he's fighting for and you don't need him to stop and catch some random person to make the point. Very tangible.

Quote:
Although, that raises a point: Have you ever thought that maybe the reason Superman traditionally fights that way is because it's the better way to portray the character because it brings the narrative strengths I mentioned above?
There are pros and cons to it.
For example, I know the flash can deal with Gorilla Grood and save people from all sort of things at the same time. Granted him saving people "helps" the drama.
I know that the flash can't do that when he fights a well do Professor Zoom(reverse flash). Mainly cause that guy is as fast it not faster than him. Well it seems we have lost that element of saving people drama but what have gained? The delicious stakes of a present threat that is unyielding and relentless.
If the goal is drama there are a few ways to go about it, a fully engaged flash that can be matched blow for blow is the price and the price is no more stop and catch saves. Fair dramatic trade off I say.

Quote:
Yes it should. It absolutely should. Why shouldn't it? If the context is different, that means there are different factors you have to take into account when assessing the situation. There's nothing logic in applying the same rigid standards to every situation regardless of context.
If superman can't fly any more I don't expect him to still be able to save people in space. The context changes and I use my logic to still understand and celebrate his heroism. I don't simply keep demanding it has the same face, that's my logic.

Quote:
It's still different. Batman doesn't have super speed, he can't just get out of his plane and save people during that chase seen the way Superman would be able to.
So it's not the scale, it's the ability? That's different. You were focusing on the damage done by superman/zod blows and all that stuff.

Here's the thing, in superman returns superman joy rides through an endangered metropolis saving stuff, catching this one guy and of course burning the falling glass. In MOS there is a scene when zod drags superman along a building and it causes falling glass. I listened to this one pod cast that said, well why didn't superman just melt the glass? Mind you Zod never in fact lets him go till they are far away from this damage.. I ask myself where did this critic get this idea and why is it pressing on him so...can't se see that superman is in dire straights, who would have even thought of that..
This is my point. It's like the some of the audience has it embedded in them., this isn't happening with other heroes imo.
I mean something so specific mind you.

Quote:
Here's the problem we're having in this dialogue:

You're talking from a purely logical standpoint. Does Superman's fight with Zod make sense on a logical level? Yes? Good.

I'm talking about how effectively the film communicated it's information and themes to the audience. The fight sequence feels cold and tensionless because the film fails to emotionally engage the audience in it and to address the human element of what's going on, in favor of focusing on the spectacle of the fight. I'm not talking about what Superman should have done differently in those circumstances, I'm talking about how those circumstances, including but not limited to Superman's actions, could have been written in a way that was more effective.
Thanks for clearing that up.
You had me confused with all those assertions that superman doesn't care given the way he behaves. I was arguing to the purpose of what is a man that cares to do what they are doing all they can. It seems this is another matter, one of missed opportunity to amplify dramatic engagement and "tension". Well I suppose if we are passed discussion how much this characterization may or may not care...

Sure, all films can seemingly implement elements that increase that stuff, the skies the limit. Spiderman can be a hero with 12 gun shots wounds and be empty on web fluid and no shirt on his back for an entire film. It comes down to what's needed for the film to work. I'd argue that it's all here but could have been executed better. I wouldn't put it in the hole as you seemed to have however. If people were affected by the city destruction imagery I'd argue that to be a point for the dramatic tension on display. Especially when people were mostly laughing through the other film.

Also,
There is something to be said for how much a film needs to make sense. You want to take as many opportunities to dramatize as you can sure, but things like plot holes and character logic are also just as important to the film going experience.

I see your point loud and clear. Take this for example.
Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

A great opportunity taken. However if you were to take this same character(ignore that this is maybe the most seasoned superman ever presented), and give him 6 seconds to save six jumpers all with bombs on their backs and duped by luthor. I would expect this same ultra caring superman do go about that precise scene in a different way than hugs and giggles. It is a missed opportunity from a writing front sure, is it an opportunity to see superman deal with a comic book threat in a super way and still be a super great guy? Indeed.
We then start to get into what makes superman work for you as an individual. That's not Snyders job.

As long as the film gives me it's christlike humanity at some point, I don't need it in every waking moment. There is a time for it to be superman vs doomsday(and nothing else) and there is a time for it to be him shedding a tear over violence. I saw enough of both to be satisfied, I assume you wanted a better balance or variation throughout. The logic of the plot didn't allow for it as much as you would have liked(cause believe me it was there), you see that as a missed opportunity.
Agree to disagree.

__________________
1992's Universal soldier is my favorite Wolverine vs Sabretooth movie.
Marvin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 08:18 PM   #634
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 16,496
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by PacificBoy View Post
Well, stopping the tanker, in my opinion, would have required the same effort as him gliding over it -- just reach out with both hands and stop it. I understand it's an easter egg moment (the LexCorp logo on the tanker) but I feel it's a wasted character moment. Anyway, I said my piece and am now at the risk of belaboring the point. But cheers for your explanation.

And you don't have to apologize; nothing to apologize for. The discussions have been enlightening and always amicable.
I suppose when the dvd is released and we can all see and discussion this stuff by way of youtube clips, things will have a chance to be more thoroughly discussed.

__________________
1992's Universal soldier is my favorite Wolverine vs Sabretooth movie.
Marvin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 10:00 PM   #635
The Question
Objectivism doesn't work.
 
