BvS Skepticism Regarding the Film - Part 7

[John Locke]

We only saw Ben Affleck at the Smallville cemetery and maybe the back of Amy Adams' head. It's only been reported that Lane, Fishburne, and Cavill were there. So who knows if they actually were there.

 

[Joe Von Zombie]

I've already started to accept this film probably wont be as good as Man of Steel due to the fact we're probably going to get a mindless killing machine villain with no character development shoehorned into the final act.

Luthor should have been the only villain, and the heroes should have worked together to foil one of his plots, not fight one of his lab experiments.

Oh well. If I prepare myself long enough for the disappointment, it will be alot easier to take.

Based on what?

 

[GreenKToo]

But isnt a lab experiment by Lex a plot of his? I mean if Lex makes it to destroy supes or to ruin his rep, isnt that as good as sinking california to grab some real estate or making a whole new continent?
Im not sold on this actor thats playing lex, but i have no problem with him making some kind of creature to take on superman.

 

[DeadPresident]

I've already started to accept this film probably wont be as good as Man of Steel due to the fact we're probably going to get a mindless killing machine villain with no character development shoehorned into the final act.

Luthor should have been the only villain, and the heroes should have worked together to foil one of his plots, not fight one of his lab experiments.

Oh well. If I prepare myself long enough for the disappointment, it will be alot easier to take.

lel kewl stry

 

[Micromind]

Don't believe the doomsday rumors, I think that Metallo is the main villain, and a few other minor villains.

 

[Aejej]

Yeah, we've already passed by Luthor Realty twice. Enough of that.

Bring on Metallo!

 

[herolee10]

It is a complete waste of time and ruins death in the universe. Making Superman Agent Coulson would be the biggest mistake the DCEU could make.

The same was once said about the idea of Superman killing off one of his enemies and then MOS happened.lol

 

[Bathead]

For all this talk of the funeral set pic, I dont remember ever actually seeing it and I have been following the production pretty hardcore. And even if that rumor is true, we have no idea the context of the shot anyways.

Anyways Superman isnt dying...besides the obvious stupidity of doing it and how illogical it is, if you kill him everyone knows he is coming back anyways so the death means nothing to the audience. It is a complete waste of time and ruins death in the universe. Making Superman Agent Coulson would be the biggest mistake the DCEU could make.

Exactly right. Just because Cavill is not seen in the ONE (two?) pic, doesn't mean he wasn't there to participate in the shoot, and is in no way "proof" that the funeral is for Superman/Clark. And I agree, it would be a huge mistake anyway. Some of y'all are a little too quick on the trigger jumping to such a conclusion.

 

[herolee10]

Exactly right. Just because Cavill is not seen in the ONE (two?) pic, doesn't mean he wasn't there to participate in the shoot, and is in no way "proof" that the funeral is for Superman/Clark. And I agree, it would be a huge mistake anyway. Some of y'all are a little too quick on the trigger jumping to such a conclusion.

Well the thing is though; Perry, Lois, Martha, and Bruce have no reason to all be at Smallville Cemetery unless it was because of them thinking/believing that Clark was dead.

And he's the only person that connects all of them together. Plus, people thought that it would be stupid for Snyder to have Superman do something like snap Zod's neck and yet we still got that.

 

[Majik1387]

Snapping Zod's neck wasn't stupid.

 

[herolee10]

Snapping Zod's neck wasn't stupid.

It was to a lot of so called Superman "Purists" who believed that Superman shouldn't, by any means, kill off one of his sentient enemies.

 

[Majik1387]

Superman does not have Batman's rule of no killing.

 

[roach]

It was to a lot of so called Superman "Purists" who believed that Superman should, by any means, kill off one of his sentient enemies.

Wait the Purist believe Superman SHOULD kill off one of his enemies???
Then what's the complaint?

 

[herolee10]

Superman does not have Batman's rule of no killing.

I believe he does. When he did cross that line at one point, to kill an Alternate version of Zod (who was responsible for wiping away several inhabited star systems), he quit being superman for awhile as a result of guilt and promised later on to never cross that line.

Wait the Purist believe Superman SHOULD kill off one of his enemies???
Then what's the complaint?

