All Things Superman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 32

Status
Not open for further replies.
Take away the green intro and it fits. :woot: Well, in any case, I bet it's nothing new or if it is, it's not at all exciting. :yay:

I already took away the green intro! :woot: I have hopes!

Anyway, I would appreciate any kind of footage, I don't care if it's action-packed or not
 
It isn't a problem. It is simply the lack of acknowledgment do to wanting to dissociate with anything that came before this film. It would be like if someone went around saying this isn't a Superman film. Why? Because they say it isn't.

Maybe there's a lack of acknowledgement because it's obvious and doesn't mean much. So both movies have Zod. Like you said, it's only on the surface.

If anything, maybe Donner and Goyer shared the same logic to start the movie in Krypton. The difference seems to be that Goyer is going further into the Kryptonian world.

It wouldn't make sense to use Brainiac because with Zod you have Jor-El's legacy and a foil of what Superman could be if he wasn't raised by the Kents. Zod makes more sense for the origin story.
 
Maybe there's a lack of acknowledgement because it's obvious and doesn't mean much. So both movies have Zod. Like you said, it's only on the surface.

If anything, maybe Donner and Goyer shared the same logic to start the movie in Krypton. The difference seems to be that Goyer is going further into the Kryptonian world.

It wouldn't make sense to use Brainiac because with Zod you have Jor-El's legacy and a foil of what Superman could be if he wasn't raised by the Kents. Zod makes more sense for the origin story.

Well you could have used Brainiac on some level and made him part of Kryptonian lore. They didnt HAVE to use Zod, nore did they have to add Faora and Bizzaro/Eradicator Non creature/bot.
 
Maybe there's a lack of acknowledgement because it's obvious and doesn't mean much. So both movies have Zod. Like you said, it's only on the surface.

If anything, maybe Donner and Goyer shared the same logic to start the movie in Krypton. The difference seems to be that Goyer is going further into the Kryptonian world.

It wouldn't make sense to use Brainiac because with Zod you have Jor-El's legacy and a foil of what Superman could be if he wasn't raised by the Kents. Zod makes more sense for the origin story.

So when the reboot Batman if they do the origin again and use Ra's again, and base it around the LoS/A attacking Gotham, it will not mean much.

Yeah, I am going to say no.

By the way, you could easily make Brainiac a part of the origin. The brilliant STAS did just that. :up:

Again not a problem. I think this movie has a ton of potential. But I don't ignore the obvious because I can't handle anyone questioning any little bit the new film.
 
New "Man of Steel" teaser has been rated.

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/releases/man-steel

MAN OF STEEL

TYPE Trailer

APPROVED RUNNING TIME 1m 23s

DIRECTORS Zack Snyder

CUT This work was passed uncut.

Classified date(s) 11/03/2013



Seems to be a teaser for a trailer. Probably similar to the Star Trek Into Darkness teaser

Share others sentiments that it's most likely the original teaser reclassified for a WB home release. If it's something else and might be released outside the UK we'll find out in a couple of days...:cwink:
 
Well you could have used Brainiac on some level and made him part of Kryptonian lore. They didnt HAVE to use Zod, nore did they have to add Faora and Bizzaro/Eradicator Non creature/bot.

It is a rule. Zod must travel in three, and one must be a very attractive woman who can crush you.
 
By the way, you could easily make Brainiac a part of the origin. The brilliant STAS did just that. :up:

Yeah, I loved that... I'm still hoping that Brainiac will be set up in this film for a future sequel.
 
So when the reboot Batman if they do the origin again and use Ra's again, and base it around the LoS/A attacking Gotham, it will not mean much.

Yup, assuming they'll retread his origins.

By the way, you could easily make Brainiac a part of the origin. The brilliant STAS did just that. :up:

STAS also had Zod, but they used Jax-Ur's name instead. The characterization was Zod.

 
Last edited:
Yup, assuming they'll retread his origins.

STAS also had Zod, but they used Jax-Ur's name instead. The characterization was Zod.


And if all the other bits are included? You just skip what doesn't fit your argument. Lets just ignore Ra's. :D

Also don't know why you brought up Jax-Ur. The entire point is you can do an origin with Brainiac and without Zod. If anything fake Zod proves my point. You can still use him down the line without having to include him as the main villain of the origin film.
 
You can cover the same plot points but in different ways. Krypton can explode for different reasons. Johnathan can die in a tornado rather than with a heart attack. His relationship with Lois and the world can be different. He can defeat Zod in a different way rather than tricking Zod while he's safe in the molecule chamber, etc. To me that's what's important. But I do expect some of the beats to be the same.

I, too, orignally hoped for Braniac.
 
Incidentally, Puzo's Superman TM script was supposedly faithful to the comic especially with regards to the Krypton villains including Jax-Ur, Faora et a., and they were only revised later on to Zod, Ursa, Non after Donner came on board.
 
Superman: Unchained has a strong chance to be a very good Superman book.
That's the only upcoming DC title I'm really amped for at the moment, tbh.

As for that trailer, I have a feeling people are right that's just the teaser we already had, cut for a home video release.
 
The entire point is you can do an origin with Brainiac and without Zod. If anything fake Zod proves my point. You can still use him down the line without having to include him as the main villain of the origin film.

You can also use Brainiac down the line.

But as I was saying, narratively Zod offers more in terms of story-telling for the origin.

Zod has a direct connection to Jor-El and Krypton's homeworld. He's a foil of what Superman could be with his powers. He plays into the "first encounter" scenario with the threat of an invasion. He introduces The Phantom Zone as well as other Kryptonian characters including possibly Brainiac.