The Question's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hub City
Posts: 39,162
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I see, cause I'm pretty sure Zod talking away superman's advantage and showing that he is in fact a physical match was the purpose of that. Guess they failed.
It really boils down to the matter of show, don't tell. Yes, Zod displays flight and heat vision, and that's supposed to tell us that the stakes have been raised and the threat is more serious. But after that point they don't show Superman having any harder of a time battling Zod than he did before. He struggles just as much and he takes Zod's blows just as well. It tells us that there's an escalation, but we're not actually shown an escalation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
1. Superman had to fly around the city to find him.
2. Superman got thrown though 8 buildings by his cape after an arial twirl move
3. zod no longer had to shimmy at walls to engage
4. The fight went into space(and superman couldn't leave him there).
5. Superman couldn't simply fly him out of the city
5.3. Superman couldn't move him away from the family at the end.
etc.
Being arial and going into space is just a change of scenery, it isn't an escalation of the tension. Superman still isn't shown to be having a harder time fighting Zod than he had before.

The only point in the fight sequence where the tension and the stakes escalate is in the train station, and that comes after 5 minutes of fighting that could have been 30 seconds with nothing lost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I'm talking about the damage after the blows by the metal tentacles. He shook those off.
And he also got progressively more injured. By the end of those fights he was really messed up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Fast recovery doesn't betray tangible hero. He can be put down he can be killed/stopped or taken prisoner.
Fast recovery completely deflates the tension. It's like "oh, I guess he's okay now. Never mind." The audience is never worried for his well being if he always gets back up with no signs of injury. In the Spider-Man movies, he's always shown to be pretty beat up at the end of each fight. Not so here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
This is an interesting prospect I must say. I personally see what you are getting at but I'm not as absolute as you. If a green lantern is struggling to save a planet I don't need any info other than that it's full of a human like intelligent life and I'm right there with him. If his girlfriend and superman are on the planet and in danger, things go up from there. But I start from the former. That's probably people care about the people in "The battle for HongKong," without seeing a single one of them in Prim.
Different stokes.
There's more to getting an audience to care about the lives of nameless background characters than finding a direct way to personalize it. I mean to say, that's not the only way to go about doing it.

Pacific Rim is actually a great example of this. The movie spends the entire opening sequences building up the human toll the Kaiju War has taken on the world. We see the aftermath of destruction, we see the somber, gut wrenching grief over lives lost, and we see the chaos, confusion, and radical shifts in culture and politics that it's caused. When the battle of Hong Kong rolls around, we care what happens because it has been well established just how much the Kaiju have ****ed up the world.

Pacific Rim also does a lot to personalize the threat of the Kaiju with the two main characters. First, when the male lead's brother dies, making one of our earliest encounters with the destruction the Kaiju cause a very personal tragedy for our lead character, and then when we have Mako's extended flashback sequence, where we not only once again personalize the tragedy the Kaiju leave in their wake, but we also see that tragedy not from the perspective of a soldier in the field of battle, but from the perspective of a civilian who's life is destroyed for no reason. In those ways, the film does a lot to personalize the threat of the Kaiju well before the battle of Hong Kong.

Another approach to getting the audience to care is to show that a character the audience likes cares, usually the main, and to show why that person cares. The Spider-Man tram sequence is also a great example of this. Throughout the whole film we've built up the sense of responsibility that Peter is burdened with. We've seen his guilt over his uncle's death, we've seen how that guilt has transformed him into a less selfish person, we've seen him take up the responsibility of protecting those in need, we've seen how that responsibility has worn him down and brought misery to his life, and we've seen him carry on in spite of that because he believes it to be the right thing to do. And so when we get to the tram sequence, even though we don't spend a lot of time with those kids, we care because Peter cares and because we understand why he cares. And all throughout that sequence, he displays his caring, we see him desperately struggling to find a way to protect those kids, protect Mary Jane, and fight the Green Goblin all at the same time. It's his emotions in that scene that ratchet up the tension.

And that's why Superman not emoting concern for the destruction caused in his fight with Zod is problematic. Yes, he fights Zod because Zod is a threat to innocent people and we know and have been told that Superman cares about innocent people. But since the only thing Superman is focusing on is Zod himself, those innocent lives are abstract. What Superman is fighting for isn't on screen, only the fight itself is on screen. We don't see the character we've come to identify with caring about what's at stake, and so our ability to empathize with what's going on is diminished.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I never thought spidey might fail, super hero movies are usually about about the hero saving everyone. Till nolan showed up.
Sure, on a logical intellectual level you knew the hero would win. But drama doesn't work unless you feel like he might lose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I suppose that means as a singular film(tdkr) this element fails.
The Dark Knight Rises is not by any stretch of the imagination a stand alone film, it's a direct continuation of elements of the first two movies. People who never saw the first two and then just sat down and watched Rises would be at a loss for several reasons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Where batman has gotham as something he's invested in, Superman has the world he's been investing in emotionally. He can't lose it, the dream sequence does a good job at selling this to me.
I disagree with that assessment. We're told that Clark cares about the world and the human race, but we're never actually shown why he has an emotional investment in it. The relationships he's formed with his parents and the people in Smallville are under developed, and we never see him express any joy in or emotional connection with any aspect of living as a human on Earth. We never see what Smallville means to him, we never see any interests or passions he has, we never see him longing for or relishing in basic human social interaction. We never see how he, as an alien raised on Earth and out in the world, related to or fails to relate to the people around him. All we see is him walking the earth and being quiet and introverted and feeling conflicted without a well defined internal conflict. Yes, he cares about the world and he wants to save it, but that caring is never defined and it's never given anything tangible for the audience to latch onto. He just cares because he's a good guy and he's supposed to. And that's good morality, sure, and ultimately him having morals should be the core reason he wants to do right by the world, but by itself, without something personal to ground it in an emotional framework, it isn't a great way to get your audience invested in what the lead shows an interest in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Again superman doesn't witness any buildings blow up and is then directly shown to have no reaction. That would be one thing. But it doesn't happen. I feel like you are being disturbed by things you yourself are putting into the film rather than just things that are lacking.
Sure, they're not going out of their way to show no reaction. But I never said they were. I said they were failing to show an adequate reaction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
There are no innocents superman has a missed opportunity of saving in that last scene(consciously anyways). I would equate it to batman carrying that nuke out of the city, blowing up the top of that empty building and continuing on in righteous purpose. It's just damage.
First of all, you have to admit that for a lot of people, when they see buildings falling over in the middle of a catastrophe that only started earlier that day within the film's timeline, their first thought is going to be that there were likely quite a few people in those buildings. They never showed mass evacuation procedures being put into place so that's what most people are going to assume at first. And that makes Superman look very callous and cold to a lot of people.

