BvS BvS Rottentomatoes score - how important will it be, and what do you hope for? - Part 8

Status
Not open for further replies.
OK -- he was hurled through a brick wall so hard the wall broke, but he's totally fine.

Maybe a couple stitches.
 
Why? He's done that on countless other mediums including comics, animation etc... This movie showed what it would look like for Superman to move at breakneck speeds, something we've all wanted always. Why do we assume that Superman killed someone? I just don't understand.

He has shown at least twice that he can shield from explosions with his cape. He could have used his hand to break the wall open. Again, I don't understand why people default to Superman killing that guy. Doesn't add up. It looked brutal. That's the point.

Yes, the old Reeves Superman could fly down and save Lois from a fall a few feet from the ground. It's not really now this one is portrayed though. When this guy saves someone from a fall it's a real graduate slowdown, so they won't get injured or worse. Superman flew at that guy faster than Lois was falling, so the speed alone just looks like kill speed, even without the wall. The dark and dreary tone of the movie also adds to the interpretation.

And I agree, the point is that they make Superman look brutal against a normal human. When Superman is brutal you don't really expect much chances for the human, other than for the fact that Superman generally doesn't kill. But neither does Batman, and here it's not even a plot point, he does it casually. That removes the trust in Snyder on this issue for me.
 
Last edited:
OK -- he was hurled through a brick wall so hard the wall broke, but he's totally fine.

Maybe a couple stitches.

In watchmen, the comedian punch through solid rock with his bear fists. Snyder likes to over exaggerate things for effect.

It's lame, don't get me wrong, but I just don't think that scene was intended to be 'OMG Superman just murdered someone'.
 
In watchmen, the comedian punch through solid rock with his bear fists. Snyder likes to over exaggerate things for effect.

It's lame, don't get me wrong, but I just don't think that scene was intended to be 'OMG Superman just murdered someone'.

No it doesn't. And that's my problem with it. Snyder does things for visual emphasis with disregard to story.
 
How do you get shoved through bricks walls at that force and not end up dead or crippled?

spongebob-imagination.gif
 
Momoa and Fisher are a disgrace. The ignorance and egoism is disgusting. Gives a bad name to the franchise imo.
 
Whatever, Momoa and Fischer are stirring **** on Twitter.

Good times :-)
 
Someone needs to calm those hussies down. Ezra Miller should teach them a thing or two. Aquaman don't be hatin' on us land-dwellers. :o
 
OK -- he was hurled through a brick wall so hard the wall broke, but he's totally fine.

Maybe a couple stitches.

Numerous brick walls, actually.
But apparently we're supposed to assume that Superman hugged him to safety, taking the brunt of the impact himself while safely protecting the man's neck from whiplash. I assume afterwards he gave him a warm milk and tucked him in for a nice nap.
 
I realize no one cares and would like to go on believing Superman killed that dude, but there's really no proof of it.

I saw the movie again yesterday and that whole thing happens so fast, it's impossible to see how exactly Superman even grabbed the guy and then flew through the walls. He could have grabbed the guy with one arm and broke through the walls with another outstretched arm. He could have grabbed the guy but broke through the wall using his own shoulder/back while protecting the guy.

The point is that there are more possible explanations outside of "Superman killed that guy by using his body to break through a bunch of concrete walls" that can be applied here.
 
I think it's pretty ridiculous that the first scene featuring Superman in this film requires the viewer to do mental gymnastics to figure out how he DIDN'T kill a guy. But as with everything regarding Superman in this film, Snyder and Terrio didn't take time to think it through. It's so obvious they don't give two sh**s about the character. I wouldn't be surprised if Supes doesn't even show up in JL until the last 20 minutes.
 
I realize no one cares and would like to go on believing Superman killed that dude, but there's really no proof of it.

I saw the movie again yesterday and that whole thing happens so fast, it's impossible to see how exactly Superman even grabbed the guy and then flew through the walls. He could have grabbed the guy with one arm and broke through the walls with another outstretched arm. He could have grabbed the guy but broke through the wall using his own shoulder/back while protecting the guy.

The point is that there are more possible explanations outside of "Superman killed that guy by using his body to break through a bunch of concrete walls" that can be applied here.

I really think Snyder could have used a slo mo here. Superman is way too fast to figure out anything.

As a person who is positive about the film, I like to believe that guy isn't dead. And vice versa for people who didn't like the film.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that the first scene featuring Superman in this film requires the viewer to do mental gymnastics to figure out how he DIDN'T kill a guy. But as with everything regarding Superman in this film, Snyder and Terrio didn't take time to think it through. It's so obvious they don't give two sh**s about the character. I wouldn't be surprised if Supes doesn't even show up in JL until the last 20 minutes.

I felt he was the heart of the film. I cared for this Superman more than I ever did. I think they nailed the aspect of what an alien would go through on Earth.
 
Whatever, Momoa and Fischer are stirring **** on Twitter.

Good times :-)


Not surprised. Momoa started a **** Marvel thing on social media as well.


I'm fine with this kind of thing, but it looks silly if it's unjustified.

Mackie and Jackson's comments against DC/WB worked because.. they ended up being true.
 
Lol at Momoa, as terrible as the film was he has the worst performance of them all. He can take a seat... What a terrible scene lol.
 
The point is that there are more possible explanations outside of "Superman killed that guy by using his body to break through a bunch of concrete walls" that can be applied here.

Another point: there should be only one on screen.
 
-fans complain about collateral damage in MOS

-fans complain about them mentioning 2 times that a place is abandoned/ uninhabited in new movie because they complained about collateral damage in MOS

-fans complain about superman throwing man through brick wall and he obviously killed him because his next line was not well gee golly lois I protected him completely, in fact he didn't have a scratch on him.

-fan complain about batman using a gun in a dream sequence yet the nolan trilogy is flawless cause it is not like in batman begins christian bales says "yeah but I don't have to save you" or anything

if they made a movie out of all the inconsequential things fans claim they want to see in a movie it would consist of nothing but exposition. it would be more boring then superman returns.
 
Lol at Momoa, as terrible as the film was he has the worst performance of them all. He can take a seat... What a terrible scene lol.

Oh come on, he had like 5 seconds on screen. Not even any dialogue. It was hardly a performance lol.
 
Oh come on, he had like 5 seconds on screen. Not even any dialogue. It was hardly a performance lol.

How sad is that? And he's throwing shade at Marvel... :whatever: What a classy guy!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,288
Messages
22,080,180
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"