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

[Killer]

the zod/cal fight last less than 5 minutes.

Yap. It wasn´t as long as many people think

 

[Naked Shia]

and it certainly didn't feel long to me. I actually wish it was longer. I love that fight.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Curious how old you think he was in the Donner movie(before saving a single life that is). Not that you think that movie is perfect of course, but I am curious what your read was...

Yeah I don't like it there either.

And i'm not saying they should have had him wearing the suit as a teenager like in Superboy.

It's just about showing that he WANTS to be able to do more. That he's not just drifting through life and at no point saying 'Okay, I need to do something with all these powers now, I can't just keep hiding'.

TBH, I don't think it would have taken much to satisfy me in this department, and they did have a moment that came really close - Jonathon and Clark's fight in the truck before he died, where Clark was saying he wanted to be more than just a farmer.

If that conversation had gone that step further, if he'd said something about all of his gifts going to waste, about how many people he could help - it would have been great.

I mean, personally I love it when he's shown to have pursued an interest in journalism after college... especially when the subject of the stories he goes after are mostly social injustices. It shows him as someone who is passionate about helping people, even if it takes him a while to figure out how to take that to a wider scale.

But it didn't have to be anything that specific. Just some indication that he wouldn't have been satisfied just staying in hiding indefinitely until forced to come out. That at some point, he would have been unable to do nothing any longer.

Sorry but your assertion about what origin stories need to have is far less objective than one about spelling errors in a script. Blade's an 'origin story'...it's somewhat unconventional. But then again all of that as well as the films quality is 'subjective'.

I just don't think you can brush EVERY story aspect I bring up away by saying 'It's all subjective' or 'They are just breaking convention'.

Not everything is a result of the film makers consciously trying to be unconventional in their approach. Some of it is simply things they have over looked, things they didn't think were important (but I think are), and things they simply didn't know how to handle.

If I were to argue this, I'd no doubt say it's better to reveal your earth destroying powers when there is giant comet promising imminent death on it's way. But that's if I was going to argue it. Again, do you recall what Perry said about someone like Clark existing?

A comet I could understand. It's a totally different scenario. It's not a member of your own race.

You only have to look at the current racial & religious prejudices surrounding terrorism to know that if a terrorist makes a threat against the entire world, people are going to be skeptical of all people that are associated with that terrorist... and since he names Kal-el as one of his people who has been hiding out here, it is literally the moment in the film where the public would be the most likely to distrust him or even hate him.

If he'd come out long before then, he might have had the chance to tell his story without fear and prejudice immediately blocking people's ability to keep an open mind.

Clark becoming a hero as you say, isn't about encouragement to become a hero. If you really mean to argue this then I find you are arguing for a lesser hero relative to others imo, the old pat on the head and shoulder if you will. Clark becoming a hero, as I was hoping you were arguing, was about he being shown love and that being his motivating factor to show his love towards the rest of the world. I really couldn't give a care if that act(tornado sacrifice) was meant to keep him from being a "hero" or not(again I don't need superman getting hero encouragement for it to work), I care that said act enforced the love of his father(probably don't do that for someone you don't love). If you want to discuss if this act strengthens the idea of jons love for his son vs weakens, please do. Otherwise I fear we are talking about different things.

It is my opinion, that showing your child you love them (and how Jonathon Kent usually shows his son he loves him) is showing them you trusts THEM. By showing him that he has faith in him and who he can become.

Not to mention the fact that my view of Jonathon is someone who also has more faith in the human race than that. More faith in their ability to receive someone like his son.

That moment to me is a father saying to his son 'No, you can't let anyone see your powers because there is no way that you can handle what comes next, and there is no way that they could possibly see your act of heroism and be accepting of you... because humans are horrible and hateful. Trust me. My life is not worth the disastrous consequences of anyone knowing the truth about you'

And to me, that isn't the kind of love I see having a positive influence on someone's upbringing, especially the upbringing of a man who eventually becomes a superhero.