Second, you hit the core of the problem right on the head: It's just damage. Damage with no substance. Damage without the narrative paying any mind to the human element of the whole thing. That's a problem.

And yes, there are no innocents in that sequence that Superman had a missed opportunity of saving. But I'm saying they should have been written into that sequence. It would have only increased the tension and strengthened the audience's emotional investment while also easing the minds of some people who felt Superman came off as cold and reckless upon reflecting on the broader implications of the destruction in that sequence.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Ignoring that he does this on 3 separate occasions in smallville so you know it's established in his characterization already.
But that's in Smallville. We're talking about the fight with Zod in Metropolis and what it, as a sequence, was lacking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I can see how it adds things but it not being there is like you subtracting a bonus, it adds, no one can argue that I guess, but it's not necessary for a fight to be compelling. Again see the fight where superman is killed by doomsday, for compelling stop and catch free action all that fight took was the possibility that superman finally met a match he couldn't beat and alot of lois.
The fight with Doomsday was quite a bit different from the fight with Zod and it was compelling for other reasons. For starters, Superman actually showed signs of injury and struggle during the fight. He was bruised, he was bloody, he was tired, and as the fight went on it seemed more and more likely that he might lose. Secondly, it came at the end of a long slow build. Doomsday was introduced as a mysterious unknown threat. As the story progressed he slowly made his way toward civilization and completely annihilated every obstacle that crossed his path, including the Justice League of America. By the time he got to Metropolis and Superman stood in his way, there was an enormous amount of desperation surrounding this thing.

Those factors weren't present in the Man of Steel fight, although the former absolutely should have in some way.

Adding a human emotional element of some kind of the fight would have made it so much more effective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I really don't agree about this abstract assertion. Him fighting in a holo-deck is abstract, him eating a bowl of cheerios for the fate of the planet..The very ugly decision to have Superman fight for the fate of the planet in a populated city with real casualties(especially the ending) is not abstract by my measure. The fact that people claim they were disturbed by the film is a testament to how present it was. I think it's pretty clear who and what he's fighting for and you don't need him to stop and catch some random person to make the point. Very tangible.
First of all, the people who were disturbed were disturbed by the implications, not the emotional reality of the film.

Second, the threat absolutely was not tangible. A city was put in danger without establishing why we should care about it using any of the methods I talked about above. And throughout the fight, our hero only showed concern with beating the bad guy and not with protecting the thing he's fighting him to protect. The threat from Zod is made, but why that's a real thing with real emotional consequences that should mean something to us is never addressed until the very end of the fight, which comes after five minutes of punching.

It's abstract because it's saying "Zod is going to destroy the city, and you should care because cities getting destroyed is bad." Using any or all of the methods I described above would make the threat tangible, because either we would be made to care about what happens through some personal connection in the story, or we would be made to care through our caring about what the protagonist cares about, and the emotions he expresses and the emotional arc he goes through would dictate out reactions. You can't do that when his emotional state throughout the vast majority of the fight is "focus on punching the bad guy."


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
There are pros and cons to it.
For example, I know the flash can deal with Gorilla Grood and save people from all sort of things at the same time. Granted him saving people "helps" the drama.
I know that the flash can't do that when he fights a well do Professor Zoom(reverse flash). Mainly cause that guy is as fast it not faster than him. Well it seems we have lost that element of saving people drama but what have gained? The delicious stakes of a present threat that is unyielding and relentless.
If the goal is drama there are a few ways to go about it, a fully engaged flash that can be matched blow for blow is the price and the price is no more stop and catch saves. Fair dramatic trade off I say.
I don't see why it's a strict binary. I don't see why The Flash struggling to save innocents caught in the crossfire while Zoom kicks the crap out of him isn't a thing you could write that would be super compelling. In fact I think there are Flash stories that do just that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
If superman can't fly any more I don't expect him to still be able to save people in space. The context changes and I use my logic to still understand and celebrate his heroism. I don't simply keep demanding it has the same face, that's my logic.
Okay. So why does that mean that you then shouldn't change your logical standards when the context changes? I'm confused.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
So it's not the scale, it's the ability? That's different. You were focusing on the damage done by superman/zod blows and all that stuff.
I was focusing on both.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Sure, all films can seemingly implement elements that increase that stuff, the skies the limit. Spiderman can be a hero with 12 gun shots wounds and be empty on web fluid and no shirt on his back for an entire film. It comes down to what's needed for the film to work. I'd argue that it's all here but could have been executed better. I wouldn't put it in the hole as you seemed to have however. If people were affected by the city destruction imagery I'd argue that to be a point for the dramatic tension on display. Especially when people were mostly laughing through the other film.
What other film?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Also,
There is something to be said for how much a film needs to make sense. You want to take as many opportunities to dramatize as you can sure, but things like plot holes and character logic are also just as important to the film going experience.
They're important, but I think that they're a lot less important than being grounded in an emotional reality and effectively communicating information to the audience. Plot holes, at least smaller ones, matter a lot less when the film is emotionally and thematically satisfying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I see your point loud and clear. Take this for example.
Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

