TMOS Review & Speculation Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
InJustice said:
I agree with your interpretation, though I see it as it's more like Bruce Wayne making the mistake of saving Ra's Al Ghul's life before his home was detonated. Because Bruce saved Ra's life, he risked Gotham being destroyed. Hence, he refuses to save him in order to guarantee that the greater good of Gotham would not be needlessly killed.

If this is indeed the premise that occurs, you have to wonder 1) If Zod was able to break free from the Phantom Zone, what's to stop him from coming back and wreaking havoc on Earth...again? 2) He can't keep continuing to be a "Boy Scout," he will face difficult moral choices, and the fact that Zod endangered millions of lives and killed some has to be weighing heavily on his mind...I'm sure all of us would kill a person that killed our loved ones. And that's the point, that's what makes Kal-El in many ways, a human being. 3) Zod is a Kryptonian, Superman probably prefers if he's the only Kryptonian so that no one could abuse the powers of the Yellow Sun (unless we get a Doomsday arc, though that's very unlikely).
Click to expand...

I call BS.

He could have saved him, but he let him die. How dangerous to the city he is after being kept alive is irrelevant. As far as I'm concerned, he killed him.

"That if you could do good things for other people, you had a moral obligation to do those things. That's what at stake here. Not a choice, responsibility."
 
^ Some people say that Ra's could have stopped the train, but he was pretty much pinned down and out of energy. Batman kept him in a deathtrap.
 
Yeah, I agree that was a really good interview. The guy was a little overly excited, but I can't say I blame him. I'd probably act the same way if I got to interview these people. He also seemed to really know his stuff, and he's clearly a Superman fan who GUSHED over the movie, so that's always good.

But yeah, Zod vs. Aquaman would be fun. :)
 
TheFlamingCoco said:
^ Some people say that Ra's could have stopped the train, but he was pretty much pinned down and out of energy. Batman kept him in a deathtrap.
Click to expand...

He let him die, therefore he killed him. Logic.
 
Where is that review?
 
JOE said:
I call BS.

He could have saved him, but he let him die. How dangerous to the city he is after being kept alive is irrelevant. As far as I'm concerned, he killed him.

"That if you could do good things for other people, you had a moral obligation to do those things. That's what at stake here. Not a choice, responsibility."
Click to expand...

How is that irrelevant? If he's been proven dangerous once (and he has through his microwave emitter plan), what's to stop him from going ahead and destroy Gotham AGAIN X years later? Especially since that's the whole point of his League of Shadows...is to destroy cities that he perceives as an "immoral failure" and at the height of their decadence. That's why you see such difference in their methods, it's draconian vs. modernity.

If Batman saved him, he is just asking for Gotham to be destroyed.
 
X Knight said:
yeah. I think that's the word. heart broken.
Click to expand...

*hugs*

Tim_Riggins said:
You guys are actually serious? :D I know this is a big no no for Supes, but if he has no choice? What if this is a situation where if he doesnt do anything, somebody else dies? Indeed, the no killing rule is just stupid to begin with, it's all good and nice, but there comes a point where it has its limits.

He cannot save everyone. Same for Batman, it makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Like I said, and will keep repeating.

My heart break wouldn't be that Superman would kill 'in that situation'.

It would be that the situation was present in the movie at all, in which it was neccesary for him to kill.

Because I don't want that to happen in this movie. And it doesn't have to. So it will have been a consious choice of the writer to have the plot involve Superman killing someone. Which IMO would suck.

JOE said:
It's a reference to the Death of Gwen Stacy. She dies by being thrown off the bridge and when Spider-Man tries to save her, her neck snaps.
Click to expand...

Ooooooh... got it :funny:
 
Last edited:
^ This why his actions make sense-movie wise. Comics, on the other hand..
(I'm not dissing comics, they're the best medium for superheroes bar-none.)
 
moviefan! said:
Nope. Review says Zod is a friend of Jor El. Really? Really??!
Click to expand...

Now idk about the review, but the MOS art book did mention somewhere that Jor-El and Zod were friends. There are pics of it somewhere in the open discussion thread.
 
yeah, I believe the art book mentioned that Zod and Jor-El were "old friends" and that Zod viewed Jor-El as a bit of a "mentor."

but see, that's the thing, that reviewer, if fake, could have easily gleaned that information about Zod and Jor-El being friends from reading the art book excerpts.
 
Yeah, that's a good sign. So far, the diehard fans that have talked a little bit about it seem to love it.
 
Rowsdower! said:
Yeah, that's a good sign. So far, the diehard fans that have talked a little bit about it seem to love it.
Click to expand...

If the hardcore fans are on board that's half the battle won, just need the casuals for their money and all is good.
 
