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

[Rodrigo90]

Er...was that the Vote or Die campaign one?

Nope. He was baninshed from the town and was found by the PETA group.

Remember this?

 

[Tempest]

Nope. He was baninshed from the town and was found by the PETA group.

Remember this?

Ha! No. I don't remember that. I shall go watch it. That show. Waaaaay off-topic, but I like the episode with the Canadian Devil. That was fricking hilarious.

MOS is super cool awesome sauce. And I still wouldn't vote for Superman for President.

 

[xxAPCxx]

I liked it. Lacked the heart that I think a great Superman movie should have though. Overall, I actually like Brandon Routh more for the role. Superman Returns was a mess, but he wasn't the problem with it. Cavill, while good, and I think he's a good New 52 Superman, he's just not what Superman should be. His features are too hard, he's almost literally too handsome too pull it off lol. He's a good Superman, but I can't by him as Clark Kent. Routh embodied strength as Superman but looked like he had the innocence to play the bumbling Clark Kent. Cavill looks like a Roman statue. Routh almost seemed to have the sadness that I picture Superman to have, wanting and having the compulsion to save everyone, but knowing he can't.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Ha! No. I don't remember that. I shall go watch it. That show. Waaaaay off-topic, but I like the episode with the Canadian Devil. That was fricking hilarious.

MOS is super cool awesome sauce. And I still wouldn't vote for Superman for President.

*****e and Turd is the name!

If we can vote for a black president, I'm sure we can vote for an alien one

 

[Tempest]

*****e and Turd is the name!

If we can vote for a black president, I'm sure we can vote for an alien one

I guess to be fair, I'd have to hear his economic policies.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I guess to be fair, I'd have to hear his economic policies.

Well, he'd save money on warfare, as he wouldn't condone those actions.

But the taxpayer would hate him for the damage he indirectly caused on MOS

 

[Tempest]

Well, he'd save money on warfare, as he wouldn't condone those actions.

But the taxpayer would hate him for the damage he indirectly caused on MOS

Eh. Cities are over-rated. Besides, he could spin it as an energy saving measure. Or something. I'm sure there's a way to make it seem like a positive step forward for the country.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Eh. Cities are over-rated. Besides, he could spin it as an energy saving measure. Or something. I'm sure there's a way to make it seem like a positive step forward for the country.

 

[Tempest]

WHY ARE YOU LAUGHING?! The energy crisis is #SeriousBusiness! It's the perfect way to make things seem better.

"Look at all the money we saved by not having electricity! We can go back to burning wood for energy!"

It'll be great.

 

[Rodrigo90]

WHY ARE YOU LAUGHING?! The energy crisis is #SeriousBusiness! It's the perfect way to make things seem better.

"Look at all the money we saved by not having electricity! We can go back to burning wood for energy!"

It'll be great.

Yeah. Metropolis doesn't need that many buildings anyway

 

[Marvin]

What are you even talking about? My statement was in no way a judgment on Rodrigo but a judgment on MOS supporters: disagree that the movie is good and you're "being negative and making snide remarks". Start to say some good things, and suddenly "Oh! he sees the light! He gets it!"

Like I said, intentions tend to get questioned depending on how you feel about a movie apparently. Your problem is that you only see it being flung the one way. You with all your accusations, literally spell it out in that very post. If you say 'nice things' then people (supporters that is) will like you. How is this not you outright questioning the intentions of supporters? That they will support you simple if you like the film and shame you simply if you don't?
What's more, "being negative and making snide remarks" is what supporters do when they hear something they don't agree with you say; so that post you made was you doing what exactly? I'm imagine it was saying something along the lines of being negative and with a snide remark when faced with something you seemingly don't agree with? That being a supporter finally making some sort of ground. Cause there was no other way to explain what was happening there. Like I said, your comments here fall into playing the victim. I can spell it out in the form of you thinking your stance get's rude and snide comments unfairly and because people don't agree, yet you infact and outright do that very thing when faced with judging the intentions(comments) of others. Others whom simply don't gasp, agree with you(as you say). Maybe people are just being honest with their feelings, both in revelation and more pertinently, agreeing. That would kinda make sense after all. I mean I was almost literally arguing these very things he's now asserting he see's but only a few pages ago. That he "see's the light" as you say would kinda be the basic response to someone seeing just what it is they have been arguing the film does for months now.

As for my assertion pertaining to his opinion, I told him to get ready, now that he's gone public this is the point where he will face what I've faced for a while, people questioning all his intentions(going forward). No matter what it is he says, or how much sense he himself thinks he makes, he'll fall into what you describe below.
And you're right your post wasn't about his agenda, it was just an implied dig for any such action, for it comes with the promise of a reward of acceptance vs shaming as you claim.