A great opportunity taken. However if you were to take this same character(ignore that this is maybe the most seasoned superman ever presented), and give him 6 seconds to save six jumpers all with bombs on their backs and duped by luthor. I would expect this same ultra caring superman do go about that precise scene in a different way than hugs and giggles. It is a missed opportunity from a writing front sure, is it an opportunity to see superman deal with a comic book threat in a super way and still be a super great guy? Indeed.
But nothing is stopping a writer from writing their story in such a way that they include a particular element. You say that Superman didn't have an opportunity to address civilian casualties directly in his fight with Zod. I'm saying that the fight should have been written in such a way that the opportunity was more present.

__________________
VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:
The Question is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 10:26 PM   #636
sf2
Side-Kick
 
sf2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,990
Default name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

well, no movie is perfect.

so which scene is MOS that you feel is a bit lacking? and put down your idea on how to improve it.

me, the scene where pa kent and his son nearby a truck at the back yard.
i hope kid clark kent was more positive thinking about his 'gifts'. that he felt nothing wrong with his gifts just like some born genius. (or birds flying isn't showing off thing) he was getting tired of hiding. he would told his father he wouldn't misused his gifts. he would use them to help people so that people would not be afraid of him. only then, pa kent saw the problem and had to tell him the secret.

and i would like to see kid clark kent having a more awful reaction when he was told he was an alien. like trying to cut himself to show his bleeding is red, isn't blue or green.

__________________
“Everything you can imagine is real.”
― Pablo Picasso
sf2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 10:56 PM   #637
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,016
Default Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

Great idea for a thread !

I loved MOS, but there are a bunch of things I would tweak.

- the death of Jonathan Kent (this deserves a thread all by itself)
anyway, I'd find a way to make it more convincing that Clark couldn't get to Jonathan without revealing his super-powers. To be honest, in the film,
everyone else was pretty much cowering and praying for their lives.
A burst of super-speed probably wouldn't have gone completely unnoticed, but with all the distraction of the tornado bearing down on them, really
he could have gotten away with it.
With a slightly different set-up, they still could have gotten the message across. Like maybe Jonathan was pinned under a car or truck, and the only way to get him out would be for Clark to lift it......even that isn't ideal.
Maybe if Martha was in jeopardy too, and he had to be in 2 places at once.
There has to be a way to tighten this scene up, so that Jonathan's death doesn't feel unnecessary. It didn't bug me as much as it did some other people, who hated it, but I admit that it was nowhere near as strong a moment as it should have been.

OTHER STUFF:

There are a couple of little things

- After Zod gives the "I'm going to make them suffer" speech, I though Cavill didn't deliver the "You're a monster Zod" line very well. In fact, while he delivers lines very well as Clark Kent, some of Superman's lines felt very forced - he was a better Superman when he let his actions and facial expressions do the acting (e.g when he saves the roughnecks on the oil rig, no talking necessary, the look says it all).

What might have worked better is if he gave a look towards Lois, worried expression, look back at Zod, gritted his teeth and then hurled himself forward. Just a little change, but it would have done the trick.


- similar to the above "You're trying to find out where I hang my cape" come on, that's just ridiculous, and out of place with the rest of the film
Superman's first lines to the army, after he surrendered were strong and well delivered " You're scared of me because you don't control me. You can't, and you never will. But that doesn't make me your enemy,"
that was pure gold.
The cape line kind of undoes that. So just delete that line altogether. It's totally illogical anyway, because Swanwick knows Superman is from Kansas, and since the army were present at the battle of Smallville, (having tracked Zod's shuttles there) probably knows that Superman has some connection to the town.
Anyway, get rid of the cape line, problem solved.

- a minor tweak, I would have had Jor El struggle a bit more with Zod's goons. The fact that Krypton's top scientist, is also it's top ass-kicker was great, but seemed a bit too much of a stretch on the Jor El character.
I'm okay with it, but maybe if he'd used a bit more trickery (or there were less of them, because he takes down 6 soldiers, who apparently are born and bred to fight - hmmmmm maybe there's a flaw in the codex there!).


There are probably a bunch more little things, I'll have a think and get back to you.

Again, great thread for MOS fans !

Batmannerism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2014, 02:31 AM   #638
FeedOnATreeFrog
A Metal Gear reference
 
FeedOnATreeFrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,066
Default Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

1. I would show Clark acknowledging the destroyed gas station a bit more, emphasizing that he has to try and leave Smallville, hoping they'd follow, but the military get attacked before they leave and thus he has to defend them.

2. some of the cg and lighting could be improved in the Smallville/Metropolis fight.

3. I would show Perry flipping through channels of the news showing how the world is reacting before arriving on the channel with Woodburn.

The news would show that the world is basically entering a downward spiral of fear (showing what would have happened if Clark made himself known 20 years ago. That the world is going to get worse). Religious turmoil on the other side of the world, the Whitehouse/UN in hysterics, stock market going crazy, including Lex Corp stock rising with the announcement of new investments into defense technology, etc, etc.

4. After Superman defeats Zod, have Lois convince Superman he did the right thing by picking Superman off his feet to look at the family he saved (preferably a shot of the father/son). Have her then lead Superman outside where they see hundreds of people staring in awe & confusion. Superman then begins to help people out of the rubble etc, most of whom start with confused expressions of their faces which turn to more trusting faces. Eventually muffle the sound and start to play news footage from around the world talking about how "they think it's over", "one of these aliens seems to be protecting us" "Is this Kal-El?", etc, showing people hugging each other in relief (TDKRises style), all that jazz. A slow piano theme would be playing over all of this with some light drums building before it fades out.