I'm not saying it's not love. I'm just saying it's not the kind of love that you can claim is a contributing factor of a man becoming a superhero. Which was the point of this discussion in the first place.

If your now discussing something else, then yes, we have reached a fork in the road.

I'm not beholden to anything. Just look at my undying love for the Blade movie for instance; Read that book it's based on lately? I believe in the idea of adaptation, I also believe in receiving such a thing on it's own merits regardless of what came before. I grew up on 60's batman, I didn't use that to then gauge TAS/DKR.

If I was to make a truly great power ranger movie right now, what would I be beholding to, it's fans and what they expect or the best possible execution of it's premise given all of our film history? Oh wait but I made the villains win? Fail, not because that's actually a bad idea but because during the saturday morning run...

See i'm of the opinion that interpretations are great, but there are key characteristics that you have to keep in tact or it just becomes a separate entity.

It's like the 'adaption' of I am Legend. They changed so much I literally don't know why they called it I am Legend other than wanting the name to boost profits. It is nothing like the book.

Similarly, I find Jonathon Kent, in this incarnation, is shown as a completely different character. That his key characteristics have been changed heavily.

Reading all of these statements in order I feel you and are simply disagree on just what a hero is and just what it was Clark was up to prior to meeting Jor.
That includes the oil rig fiasco.

As for that first point about his heroic nature. I fear this is the crux of our issue. Just what is Clark's nature at the age of 13 if not heroic exactly? I suppose that's thanks to jor as well..

I apologize because on re reading it I can see that there is a key word missing from my post. 'Super'.

I don't mean to say that the heroic acts we saw don't make him a hero. Of course, anyone who saves anyone is a hero, and I feel bad for not taking care to point that out.

I just mean it doesn't make him a superhero. And it's the story of how he becomes a superhero.

So re addressing my questions in that post but using the word I meant to - do you think he would have ever become a SUPERHERO of his own accord if he'd never found the scout ship and Zod had never arrived?

Or do you think he would have continued drifting in the shadows?

I liked that too. That was Shannon at his best.

Agreed, although it just kind of made me sad they'd not done MORE of that with him. The rest of his lines were just so full of cliches.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Ok...a few pages into my MOS script...and instead of starting on Krypton, I've started it in his childhood...and at least one kid dies in the bus accident...and instead of Clark being a travelling hobo...He's an Aids Worker in Isreal...and I'm trying to keep the Jesus references to a minimum

 

[DA_Champion]

Why Israel?

 

[Rodrigo90]

Why Israel?

Two reasons. I'm alluding to the events of Gaza, with the conflict going on.

And because Jerusalem is the capital of Isreal, and Jesus had connections there

 

[hopefuldreamer]

...and I'm trying to keep the Jesus references to a minimum

And because Jerusalem is the capital of Isreal, and Jesus had connections there

 

[Rodrigo90]

I'm not going to use all the imagery and Bible inspirations that MOS did

Noticeable, but on a subconscious level

Like he's in Isreal, but you see nothing alluding to Christ.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I'm not going to use all the imagery and Bible inspirations that MOS did

Noticeable, but on a subconscious level

I'm just teasing. I think having him out in an area of the world that the GA recognise from the news is a good idea. It makes the film feel current and more grounded in reality if you allude to real events.

 

[Killer]

7.5 for me.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I'm just teasing. I think having him out in an area of the world that the GA recognise from the news is a good idea. It makes the film feel current and more grounded in reality if you allude to real events.

I spent an hour last night going back and forth looking for the events in Gaza and seeing where Aid Workers are most needed and where all the hotspots are for attacks.
I was going to put him in Syria instead and make ISIS a part of it, but what with all the beheadings, I felt uncomfortable.

I'm using a few things from the beginning of Birthright, where it was Africa that was at the heart of the conflict. But I want to keep it as current and relatable as I can.

Lois is going to be one of the journalists covering the story...but then realise she prefers writing instead of hosting

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I spent an hour last night going back and forth looking for the events in Gaza and seeing where Aid Workers are most needed and where all the hotspots are for attacks.
I was going to put him in Syria instead and make ISIS a part of it, but what with all the beheadings, I felt uncomfortable.