Is Rodrigo gonna get overdefensive when people criticize MOS? Is he gonna talk to his fellow MOS supporters about how "negative" and "snide" people are because they, gasp, disagree with him? Is he gonna ascribe tired, cliche reasons to why people don't like MOS? Is he gonna complain and cry "conspiracy!" if bloggers have little to no faith in WB/DC due to their track record? If he won't do any of those things, he has my support, even if he likes the movie, and I simply find it mediocre.

This is you with more of your taking the lot of supporters and painting them in your amusing fashion. Check out Joey's post on 372 or so, for more of the same. Apparently this is what I(for example) do. And here I thought I was simply defending a film with arguments I find valid, who knew. I figure everyone that does similar is doing so for similar reasons. Imagine for a second, someone asserting some dubious and petty intent in defending SR? Imagine the painting of every SR supporter as a faker that simply wants to begrudge MOS? It would get old. Rest assured, you're free to do what you want.

As to your actual question, I ask my own: Did he get over defensive when people defended MOS? did he talk to his fellow detractors about how negative and snide people were because they didn't agree with him? Did he ascribe cliche reasons as to why people liked MOS(See punchings in faces), did he cry conspiracy before or question bloggers and fans have too much blind faith in WB and DC due to a track record he himself deemed weak? If he didn't do any of those things before, I doubt he'll start now. So I suppose he shouldn't worry after all. That being said I've known a few people here and there that seemingly do all that, it's not all that uncommon.

 

[Tempest]

Yeah. Metropolis doesn't need that many buildings anyway

Especially since Superman killed 100 million billion people.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Like I said, intentions tend to get questioned depending on how you feel about a movie apparently. Your problem is that you only see it being flung the one way. You with all your accusations, literally spell it out in that very post. If you say 'nice things' then people (supporters that is) will like you. How is this not you outright questioning the intentions of supporters? That they will support you simple if you like the film and shame you simply if you don't?
What's more, "being negative and making snide remarks" is what supporters do when they hear something they don't agree with you say; so that post you made was you doing what exactly? I'm imagine it was saying something along the lines of being negative and with a snide remark when faced with something you seemingly don't agree with? That being a supporter finally making some sort of ground. Cause there was no other way to explain what was happening there. Like I said, your comments here fall into playing the victim. I can spell it out in the form of you thinking your stance get's rude and snide comments unfairly and because people don't agree, yet you infact and outright do that very thing when faced with judging the intentions(comments) of others. Others whom simply don't gasp, agree with you(as you say). Maybe people are just being honest with their feelings, both in revelation and more pertinently, agreeing. That would kinda make sense after all. I mean I was almost literally arguing these very things he's now asserting he see's but only a few pages ago. That he "see's the light" as you say would kinda be the basic response to someone seeing just what it is they have been arguing the film does for months now.

As for my assertion pertaining to his opinion, I told him to get ready, now that he's gone public this is the point where he will face what I've faced for a while, people questioning all his intentions(going forward). No matter what it is he says, or how much sense he himself thinks he makes, he'll fall into what you describe below.
And you're right your post wasn't about his agenda, it was just an implied dig for any such action, for it comes with the promise of a reward of acceptance vs shaming as you claim.


This is you with more of your taking the lot of supporters and painting them in your amusing fashion. Check out Joey's post on 372 or so, for more of the same. Apparently this is what I(for example) do. And here I thought I was simply defending a film with arguments I find valid, who knew. I figure everyone that does similar is doing so for similar reasons. Imagine for a second, someone asserting some dubious and petty intent in defending SR? Imagine the painting of every SR supporter as a faker that simply wants to begrudge MOS? It would get old. Rest assured, you're free to do what you want.

As to your actual question, I ask my own: Did he get over defensive when people defended MOS? did he talk to his fellow detractors about how negative and snide people were because they didn't agree with him? Did he ascribe cliche reasons as to why people liked MOS(See punchings in faces), did he cry conspiracy before or question bloggers and fans have too much blind faith in WB and DC due to a track record he himself deemed weak? If he didn't do any of those things before, I doubt he'll start now. So I suppose he shouldn't worry after all. That being said I've known a few people here and there that seemingly do all that, it's not all that uncommon.

Especially since Superman killed 100 million billion people.

He decreased the surplus population and he's a hero for doing that!

 

[Tempest]

He decreased the surplus population and he's a hero for doing that!

See all the good things that happened in MOS? And people were soooooo upset about all of it.

Edit: I forgot to mention all the shovel-ready jobs he created in both Smallville and Metropolis. Job-creator. Friend to the Earth. See? It's all good.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Especially since Superman killed 100 million billion people.