Basically, in relation to point number 3, I would put more emphasis on the idea that Superman is the hope they needed when things turned sour (when they learned the existence of all-powerful alien life that intends to do them harm). Instead of being the one to cause fear (alerting them to this truth before it was necessary), it was Zod who did this, and thus by defeating Zod for the human race, Superman became the agent of hope.

5. Before the shot of Perry introducing Clark, show a couple seconds of Lois watching the TV of breaking news where Superman has just saved people from a burning building or something and talking to the reporter (showing the status quo of Superman saving people in Metropolis). Then Woodburn hits on Lois and Perry introduces Clark.


Last edited by FeedOnATreeFrog; 01-24-2014 at 03:37 AM.
FeedOnATreeFrog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2014, 03:13 AM   #639
Visualiza
What is a yout?
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Knowhere
Posts: 1,334
Post Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

Doesn't this thread more or less fulfill the same purpose?

Visualiza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2014, 04:28 AM   #640
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,016
Default Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeedOnATreeFrog View Post
1. I would show Clark acknowledging the destroyed gas station a bit more, emphasizing that he has to try and leave Smallville, hoping they'd follow, but the military get attacked before they leave and thus he has to defend them.

2. some of the cg and lighting could be improved in the Smallville/Metropolis fight.

3. I would show Perry flipping through channels of the news showing how the world is reacting before arriving on the channel with Woodburn.

The news would show that the world is basically entering a downward spiral of fear (showing what would have happened if Clark made himself known 20 years ago. That the world is going to get worse). Religious turmoil on the other side of the world, the Whitehouse/UN in hysterics, stock market going crazy, including Lex Corp stock rising with the announcement of new investments into defense technology, etc, etc.

4. After Superman defeats Zod, have Lois convince Superman he did the right thing by picking Superman off his feet to look at the family he saved (preferably a shot of the father/son). Have her then lead Superman outside where they see hundreds of people staring in awe & confusion. Superman then begins to help people out of the rubble etc, most of whom start with confused expressions of their faces which turn to more trusting faces. Eventually muffle the sound and start to play news footage from around the world talking about how "they think it's over", "one of these aliens seems to be protecting us" "Is this Kal-El?", etc, showing people hugging each other in relief (TDKRises style), all that jazz. A slow piano theme would be playing over all of this with some light drums building before it fades out.

Basically, in relation to point number 3, I would put more emphasis on the idea that Superman is the hope they needed when things turned sour (when they learned the existence of all-powerful alien life that intends to do them harm). Instead of being the one to cause fear (alerting them to this truth before it was necessary), it was Zod who did this, and thus by defeating Zod for the human race, Superman became the agent of hope.

5. Before the shot of Perry introducing Clark, show a couple seconds of Lois watching the TV of breaking news where Superman has just saved people from a burning building or something and talking to the reporter (showing the status quo of Superman saving people in Metropolis). Then Woodburn hits on Lois and Perry introduces Clark.

Good call dude, totally agree !
I probably would do it slightly differently , but I agree, especially with point 5, something more was needed to bridge the gap between the final scene and the death of Zod.

I loved the final flashback, but a brief scene with some of the ideas you've mentioned would have made the film more complete and explain why the world now accepts , or is going to accept Superman. By just jumping ahead to Clark's first day at work, and ignoring the catastrophic events (which would probably have been the equivalent of a small nuclear detonation in downtown Metropolis, man that crater was huge !),
even some shots or images of the re-build.

Maybe a shot of Superman helping fire crews search for bodies/survivors in the rubble ? Whatever, but you're dead right, there's a small but important piece missing there. Hopefully it does get addressed in future films - but I think it was a mistake to leave it any mention of it out.

Something else that might have been little, but worked, was if the evil Kryptonian scientist had actually extracted the codex from Kal's cells,while he was on Zod's ship. This would have magnified Zod's threat (although I guess he was pretty threatening already) as he'd only have to retrieve the genesis chamber and then start breeding new Kryptonians. I don't know
just something that occurred to me, but it would have resolved the codex issue, which was complained about by some as a distracting McGuffin.


Quote:
Doesn't this thread more or less fulfill the same purpose?
you're right, but no one's posted in it for 6 months.

Here's a challenge for Visualiza, or anyone, including the OP.
Focussing on the death of Jonathan Kent, re-write or re-work that scene so it has the impact it should have (and none of that "I wouldn't have done it at all" that's a dodge).

Sorry I don't mean to hijack a really good thread, just that scene's bugging me at the moment.

Batmannerism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2014, 05:43 AM   #641
sf2
Side-Kick
 
sf2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,990
Default Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
Great idea for a thread !

I loved MOS, but there are a bunch of things I would tweak.

- the death of Jonathan Kent (this deserves a thread all by itself)
anyway, I'd find a way to make it more convincing that Clark couldn't get to Jonathan without revealing his super-powers. To be honest, in the film,
everyone else was pretty much cowering and praying for their lives.
A burst of super-speed probably wouldn't have gone completely unnoticed, but with all the distraction of the tornado bearing down on them, really
he could have gotten away with it.
With a slightly different set-up, they still could have gotten the message across. Like maybe Jonathan was pinned under a car or truck, and the only way to get him out would be for Clark to lift it......even that isn't ideal.
Maybe if Martha was in jeopardy too, and he had to be in 2 places at once.
There has to be a way to tighten this scene up, so that Jonathan's death doesn't feel unnecessary. It didn't bug me as much as it did some other people, who hated it, but I admit that it was nowhere near as strong a moment as it should have been.