I'm using a few things from the beginning of Birthright, where it was Africa that was at the heart of the conflict. But I want to keep it as current and relatable as I can.

Sounds great to me so far... I was actually so surprised they showed no current events in the film. They kept banging on and on about how it would be grounded in reality, but did literally NOTHING to give the setting a real world context.

I'll be first in line to read it when it's done!

I thought about doing a re write myself after I came up with an alternate ending to the neck snap. But ultimately I think going over and over what could have been would just depress me.

I don't mind reading someone else ideas, but spending that much time on everything I think needed changing in the story would probably drive me nuts

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Random question: in the comics, previous movies, tv shows, etc, what are Jonathan's reasons for keeping Clark's existence a secret?

 

[Rodrigo90]

Sounds great to me so far... I was actually so surprised they showed no current events in the film. They kept banging on and on about how it would be grounded in reality, but did literally NOTHING to give the setting a real world context.

I'll be first in line to read it when it's done!

I thought about doing a re write myself after I came up with an alternate ending to the neck snap. But ultimately I think going over and over what could have been would just depress me.

I don't mind reading someone else ideas, but spending that much time on everything I think needed changing in the story would probably drive me nuts

Cheers big ears!

I know
I'm trying to keep it in line with the film, using what it gave us as a basis and then trying to change what people had issues with and what I still have issues with.
I'm trying to get Clark's backstory in with the flashbacks, but make them more consistent to the story in hand.
And I'm trying to shake up my biggest complaint...the rush job at the beginning when he finds the ship. You see Cavill, he hardly says anything, just a few lines...then he's Superman...I still hate that!

 

[Rodrigo90]

Random question: in the comics, previous movies, tv shows, etc, what are Jonathan's reasons for keeping Clark's existence a secret?

The only thing I know is from Smallville.

And that's sort of what they alluded to in MOS.
Is that Jonathan and Martha were fearful of what people what do to Clark if they knew he was an Alien.
Jonathan in Smallville said that he and Martha would cry at the thought of the Government taking their son away and doing all sorts of tests on him and that they would never see him again.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Random question: in the comics, previous movies, tv shows, etc, what are Jonathan's reasons for keeping Clark's existence a secret?

In some comics, previous movies, tv shows etc they don't keep Clark's existence a secret once he's older. He comes out to the world as Superman... of his own accord.

Keeping his existence a secret as a kid is obviously sensible.

When he is older, of course those fears still exist... but he's a man now, and his parents have to take a step back in being so protective. It's a journey all parents have to go through in one way or another.

 

[HaplessHenchman]

and it certainly didn't feel long to me. I actually wish it was longer. I love that fight.

Yeah, it was awesome.

The "too much action" complaint is one of the oddest criticisms, to me, that MOS gets.

 

[BH/HHH]

Yeah, it was awesome.

The "too much action" complaint is one of the oddest criticisms, to me, that MOS gets.

 

[BH/HHH]

Ok...a few pages into my MOS script...and instead of starting on Krypton, I've started it in his childhood...and at least one kid dies in the bus accident...and instead of Clark being a travelling hobo...He's an Aids Worker in Isreal...and I'm trying to keep the Jesus references to a minimum

Would love to read it when you're done

 

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah, it was awesome.

The "too much action" complaint is one of the oddest criticisms, to me, that MOS gets.

Yeah. Someone complained to me recently that the movie featured "a 45 minute action sequence with no dialogue." Umm, no. The film does feature two big action set pieces towards the end (the World Engine stuff and then the fight with Zod). But there is plenty of dialogue throughout. Maybe people felt there should have been more, but what exactly would you have added? Was Superman supposed to TALK to the World Engine as he was destroying it? Should have have delivered a zinger every time he punched Zod?

If only Joss Whedon had been there to give him brilliant lines like "SUPERMAN SMASH" and some sh** about toads and lightning.

 

[WBwins]

One of the key things I wanted to show in my Fanscript was to showcase the world as a place that needs Superman.

