Black Narcissus
8 | 24
- Joined
- May 2, 2012
- Messages
- 34,809
- Reaction score
- 13,546
- Points
- 103
LOL gotta give Snyder credit for a film that will still be talked about 10 years from now. Good or bad, it is better to be talked about.
Congratulations. Youve become the internet in 2018.
LOL gotta give Snyder credit for a film that will still be talked about 10 years from now. Good or bad, it is better to be talked about.
There must always be a point where you draw a line in an interpretation of a character so as not to move that character away from who he/she or it is. We merely differ on where that line is.
There must always be a point where you draw a line in an interpretation of a character so as not to move that character away from who he/she or it is. We merely differ on where that line is.
In an Elseworlds situation, in a film that was not supposed to kickstart a cinematic universe for a broad audience, Id be happy to see how Snyders philosophical standpoint created interesting and novel twists on existing characters. Nothing wrong with that. If hed made Red Son or Kingdome Come, hed have probably done a decent job.
But in a movie that is meant to kickstart a cinematic universe, and have broad appeal? Its cretinous to have made the decisions he did... and were seeing the fallout to this day.
LOL gotta give Snyder credit for a film that will still be talked about 10 years from now. Good or bad, it is better to be talked about.
The arm over Zods eyes was genius. A really good joke, but also a clever one that highlights how dumb the reasoning behind the neck snap really was.
Can't say that about any other CBM director, it seems. Except Nolan, Burton and Donner.
But, I guess, as we just saw with Star Wars, deviating from the classic interpretations can be an arduous uphill battle with the fans.
The "classic interpretation" killed Zod in an even more upsetting way: he kills him when he is depowered and defenseless. He kills him with a smile.
Snyder's deviation was to make the act of killing more moral and ethical, in my opinion. It's more heroic, and Superman's reaction to it is more sympathetic. The classic interpretation has all the things people don't like about the Snyder version and more. Reeve's version of killing Zod is actually closer to cold-blooded murder.
It didn't have to be, but it was. It's the moment we're given, implying no other occasion was worthy enough, and it's how the film vindicates Jonathan's stance -- the absolute necessity of waiting, past his entire twenties and well into his thirties if must be -- and it doesn't question it, nor do any of the characters. Lois says she doesn't believe it's an option for him to stop helping people, but the argument that he's been as good as a costume-less Superman during his entire soul-searching period wouldn't really hold up when it's clear that the events where he's intervened are only those that he's happened to witness. He's known by only a handful of folks and by no one outside of the bus and rig incidents. Not to remove credit from those saves, but if what's being judged is how they relate to Jonathan's philosophy and the mark it left on his son, they seem to have occurred in spite of it and not because. We see where he is at 33 and we see where he stands in regards to coming up with a life plan of his own that involves making himself truly available to the world. There's not enough there that would have led to a hypothetical of Clark revealing himself if he had never come across Jor-El or without Zod's cue.
In before "but da deleted scene showed he's alive!!!111".
The "classic interpretation" killed Zod in an even more upsetting way: he kills him when he is depowered and defenseless. He kills him with a smile.
Snyder's deviation was to make the act of killing more moral and ethical, in my opinion. It's more heroic, and Superman's reaction to it is more sympathetic. The classic interpretation has all the things people don't like about the Snyder version and more. Reeve's version of killing Zod is actually closer to cold-blooded murder.
Haha people can try to use that as an excuse but its deleted therefore its not part of the film.
In before "but da deleted scene showed he's alive!!!111".
A deleted scene that wasn't seen for years after the film's release. The nostalgic version of Reeve's Superman was the one depicted in the gif.
If you want to be technical, the part that's really out of character for Superman in II is when he returns to the diner to get "revenge" on the bully. Clark essentially lowers himself to the bonehead's level and makes an example of him. Nobody complains about that.
OR...is that merely a nod to early Superman, who was a lot meaner? :sarcasm:
Completely out of character for Zod. Try again.
If anything, it seemed like Zod was committing suicide by proxy. He lost his purpose, but he wasn't going to kill himself. Zod put Clark in a position where he would have to do it for him.