OTHER STUFF:

There are a couple of little things

- After Zod gives the "I'm going to make them suffer" speech, I though Cavill didn't deliver the "You're a monster Zod" line very well. In fact, while he delivers lines very well as Clark Kent, some of Superman's lines felt very forced - he was a better Superman when he let his actions and facial expressions do the acting (e.g when he saves the roughnecks on the oil rig, no talking necessary, the look says it all).

What might have worked better is if he gave a look towards Lois, worried expression, look back at Zod, gritted his teeth and then hurled himself forward. Just a little change, but it would have done the trick.


- similar to the above "You're trying to find out where I hang my cape" come on, that's just ridiculous, and out of place with the rest of the film
Superman's first lines to the army, after he surrendered were strong and well delivered " You're scared of me because you don't control me. You can't, and you never will. But that doesn't make me your enemy,"
that was pure gold.
The cape line kind of undoes that. So just delete that line altogether. It's totally illogical anyway, because Swanwick knows Superman is from Kansas, and since the army were present at the battle of Smallville, (having tracked Zod's shuttles there) probably knows that Superman has some connection to the town.
Anyway, get rid of the cape line, problem solved.

- a minor tweak, I would have had Jor El struggle a bit more with Zod's goons. The fact that Krypton's top scientist, is also it's top ass-kicker was great, but seemed a bit too much of a stretch on the Jor El character.
I'm okay with it, but maybe if he'd used a bit more trickery (or there were less of them, because he takes down 6 soldiers, who apparently are born and bred to fight - hmmmmm maybe there's a flaw in the codex there!).


There are probably a bunch more little things, I'll have a think and get back to you.

Again, great thread for MOS fans !
Regarding the pa Kent death scene.
The whole idea is they want him to sacrifice himself for his son so that he will not reveal himself. Therefore if Clark do anything, or any of your ideas, it will defeat the purpose.
Maybe Clark saved him but he still died due to heart attack?

__________________
“Everything you can imagine is real.”
― Pablo Picasso
sf2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2014, 07:04 AM   #642
sf2
Side-Kick
 
sf2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,990
Default Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeedOnATreeFrog View Post
1. I would show Clark acknowledging the destroyed gas station a bit more, emphasizing that he has to try and leave Smallville, hoping they'd follow, but the military get attacked before they leave and thus he has to defend them.

2. some of the cg and lighting could be improved in the Smallville/Metropolis fight.

3. I would show Perry flipping through channels of the news showing how the world is reacting before arriving on the channel with Woodburn.

The news would show that the world is basically entering a downward spiral of fear (showing what would have happened if Clark made himself known 20 years ago. That the world is going to get worse). Religious turmoil on the other side of the world, the Whitehouse/UN in hysterics, stock market going crazy, including Lex Corp stock rising with the announcement of new investments into defense technology, etc, etc.

4. After Superman defeats Zod, have Lois convince Superman he did the right thing by picking Superman off his feet to look at the family he saved (preferably a shot of the father/son). Have her then lead Superman outside where they see hundreds of people staring in awe & confusion. Superman then begins to help people out of the rubble etc, most of whom start with confused expressions of their faces which turn to more trusting faces. Eventually muffle the sound and start to play news footage from around the world talking about how "they think it's over", "one of these aliens seems to be protecting us" "Is this Kal-El?", etc, showing people hugging each other in relief (TDKRises style), all that jazz. A slow piano theme would be playing over all of this with some light drums building before it fades out.

Basically, in relation to point number 3, I would put more emphasis on the idea that Superman is the hope they needed when things turned sour (when they learned the existence of all-powerful alien life that intends to do them harm). Instead of being the one to cause fear (alerting them to this truth before it was necessary), it was Zod who did this, and thus by defeating Zod for the human race, Superman became the agent of hope.

5. Before the shot of Perry introducing Clark, show a couple seconds of Lois watching the TV of breaking news where Superman has just saved people from a burning building or something and talking to the reporter (showing the status quo of Superman saving people in Metropolis). Then Woodburn hits on Lois and Perry introduces Clark.
Excellent ideas. They certainly will make it more complete n perfect.

__________________
“Everything you can imagine is real.”
― Pablo Picasso
sf2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2014, 09:29 AM   #643
FeedOnATreeFrog
A Metal Gear reference
 
FeedOnATreeFrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,066
Default Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

^I'm glad you like my ideas!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
Here's a challenge for Visualiza, or anyone, including the OP.
Focussing on the death of Jonathan Kent, re-write or re-work that scene so it has the impact it should have (and none of that "I wouldn't have done it at all" that's a dodge).

Sorry I don't mean to hijack a really good thread, just that scene's bugging me at the moment.
I actually think the scene was pretty perfect. I love it every time I watch it.

Perhaps for some people, they might have bought it more if they understand exactly what Jonathan believed would happen if Clark's secret got out; the whole "there's more at stake than our lives" thing. So maybe it was actually a prior scene that could have been changed.


Last edited by FeedOnATreeFrog; 01-24-2014 at 09:32 AM.
FeedOnATreeFrog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2014, 12:41 AM   #644
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,016
Default Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sf2 View Post
Regarding the pa Kent death scene.
The whole idea is they want him to sacrifice himself for his son so that he will not reveal himself. Therefore if Clark do anything, or any of your ideas, it will defeat the purpose.
Maybe Clark saved him but he still died due to heart attack?
That's how Pa Kent has died in a few different versions of the story (All Star Superman, Superman the Movie, etc). In MOS, the point was
that Clark COULD have saved him, but it would have meant revealing
his super-powers.