X Knight said:
yeah, I believe the art book mentioned that Zod and Jor-El were "old friends" and that Zod viewed Jor-El as a bit of a "mentor."

but see, that's the thing, that reviewer, if fake, could have easily gleaned that information about Zod and Jor-El being friends from reading the art book excerpts.
Click to expand...

I know, I never said I believed the review.
 
JOE said:
I call BS.

He could have saved him, but he let him die. How dangerous to the city he is after being kept alive is irrelevant. As far as I'm concerned, he killed him.

"That if you could do good things for other people, you had a moral obligation to do those things. That's what at stake here. Not a choice, responsibility."
Click to expand...
NO. Batman didn't put Ras on that train, it was all Ras & his doing, his plan. Batman just didn't save him. He did not kill him. Anybody who says otherwise is just looking for excuses to hate that version of Batman, even if it's just 1 scene to nitpick at.
 
If Superman didn't kill Zod what should he have done?

Defeat him and make him promise to be a good boy from now on??

We don't need him depowering Zod like in Superman 2 and in Lesters cut he tossed his butt into a pit..
 
If they seriously kill off Zod, the least controversial way to do it would be letting him kill himself. An ending where Superman is the one to finish him would have to be dark and depressing. Honestly, an ending like that would work very well in the sequels with other villains.
 
Hi. I've been reading this thread for updates on MOS. I am not a comic book fan. Still, I love Superman. I think he is great. I wasn't around yet when early movies about him were shown. Nonetheless, I've seen some of Superman movies through vhs when I was a kid. I got pretty excited to have learned WB is doing a reboot. It excites me to see Superman's capabilities to actualize on screen given the technology we have in the present time. That would be just so awesome to imagine.

I created this account just to say my piece regarding the possibility of Superman killing Zod. I read that some comic book fans here are enraged by the thought of it. I believe it's because having Superman kill a villain is a severe departure from the Superman in the comic book. I am not sure if that's the reason. Again, I am not really a comic book fan. But from a perspective of a fellow from the mainstream audience, Superman's killing a villain won't make Superman less of a superhero. To me, that actually adds to the complexity of Superman's character. And I love that; it makes him more relatable, more relevant to us, the mainstream audience. That proves he also has flaws. That he also faces situations in which drastic decisions are made just as any of us does.

As part of the mainstream audience, I care most that this film should be action-packed and over-top in the same level as The Avengers or even better than that film. I want to be entertained more than anything else. Of course, the film has to have a decent story. It doesn't need to have the Oscar potential. If this film turns out to be a boring Superman film, I'd be very disappointed. But from what I can see and based on the early reactions, MOS would not disappoint, and I am happy about it.

Just saying my piece.
 
Last edited:
Wow people actually taking the Zod rumors as factual, at this rate with how gulable people are proving to be I might just spread my own online rumor about the film. Hmmmmmmm I wonder whats a good one.
 
Isn't a big part of Superman's character, the person people should strive to be? Sure we don't have all his powers and such but the core of his character is who we want to become. So for him to kill they would have to make it in a context where it is absolutely necessary, like its his only option left.
 
In this movie he's still a YOUNG Superman. I see no problem with him making a rash decision and killing Zod. That way for future movie he becomes more mature and starts to adopt the "no killing" attitude. Now if he's just popping villains left and right then ok, that's overboard.
 
Liam_H said:
Isn't a big part of Superman's character, the person people should strive to be? Sure we don't have all his powers and such but the core of his character is who we want to become. So for him to kill they would have to make it in a context where it is absolutely necessary, like its his only option left.
Click to expand...

That I am curious to see if the decision to kill is done in the right context. I mean no option left but kill the villain. Regarding the 'person' in Superman people should strive to be, hmm, I think that's the ideal. And ideals are not automatically achieved in a snap, although people are not hindered from striving towards them. That's life. I wouldn't find it off if he's not that 'person' yet in this film. Thus, he also commits mistakes. Realistically, he can't be that perfect given he's just beginning to realize his capabilities and the consequences of every decision he makes. But what would be very interesting to see is how he rises from the detrimental outcomes of his decision. I am curious to see that in this film or in the sequel. That would be more colorful and inspirational, I guess. But that's just me. To each his/her own.
 
super-t said:
In this movie he's still a YOUNG Superman. I see no problem with him making a rash decision and killing Zod. That way for future movie he becomes more mature and starts to adopt the "no killing" attitude. Now if he's just popping villains left and right then ok, that's overboard.
Click to expand...

This ^ I agree to.:yay:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 2,807 (members: 7, guests: 2,800)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,265
Messages
22,075,971
Members
45,876
Latest member
Pducklila

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"