Rate MAN OF STEEL......once and for all

[Boy Scout]

I still can't understand to this day why Jonathan did what he did. But from Costner's performance, you could tell Jonathan was a pretty depressed guy and just wanted to be sucked into the tornado.
And living in MOS's depressing enviorement, with other depressing people, I'm not surprised.

That was one of the worst scenes in the movie. I HATED Jonathan.

And I can justify Supes killing Zod. I had no problem with it. Zod wouldn't have stopped even if he had killed those people in the station...why don't people understand that?

It was absolutely justifiable. My issue is that the execution of it all was piss poor.

 

[The Question]

The Tornado scene was horrible. Costner didn't emote at all, the scenario felt super contrived, his simply fading into the tornado looked incredibly goofy, Caville was way too old and it was super distracting, all around a failure of visual storytelling.

 

[Boy Scout]

Costner was sleepwalking the entire time. Easily the worst of the cast.

 

[Rodrigo90]

That was one of the worst scenes in the movie. I HATED Jonathan.

It was too stupid to feel sorry for him.
I know of tragic tales of people who would jump into oceans and burning buildings to save their pets, so I can't fault Jonathan for doing that. But Clark offered to save the dog...He didn't even have to use his powers to do what Jonathan did. He got to the car in time and saved the dog, it was just the crush of it that dealt the killing strike.
And while it is admirable of a father to put his child above his own safety...It was just bizarre. Really bizarre. As The Question pointed out, there was no appropriate response from a man who was about to be sucked into a tornado, to his death.
The guy was either pretty suicidal, or just written in a pretty strange away. I think Costner's slight smile when he was about to die was because he knew he'd get his pay cheque after this last day of filming
Smallville had its faults, but John Schneider was a great Jonathan Kent...BECAUSE HE WAS WRITTEN AS A HUMAN BEING!
He would have doubts, but would never tell Clark not to do something if it wasn't the right thing.
He would be encouraging, while at the same time, fearful.
He would get angry, which caused him to lose his life.

Costner was pratically a robot, who was programmed to be a killjoy and give little to no emotion.

An admirable character, at certain times, but very oddly distant and unsure of everything, which rubbed off on Clark...
And his decisions were stupid and ones that didn't make him seem human in the slightest.

It was absolutely justifiable. My issue is that the execution of it all was piss poor.

Yep. It made sense...but was handled very crudely.

 

[Zionite1]

Okay guys talked to mod.He doesnt see anything wrong with the Poll.

Looks very much like the Poll is accurate after all.So yeah.Most people like MOS on this boards.t:

 

[Rodrigo90]

A conspiracy....CONSPIRACY I TELLS YA!

But I would like to hear their reasons for its excellence...

 

[Pickleweasel]

Reporting a poll cuz its not how you like LOL dead bananas everywhere

 

[Boy Scout]

It was too stupid to feel sorry for him.
I know of tragic tales of people who would jump into oceans and burning buildings to save their pets, so I can't fault Jonathan for doing that. But Clark offered to save the dog...He didn't even have to use his powers to do what Jonathan did. He got to the car in time and saved the dog, it was just the crush of it that dealt the killing strike.
And while it is admirable of a father to put his child above his own safety...It was just bizarre. Really bizarre. As The Question pointed out, there was no appropriate response from a man who was about to be sucked into a tornado, to his death.
The guy was either pretty suicidal, or just written in a pretty strange away. I think Costner's slight smile when he was about to die was because he knew he'd get his pay cheque after this last day of filming
Smallville had its faults, but John Schneider was a great Jonathan Kent...BECAUSE HE WAS WRITTEN AS A HUMAN BEING!
He would have doubts, but would never tell Clark not to do something if it wasn't the right thing.
He would be encouraging, while at the same time, fearful.
He would get angry, which caused him to lose his life.

Costner was pratically a robot, who was programmed to be a killjoy and give little to no emotion.

An admirable character, at certain times, but very oddly distant and unsure of everything, which rubbed off on Clark...
And his decisions were stupid and ones that didn't make him seem human in the slightest.

 

[Zionite1]

Reporting a poll cuz its not how you like LOL dead bananas everywhere

Its time I reveal my reasons for creating this poll:

I created this poll to prove to the MOS haters on the board that they are not as many as theyd like to think and tht majority of the people liked it.Well the poll is right there.You may not like it but by God you have to accept it

 

[Boy Scout]

I don't think there was ever any doubt.

And considering how poorly constructed this poll is in the first place, with very few in-between options, I don't think you can count this as a win.

 

[Zionite1]

I don't think there was ever any doubt.

Posters like Flint marko disagree.He thinks its evenly split.

 

[Boy Scout]

I'm not convinced that it isn't a 51/49 - 60/40 split. A few people have already remarked upon the absurd surge in positive votes in the last 24 hours, so I don't think I need to add my two cents.

 

[Zionite1]

I'm not convinced that it isn't a 51/49 - 60/40 split. A few people have already remarked upon the absurd surge in positive votes in the last 24 hours, so I don't think I need to add my two cents.