I know what you mean, that the idea was that Jonathan sacrificed himself
to protect Clark's secret. You're totally right.

However, I reckon that even a few little changes to the Tornado scene
could have made it more convincing.

Batmannerism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2014, 12:54 AM   #645
herolee10
S.W. Mourner
 
herolee10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 15,337
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Visually wise, what I would have done differently would be:

1. I would have had Superman and Zod's fight in Metropolis take place at night, with the city background looking more like it does in this shot than what we eventually got in the film:




2. When Superman and Zod fought on the streets of Metropolis, just for the sake of quelling down some complaints, I would have had Zod kick the truck towards people that were trying to run away, with Superman coming down and stopping it as opposed to dodging it and letting explode. I would have also had preferred them to fight in a actual street as opposed to filming everything behind a green screen. I would have had the street fight look something like this...




3. I think a montage was needed at the end of the film, showing the aftermath of Zod's battle with Superman, along with Superman slowly starting to establish himself among the public.


4. Instead of creating the Kryptonians armor entirely from CGI, they should have created some real pieces for Shannon to wear..or they should have had WETA do all of the armor effects from the start since it really looks dodgy for their Earth armors in regards to the CGI quality.


5. I think Jonathan could have just died from natural reasons. It felt kind of odd to go from a uplifting scene of Clark finally mastering his flight ability and donning the suit, only to go back to a depressed time in his life. They could have just had Clark encountering Lois in Smallville, have them having a normal conversation with each other where they end up spending the entire day with each other and getting to know one another entirely..and Clark would just trust her that she would do the right thing...which, after seeing what kind of person Clark is....Lois would decide on her own ultimately not to pursue the story for his sake.

When it comes to how Jonathan dies...let's just say that instead of visiting the Priest..Clark could be at his house...watching the news on how people are reacting to Zod's global announcement and having a flash back to when his father passed away and how Jonathan told Clark that a day would come where Clark would have to reveal himself to world and that when it came, he (Jonathan) trusts that Clark will know how to handle it. This scene could end with Clark having a emotional scene with Martha where Martha pretty much thinks that she'll never see her son again.

herolee10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2014, 07:35 AM   #646
sf2
Side-Kick
 
sf2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,990
Default Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Visualiza View Post
Doesn't this thread more or less fulfill the same purpose?
oh, man. they are 2 totally different threads. one is complaint and the other one is positive and ideas discussion.

and now the mod has lumped it into the negative thread.
it totally defeats the my original purpose.

__________________
“Everything you can imagine is real.”
― Pablo Picasso
sf2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2014, 06:40 PM   #647
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,016
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by herolee10 View Post
Visually wise, what I would have done differently would be:

1. I would have had Superman and Zod's fight in Metropolis take place at night, with the city background looking more like it does in this shot than what we eventually got in the film:




2. When Superman and Zod fought on the streets of Metropolis, just for the sake of quelling down some complaints, I would have had Zod kick the truck towards people that were trying to run away, with Superman coming down and stopping it as opposed to dodging it and letting explode. I would have also had preferred them to fight in a actual street as opposed to filming everything behind a green screen. I would have had the street fight look something like this...




3. I think a montage was needed at the end of the film, showing the aftermath of Zod's battle with Superman, along with Superman slowly starting to establish himself among the public.


4. Instead of creating the Kryptonians armor entirely from CGI, they should have created some real pieces for Shannon to wear..or they should have had WETA do all of the armor effects from the start since it really looks dodgy for their Earth armors in regards to the CGI quality.


5. I think Jonathan could have just died from natural reasons. It felt kind of odd to go from a uplifting scene of Clark finally mastering his flight ability and donning the suit, only to go back to a depressed time in his life. They could have just had Clark encountering Lois in Smallville, have them having a normal conversation with each other where they end up spending the entire day with each other and getting to know one another entirely..and Clark would just trust her that she would do the right thing...which, after seeing what kind of person Clark is....Lois would decide on her own ultimately not to pursue the story for his sake.

When it comes to how Jonathan dies...let's just say that instead of visiting the Priest..Clark could be at his house...watching the news on how people are reacting to Zod's global announcement and having a flash back to when his father passed away and how Jonathan told Clark that a day would come where Clark would have to reveal himself to world and that when it came, he (Jonathan) trusts that Clark will know how to handle it. This scene could end with Clark having a emotional scene with Martha where Martha pretty much thinks that she'll never see her son again.
First, big ups and respect to your ideas.

Totally with you on 4,5, that would have really worked well and made the film feel more complete.

As for 3, the CGI armour didn't bug me that much, ( I did some work on the Hobbit as an extra, and can tell you, that armour is damn heavy, even when made by WETA, as ours was, Crowe and Shannon could never have had such energetic fisticuffs with that stuff on). I was wondering how they moved so well, until I found out it was CGI.

If WETA had done it, it would have looked great, but you would really have sacrificed speed and flexibility.
In the final analysis, it didn't bug me, but I can see how it would annoy some, so fair point.

as for 1 and 2.

Actually, I thought the staging of the Supes v Zod final smackdown was great, but that's just IMO. The weakness in that fight was the lack of a pacing and/or shape to it (as in it seemed a little too random, whereas Smallville had a brutal pace and rhythm to it, which made it work so much better). Personally, I found the Hulk v Abomination quite a dissatisfying set-piece for an otherwise decent Hulk movie - could never put my finger on why, but it just didn't work for me.

Also, I think that the importance of flight in Superman's character/mythology made it essential to do a lot of that battle in the air.

Although having said that, my favourite action sequence was the battle of smallville, and as you suggest, that did happen right on street level.
However, as for time of day I think it also works so well, because it happens in the most ordinary of locations, in broad daylight.