Oops, my apologies about that Roach. Typo there. I mean Superman purists, that I saw online back then, thought that Superman should never be either put in a position where he has to kill off one of his sentient villains or do it at all, in general.

 

[roach]

I believe he does. When he did cross that line at one point, to kill an Alternate version of Zod (who was responsible for wiping away several inhabited star systems), he quit being superman for awhile as a result of guilt and promised later on to never cross that line.



Oops, my apologies about that Roach. Typo there. I mean Superman purists, that I saw online back then, thought that Superman should never be either put in a position where he has to kill off one of his sentient villains or do it at all, in general.

I was being silly

 

[AnneFan]

I believe he does. When he did cross that line at one point, to kill an Alternate version of Zod (who was responsible for wiping away several inhabited star systems), he quit being superman for awhile as a result of guilt and promised later on to never cross that line.

Yes, but to be fair Superman never outlined any moral 'no killing' code in MoS. There's every chance they'll flesh something out as the character develops in the DCCU.

 

[Rowsdower!]

It depends on who is writing the character. Mark Waid's Superman has this hard and fast rule about never killing anyone under any circumstances. I like Waid a lot, but I think he goes overboard with this (see: his reaction to the Zod neck snap).

On the other hand, John Byrne's Superman or Dan Jurgens' Superman both are willing to take a life if they absolutely have to. Byrne's Superman killed Zod and Jurgens' Supes killed Doomsday twice. I think I prefer this take on the character. He's not Frank Castle; he doesn't actively want to kill; but if there is no other option and innocent lives are at stake, he does what has to be done.

 

[Joe Von Zombie]

It was to a lot of so called Superman "Purists" who believed that Superman shouldn't, by any means, kill off one of his sentient enemies.

And those same purists gush over superman 2, another film where Superman kills zod.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah, that's the one I don't get. Superman DIDN'T have to kill Zod in that instance, yet somehow it's okay there. And yeah, I know that there's a deleted scene where Zod and the others actually are shown to have survived and are arrested, but that didn't make the final cut.

 

[herolee10]

Yeah I didn't understand the argument that was made by people back then regarding the Zod situation.

But point being, I don't think Snyder will care whether people thinks it's stupid to kill Superman at the end of this film so that he returns (most likely midway) in the Justice League film when they're already formed without him.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

It depends on who is writing the character. Mark Waid's Superman has this hard and fast rule about never killing anyone under any circumstances. I like Waid a lot, but I think he goes overboard with this (see: his reaction to the Zod neck snap).

On the other hand, John Byrne's Superman or Dan Jurgens' Superman both are willing to take a life if they absolutely have to. Byrne's Superman killed Zod and Jurgens' Supes killed Doomsday twice. I think I prefer this take on the character. He's not Frank Castle; he doesn't actively want to kill; but if there is no other option and innocent lives are at stake, he does what has to be done.

Me too. I think a Superman who is willing to kill if there's no other choice represents an underlying emotional maturity. Though I prefer that Supes not kill for the most part.

 

[theotherme]

Me too. I think a Superman who is willing to kill if there's no other choice represents an underlying emotional maturity. Though I prefer that Supes not kill for the most part.

it's the difference between being beholden to an arbitrary code over the lives of real people. I've never understood people who want a doctrinaire Superman at the expense of situational awareness or judgment. That, to me, would be really alien.

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

Skepticism: hmm, I will not see this movie if a) Batman Is made the star or is made out that he can beat Superman b) Lois is sidelined for Wonder Woman c) Jason Todd is actually not dead but is instead the new Joker.

 

[rockandrollsoul]

Skepticism: hmm, I will not see this movie if a) Batman Is made the star or is made out that he can beat Superman b) Lois is sidelined for Wonder Woman c) Jason Todd is actually not dead but is instead the new Joker.

You will not be seeing this movie, then. I'm not saying he will beat Superman, but given that they're antagonists, they will definitely make it seem like he can, as well they should. If Bats doesn't pose a threat, where's the conflict?

 

[sf2]

You will not be seeing this movie, then. I'm not saying he will beat Superman, but given that they're antagonists, they will definitely make it seem like he can, as well they should. If Bats doesn't pose a threat, where's the conflict?

i agree. in the movie history of man vs alien, man always win.