Like i said reported it to the mods.Its legit from what they can see

 

[Boy Scout]

You also just admitted you created the poll with biased intentions.

It doesn't really matter. People like what they like.

 

[Zionite1]

You also just admitted you created the poll with biased intentions.

It doesn't really matter. People like what they like.

If my intentions were wrong the poll would have proved it.I just got tired of hearing how "hated" the movie was and wanted to show how inaccurrate that statement is.

Anyway the poll is there once and for all.

 

[Boy Scout]

 

[DeadPresident]

That's another thing I didn't like about the movie. Superman never kills people or beings, only as a last resort.

You mean like in exchange for the lives of an innocent family, that kind of last resort?

Let's play this out logically, considering Zod explicitly told Kal he was going to kill "every single human", if he had let Zod out of that chokehold and continued the fight, how many extra lives would have been lost?

People are clinging onto this "he never takes a life" thing like dogmatic children. Honestly, in that particular moment, the most Superman thing he could have done was to take Zod's life, in exchange for the safety of literally everyone else. What people actually don't like about Superman killing Zod is that the writers put Supes in a position that makes him less than the perfect, effervescent boy scout.

 

[The Question]

I think debating wether the actions taken by a fictional character within a fictional scenario make logical sense is kind of missing the point. Writers can craft and wrist any situation to justify the actions of their characters in a logical pragmatic sense, but that doesn't mean that it makes narrative sense or that it fulfills the themes of the story in an effective and positive way.

 

[DeadPresident]

I think debating wether the actions taken by a fictional character within a fictional scenario make logical sense is kind of missing the point. Writers can craft and wrist any situation to justify the actions of their characters in a logical pragmatic sense, but that doesn't mean that it makes narrative sense or that it fulfills the themes of the story in an effective and positive way.

Firstly, that point is debatable. If you look at SHH about 50% of the arguments about most CBMs is about the decisions taken by a fictional character in a fictional situation, and why.

Secondly, I'm not sure there are many scenarios that could've been written that wouldn't have quickly been identified as contrivances by the writers. I understand your point, but personally I feel like people who criticize the Zod killing within the vacuum of MoS only are the ones missing the point. People who say "Superman never kills" are off base. Superman, the entire point and his purpose (by his own admission) is to safeguard humanity. Not killing people is a good way of achieving it, but he'll cross that line when the alternative is worse. It's about as basic as 5>2.

 

[The Question]

Firstly, that point is debatable. If you look at SHH about 50% of the arguments about most CBMs is about the decisions taken by a fictional character in a fictional situation, and why.

That doesn't mean that it isn't missing the point. It is possible for 50% of people within a given population to miss the point.

Secondly, I'm not sure there are many scenarios that could've been written that wouldn't have quickly been identified as contrivances by the writers. I understand your point, but personally I feel like people who criticize the Zod killing within the vacuum of MoS only are the ones missing the point. People who say "Superman never kills" are off base. Superman, the entire point and his purpose (by his own admission) is to safeguard humanity. Not killing people is a good way of achieving it, but he'll cross that line when the alternative is worse. It's about as basic as 5>2.

1: Zod could have been sucked back into the Phantom Zone with the other Kryptonians. Snyder and Goywer constructed that sequence of events so that Zod wasn't near the portal when it sucked everyone in, but they didn't need to do that, or there could have been a frantic last-minute fight between Zod and Superman that ends with Superman forcing Zod into the portal. No second climax with Zod, just end that whole sequence with that kissing moment.

2: "Superman doesn't kill" isn't the only argument against Superman killing Zod. It's only the weakest one. Lots of people, myself included, are open to the notion in theory, but hated how it was executed.

 

[Tempest]

Aw, it makes me so sad that some of you didn't like Jonathan Kent, or his death scene. I adored him, and his death scene still gives me goosebumps.

 

[kguillou]

Let me ask you guys a theoretical question, do you guys think the outrage would have been as grand if say it was Batman killing the Joker?

 

[Tempest]

Let me ask you guys a theoretical question, do you guys think the outrage would have been as grand if say it was Batman killing the Joker?

Whatever happens in Batman films, all the rage happens, because everything is always wrong.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I think WB studios would've been set ablaze if Batman killed Joker...Sure, he did it before in B89...but, you know?

 

[The Batman]

Okay guys talked to mod.He doesnt see anything wrong with the Poll.

Looks very much like the Poll is accurate after all.So yeah.Most people like MOS on this boards.t:

MOS was voted best Superman film on these very forums. It also won "Best Superhero Movie" for 2013 on here as well. If you've been paying attention, its really not a plot twist that most people on this site would find the movie "excellent". Its exactly why I said this film was overrated earlier in this thread.

I also find it funny that some people find it ridiculous that people would create fake user names to up votes on a poll. I once saw someone on SHH! get banned because there was a "Batman: TAS vs Spectacular Spider Man" poll, and he got so upset that BTAS was winning, that he created fake accounts to up the votes for SSP. Not to mention that people do this kind of thing all the time all over the internet.