When superheroes fight at night, it always seems to me like the director is trying to hide the background.

Do agree with you about the truck though, that was an odd touch, it just seems natural for Superman to try and stop it. That might have been a good opportunity for Zod to threaten some humans, i.e. kick the truck at people rather than Supes.

Again, just IMO.

Batmannerism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2014, 06:55 PM   #648
Batmannerism
Side-Kick
 
Batmannerism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,016
Default Re: name a scene that you wanna make it better and improved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sf2 View Post
oh, man. they are 2 totally different threads. one is complaint and the other one is positive and ideas discussion.

and now the mod has lumped it into the negative thread.
it totally defeats the my original purpose.

Yeah, know what you mean. It sucks when a thread that gives people a chance to talk about about positive stuff or share some ideas and be creative, and not slag other people off, gets hijacked by haters.


Watching MOS at the moment in the background, Battle of Smallville, not just best superhero action sequence of 2013, but best ever. Avengers not even close, IMO. That's one part of the film that didn't need to be changed, at all (except maybe showing Superman helping clean up afterwards, maybe at the end of the film ? Who knows. Although he does go and check on his mom first thing when the battle's over, which just shows what a great guy he is).

Peace out Super-fans !

Batmannerism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2014, 03:16 AM   #649
doobie
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 449
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

I think MOS had a more difficult task than Batman to establish Metropolis, because Supe has a more complicated back story. In Batman there was just Gotham and his worldwide training to establish, wheras in Supes you have Krypton, his American travels, and Smallville before you get to the city.

I do agree that the personal feel of Metropolis and the people there was the most glaring thing that felt missing from the film. I think the film should have spent more time on the DP staff making them the "public face" of Metropolis and showing that they trusted Superman and accepted him as their hero.

Just one line from Perry like "I represent the people, I'll tell them you're on our side". As the editor of Metropolis' biggest paper we know he is in touch with what people think so it would establish that the public trust him.

And there could have been a few more touches of Superman interacting with regular people, like the scene in Begins where Batman gives Joffrey his discarded stuff, little things like that go a long way in creating emotional engagement in a film.

I mean imagine Batman Begins if Ra's had just chosen a random city and Batman had followed him there and fought him, you would have still cared about the people, but it had so much more emotional weight it being his city which his family had fought for through history.

Obviously you wouldn't get that with Supes as he is a newcomer to Metropolis, but I did think the city felt a bit empty and faceless.

I am holding judgement on that till the next film, if the next film establishes Metropolis well and gives it lots of personality, I will retro-actively forgive MOS for skimping on that side of it.

And it didn't occur to me about Superman not caring about the destruction the fights caused as it looked like he was too overwhelmed (and I thought of course he would care if he had time to think)..but so many people complain about that, maybe the next film should have him giving little sad looks as the fights happen, to show he is sad about the wrecked shops etc. Tutting and shaking his head as the guy cries at his wrecked stor, waving and shouting "sorry!" as someone loses their home. The Bat films had the same problem though, how can the Bat care about the poor of Gotham blowing up their cars everywhere, that could put a guy out of work taking away his transport.

doobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2014, 04:33 AM   #650
herolee10
S.W. Mourner
 
herolee10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 15,337
Default Re: What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batmannerism View Post
First, big ups and respect to your ideas.

Totally with you on 4,5, that would have really worked well and made the film feel more complete.

As for 3, the CGI armour didn't bug me that much, ( I did some work on the Hobbit as an extra, and can tell you, that armour is damn heavy, even when made by WETA, as ours was, Crowe and Shannon could never have had such energetic fisticuffs with that stuff on). I was wondering how they moved so well, until I found out it was CGI.

If WETA had done it, it would have looked great, but you would really have sacrificed speed and flexibility.
In the final analysis, it didn't bug me, but I can see how it would annoy some, so fair point.

as for 1 and 2.

Actually, I thought the staging of the Supes v Zod final smackdown was great, but that's just IMO. The weakness in that fight was the lack of a pacing and/or shape to it (as in it seemed a little too random, whereas Smallville had a brutal pace and rhythm to it, which made it work so much better). Personally, I found the Hulk v Abomination quite a dissatisfying set-piece for an otherwise decent Hulk movie - could never put my finger on why, but it just didn't work for me.

Also, I think that the importance of flight in Superman's character/mythology made it essential to do a lot of that battle in the air.

Although having said that, my favourite action sequence was the battle of smallville, and as you suggest, that did happen right on street level.
However, as for time of day I think it also works so well, because it happens in the most ordinary of locations, in broad daylight.

When superheroes fight at night, it always seems to me like the director is trying to hide the background.

Do agree with you about the truck though, that was an odd touch, it just seems natural for Superman to try and stop it. That might have been a good opportunity for Zod to threaten some humans, i.e. kick the truck at people rather than Supes.

Again, just IMO.
Thanks for the comment.

Actually, regarding one and two...the only thing that I really wanted more of was a better looking "CGI background".

As I mentioned above, when we saw Superman and Zod flying throughout Metropolis, I wish that they would have used the type of colorful background like you see in the picture of Iron Man as their CGI background instead of the gloomy and dark one that we got in the film.

And Idk why, but it just felt so weird to see them fighting on a street where nothing was real at all..not the street..the extras...or buildings...all green screen and floor. I think it felt weird because Snyder has used so much "on-set" location for most of the film before this that it just felt like it didn't belong there.

herolee10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:59 AM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"
Contact Us - Mobile - SuperHeroHype - ComingSoon.net - Shock Till You Drop - Lost Password - Clear Cookies - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - AdChoices


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.