If you're going to start with Krypton, Zod is an earlier character than Brainiac. Thematically, Brainiac represents something different that wouldn't work as well for an origin. Brainiac is more about the end of things.
 
Hail Brainiac! :awesome:

I dunno why I said that I would just be so ecstatic to get him/her/it on the big screen. I like how much of Kyptonian tech seems to be appearing in MOS so I'm hopeful to having the character in a future film.
 
wu4g.jpg

Sorry for going offtopic, but where is that gif from?
 
You can also use Brainiac down the line.

But as I was saying, narratively Zod offers more in terms of story-telling for the origin.

Zod has a direct connection to Jor-El and Krypton's homeworld. He's a foil of what Superman could be with his powers. He plays into the "first encounter" scenario with the threat of an invasion. He introduces The Phantom Zone as well as other Kryptonian characters including possibly Brainiac.

If you're going to start with Krypton, Zod is an earlier character than Brainiac. Thematically, Brainiac represents something different that wouldn't work as well for an origin. Brainiac is more about the end of things.

Agreed, Brainiac is a colder, more limited character, Zod is the best villain for this story. Is better to use Brainiac in a sequel along with Lex, but it seems some need to complain about something. :oldrazz:
 
Agreed, Brainiac is a colder, more limited character, Zod is the best villain for this story. Is better to use Brainiac in a sequel along with Lex, but it seems some need to complain about something. :oldrazz:

I don't think anyone is complaining about Zod.
 
Batman and Spider-Man are my top two, with Superman being the third. Mainly due to his cultural significance and origins, which is a central part. Though I think Man of Steel will go a long way in making me like the character more than I do. And I don’t have any loyalty to the previous film series. I more appreciate STM than like it. So if there are covering old territory, eg. Zod, I’m sure MOS can do things better second time around and differently.
 
You can also use Brainiac down the line.

But as I was saying, narratively Zod offers more in terms of story-telling for the origin.

Zod has a direct connection to Jor-El and Krypton's homeworld. He's a foil of what Superman could be with his powers. He plays into the "first encounter" scenario with the threat of an invasion. He introduces The Phantom Zone as well as other Kryptonian characters including possibly Brainiac.

If you're going to start with Krypton, Zod is an earlier character than Brainiac. Thematically, Brainiac represents something different that wouldn't work as well for an origin. Brainiac is more about the end of things.
That isn't the point and you know it. The point is they have decided to do exactly what the Donner films set out to do. You can do it differently. There is no denying that. Zod wasn't even around until 20+ years after the origin was told at least a half a dozen times. From what I can tell his place in the origin didn't really come around until after the Donner film.

Heck, how many of the recent origin tales, heck any of the origin tales over the years, have featured Zod? That they are playing up the connection between Jor-El and Zod just emphasis the fact that they are taking a similar direction to the first two films.

Agreed, Brainiac is a colder, more limited character, Zod is the best villain for this story. Is better to use Brainiac in a sequel along with Lex, but it seems some need to complain about something. :oldrazz:

If you are going to make a comment like that, it would be nice if you read the thread.

Batman and Spider-Man are my top two, with Superman being the third. Mainly due to his cultural significance and origins, which is a central part. Though I think Man of Steel will go a long way in making me like the character more than I do. And I don’t have any loyalty to the previous film series. I more appreciate STM than like it. So if there are covering old territory, eg. Zod, I’m sure MOS can do things better second time around and differently.
I agree. I think it can do it better. But the point is they are doing they are retreading, at least in terms of the broader strokes. There is no need to deny it. It doesn't make this film any less exciting for me.
 
Last edited:
That isn't the point and you know it. The point is they have decided to do exactly what the Donner films set out to do. You can do it differently.

Do you really have a point? I don't know about that.

Yes, Donner and Goyer used similar characters, but they're both origin stories and as origin stories of course they're setting out to do the same thing. It doesn't mean they're copying from each other. The Zod story existed in comics before Donner. They can have the same characters and still have different ways to use them or portray them. I'm sure MOS will set itself apart and do many things different from Donner. Some similarities are to be expected because they're both Superman movies no matter what.
 
I think the reason some people (myself included) are reluctant to say that MOS is a retread of the previous films is because of the negative connotation associated with the word "retread."
 
I think the reason some people (myself included) are reluctant to say that MOS is a retread of the previous films is because of the negative connotation associated with the word "retread."

Yes. Thank you. That is what I said above.

People will fight that their are any similarities because they think the movie is being mocked.
 
Do you really have a point? I don't know about that.

Yes, Donner and Goyer used similar characters, but they're both origin stories and as origin stories of course they're setting out to do the same thing. It doesn't mean they're copying from each other. The Zod story existed in comics before Donner. They can have the same characters and still have different ways to use them or portray them. I'm sure MOS will set itself apart and do many things different from Donner. Some similarities are to be expected because they're both Superman movies no matter what.
Showtime seem to understand my point. I also have noticed you have avoided all his post on it. :oldrazz:

You keep ignoring the point because your argument ceases to exist if you acknowledge it. You keep acting like Zod's Miraculous Trio is a common, almost necessary part of the origin.

So, what are all these Superman origin stories where Zod's Miraculous Trio are the central villain? I know there is Donner's STM/SMII. The other ones?

I think the reason some people (myself included) are reluctant to say that MOS is a retread of the previous films is because of the negative connotation associated with the word "retread."

I understand that. But it doesn't make it any less true nor does that make it a bad thing. It is just what it is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"