That monster! How dare he have a fight like the ones depicted in the comic books!

 

[Rodrigo90]

See all the good things that happened in MOS? And people were soooooo upset about all of it.

Now just get him over to Africa so he can decrease the ever growing population there, evidently putting an end to AIDS and Ebola! t:

 

[Tempest]

That monster! How dare he have a fight like the ones depicted in the comic books!

I know. It's the worst when a film actually has things from the comics.

Now just get him over to Africa so he can decrease the ever growing population there, evidently putting an end to AIDS and Ebola! t:

You missed my edit.

 

[Marvin]

First off, the more proof of your assertion:
You are right it's not the first time costumed heroics don't ensue till after he meets Jor-El but there are just as many interpretations where costumed heroics ensue before he meets Jor-El. Which proves nothing for either me or you.

There aren't any other live action feature interpretations that do it. There isn't really anything outside of comics and straight up shows circling the idea of superboy for seasons on end. I suppose that would be Smallville. Ranking it in the realm of features I'd have to imagine that counts for something. At the very least it should have you questioning past interpretations in a similar if not harsher manner. He's here full on doing superman like things in this story long before jor ever shows up. Doing more things in his youth and pre-superman days than most other heroes do after the fact..Ten years of this stuff the movie said. And given the pressure put on him, it's very heroic. Pressure to not be a hero is kinda what makes people like spidey hang it up from time to time, its' also what makes them seen as stronger the the heroes that both have it easy and get nothing but encouragement. All that and Clark is still encouraged to be a hero pre Jor.

As it's said on Krypton Clark/Kal was a natural birth. All the other Kryptonians were born to do specific tasks/jobs. But he had the potential to be anything, good or bad. And therefore it's down to how he was raised to make him a hero but I never got that.

Yes, it's kinda at this point that we can infer plenty. That is, anything he becomes is due to nurture and not specifically predestined or societal or genetic. That is, the person you meet in the film is the person he was raised to be by the humans who raised him, just as any other human is. Very different than say the alien zod was bred to be..etc.

Then you say that you simply don't see him being taught to do right and that it's only by assumption that we come to that conclusion. That's odd because it seems almost everything out of his folks mouths was about good moral parenting. You say subtle cues would work and they're there, but they fall short in that Jon doesn't give him the push to be an actual hero? How about the push to be a good and humble man?(honest question) To be like his father(jon) and his before him(jon's dad)? One that doesn't doesn't engage with bullies weaker than him even but rather walks magnanimous? Or strives towards humility? (I'd imagine superman tends to have this trait in most interpretations not named jla war).

You mentioned greater good. Everything Jon said was about the greater god imo. That's what's muddling the morality of his message I think. Nothing superman in the film does is in spite of Jon's words, they actually fall directly inline with them. Jon was explicit about him changing the world, but first he needed to find out 'who he is and just what kinda changing of the world he wanted to do', his choice. To keep his secret until then, which was also followed for Clark saved countless lives without actually revealing himself. The bus stunt wasn't him doing that.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I know. It's the worst when a film actually has things from the comics.



You missed my edit.

That's a good point!

But I know where I'm better off and that's on my benefits! If I'm taken off though, then I'll get a job cleaning up the debris and corpses!

 

[ThePhantasm]

I know. It's the worst when a film actually has things from the comics.

He even killed Zod... just like the Superman in the comics! Curses! What a betrayal of the integrity of the character!

 

[Rodrigo90]

He even killed Zod... just like the Superman in the comics! Curses! What a betrayal of the integrity of the character!

It hurts when I have to say that Chris Reeve's Superman was pure evil...he and Lois killed Zod and Ursa and both had a laugh over it...I know I had a few jokes during the Fappening, but that's so wrong!

 

[Tempest]

He even killed Zod... just like the Superman in the comics! Curses! What a betrayal of the integrity of the character!

It hurts when I have to say that Chris Reeve's Superman was pure evil...he and Lois killed Zod and Ursa and both had a laugh over it...I know I had a few jokes during the Fappening, but that's so wrong!

But I could have sworn that I was told numerous times that Superman doesn't kill. How is this possible?

 

[Rodrigo90]

But I could have sworn that I was told numerous times that Superman doesn't kill. How is this possible?

You were deceived...we all were...no matter how much we try to deny it to ourselves...Superman slaughters just like a butcher

 

[Tempest]

You were deceived...we all were...no matter how much we try to deny it to ourselves...Superman slaughters just like a butcher

This just goes to show you that you can't trust anyone who wears glorified long johns as their daily outfit.

 

[Rodrigo90]

This just goes to show you that you can't trust anyone who wears glorified long johns as their daily outfit.

Which is why he's president material!