In my Script the World has been suffering from frequent Natural disasters.So many lives have been lost,so much despair.........

....Until Superman.......

 

[I Am The Knight]

The problem for me is that the amount of action in MOS came at the expense of character development and story.

 

[Flint Marko]

The problem for me is that the amount of action in MOS came at the expense of character development and story.

Boom. No matter how many times its said here, a few still won't get it.
"Oh well people complain about no action in SR, but now that they get action in MoS of course teh haters are still whining "
It's a pretty easy idea to grasp.

I hardly see how it's quite the assumption. Zod said Kal drew them there, he never said they wouldn't have found him had it not been for the signal, which could have also easily been a line of dialogue. The statement in and of itself implies a matter of speed. An extreme example would be if there were literally 10 outposts and this same chain of events occurred, Zod would be in the position to say the same exact thing, even if he was on out post 5, "you drew us here". I'm not getting into what you are saying about the christ parable, for it's I find it interesting that for the amount of complaining there is to be had about the christ parable existing, this is seemingly an argument against it...

I'm just asserting that the film implies Zod was on his way to earth eventually. Given his means and determination. Unless there were of course 10 billion outposts(something I see as odd) for him to search but even still...

If you are a science head, there would be something interesting things to consider. Such as just how fast these ships get around without the hyperdrive Jor was said to have invented. I'd imagine it would fall into light speeds at most. Even then, that would kinda suck given all the time dilation that would occur in their lifetimes of the journeymen vs krypton. But still, I'm proposing that the outposts ships weren't actually sent 'all' that far away from each other. Then there is the issue of just how fast that(light speed) traveling distress beacon reached zod. Again, doesn't seem like it's all that far. For instance if you look into our own radio signal bubble and how far it is given it's been growing for over half a century...I digress, I just don't think Zod would have missed earth in the not to distant future is all. If it wasn't not it would have been later. But who's to say.

This is a pretty dumb thing to be debating. My original point was that the Jesus parallels are weak and unnecessary. I further expanded on this point by bringing up that Superman was, unlike Jesus, saving us from something he himself brought onto humanity. The film makes the point to emphasize this by having Zod say "you led us here, Kal".
To say, "well maybe Zod would've found the earth eventually" is not only missing my point but going against what is shown in the movie, as, once again, the movie points out that it was Kal's doing that led the Kryptonian's to the eath. Is it possible that Zod would have found the earth at some point? ...I mean, sure, maybe, I guess the film never says otherwise, but why would it even need to? Why would Zod have to say, "Oh we never would have found this if not for you"? It's such a ridiculous thing to speculate.
By that same logic who is to say he wouldn't have found another inhabitable planet before the earth? Zod never said that wasn't an option, so by your standards I guess it could have happened. The biggest reason they came to earth was to retrieve the codex from Kal, not to necessarily rebuild Krypton. Once they got the distress beacon from the scout ship they knew Kal was on earth, so they came there to retrieve the codex and rebuild Krypton. Had Superman not have triggered the distress beacon, whose to say they wouldn't have stumbled across another planet before earth and rebuilt Krypton there?
Once again, it isn't part of my original point and the movie directly says that it was Kal's actions that led them to the earth. You saying otherwise seems like disagreeing solely for the sake of disagreeing, as I really don't think this is a worthwhile thing to argue in the first place.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Would love to read it when you're done

Thanks!

 

[Flint Marko]

Yeah. Someone complained to me recently that the movie featured "a 45 minute action sequence with no dialogue." Umm, no. The film does feature two big action set pieces towards the end (the World Engine stuff and then the fight with Zod). But there is plenty of dialogue throughout. Maybe people felt there should have been more, but what exactly would you have added? Was Superman supposed to TALK to the World Engine as he was destroying it? Should have have delivered a zinger every time he punched Zod?

If only Joss Whedon had been there to give him brilliant lines like "SUPERMAN SMASH" and some sh** about toads and lightning.

It's sad when you can't defend a film without insulting other ones.