What are your complaints? What would you do differently? *SPOILERS* - Part 1

[blumatic]

It's the structuring of it all. If it started from Krypton-childhood-adulthood-quest-invasion-resolution, it would be 5 times better.
Instead it starts from Krypton-Quest-adulthood-invasion-resolution.

Lois meeting Clark would be better if done near the end of the movie, imho

How much time would we have spent during childhood. How fast would they move his childhood hood to get a sense of how things went during his childhood.

I can't remember that last time a movie spent time on childhood without flashbacks or without it being very short.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

The issue with the Krypton stuff being repeated is yes Clark had to know the information, but we as an audience already knew the information making it redundant to us. This is why the entire Krypton prologue is borderline useless, it wastes a good 20 mins of the movie, time that could have been used to better expand Clark's story.

I disagree. Between "Make a better world", the visuals of a desolate wasteland, and Superman going away to space, I feel like the Krypton opening was NECESSARY to convey who Superman is as an alien.

Or do you mean the dialog where Jor-El repeats what we saw earlier? Yes, I could do with that being cut

 

[the last son]

Just one more scene of Superman telling the people to go inside, or be careful or just showing he cared, would have been all I needed.

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

Just got back from seeing it a second time, only thing I really hated this time around was that freaking shaking camera.

 

[blumatic]

I think Jor - El repeating to Clark was just fine. I would equate to the showing of space and stars when Jor-El was training Clark in STM. It would be awkward in both films for Clark to just walk in and walk out. In STM Jor-El was saying random science stuff and we know its for Superman's knowledge. But that scene was there as a buffer from when Superman was a kid to him being a man.

In MOS, that scene was a buffer as well. Was is repetitive, sure but it wasnt annoying. Nor was it unecessary. I think it served its purpose well. It allowed Jor-El and Clark some time on screen togther. And what else would they talk about.

 

[blumatic]

Just got back from seeing it a second time, only thing I really hated this time around was that freaking shaking camera.

The shaky cam bothered my the second time around. During parts that would lead up to the action sequences they were fine. But through out the whole film it was weird. Strangely I didnt notice it the first time around.

 

[jmc]

I disagree. Between "Make a better world", the visuals of a desolate wasteland, and Superman going away to space, I feel like the Krypton opening was NECESSARY to convey who Superman is as an alien.

Or do you mean the dialog where Jor-El repeats what we saw earlier? Yes, I could do with that being cut

My argument against Krypton being necessary is that is takes away the discovery of who Clark is. We as an audience know where he's from, so him discovering it 45 mins after we know doesn't resonate. Now if we as the audience from the beginning are discovering everything along with Clark it's a different story because we're experiencing it with him, we become part of the journey. As it's presented to us here we're already a step ahead of the main character.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Good point. I guess the beginning was more suited to a linear story, while the parts NEAR the beginning are fragmented, while the rest is back to linear.

Kind of jumpy, imho.

 

[robot]

My argument against Krypton being necessary is that is takes away the discovery of who Clark is. We as an audience know where he's from, so him discovering it 45 mins after we know doesn't resonate. Now if we as the audience from the beginning are discovering everything along with Clark it's a different story because we're experiencing it with him, we become part of the journey. As it's presented to us here we're already a step ahead of the main character.

The 20 mins of the Krypton scene was my favorite of the entire movie... it as pure sci-fi, breath-takingly beautiful, etc...

The Smallville scene was my second fav... the last battle was the worse... it was actually an anti-climax for me...

 

[The Guard]

Jor-El didn't really repeat that much to Clark. He put a few things he briefly mentioned earlier in the film in larger context with additional information, especially the info that was relevant to Clark at the time, regarding Zod.

 

[DrDoom]

I woulda put moar Faora in the movie

 

[InJustice]

Why are people complaining about redundancy of the Krypton sequence? The reason that Krypton was fleshed out was for the audience to understand what was going on, and why The Ruling Council never moved on from Jor-El's theory of planetary destruction. The second time around it's because Clark has no idea of his origins, which is what the audience knows. 2mins is hardly worth complaining about.

 

[jmc]

The 20 mins of the Krypton scene was my favorite of the entire movie... it as pure sci-fi, breath-takingly beautiful, etc...

The Smallville scene was my second fav... the last battle was the worse... it was actually an anti-climax for me...

I won't deny it's a beautiful sequence in its own right, it is visually spectacular, but it leaves a lot to be desired in terms of it being the starting point for this film.

 

[jmc]

Why are people complaining about redundancy of the Krypton sequence? The reason that Krypton was fleshed out was for the audience to understand what was going on, and why The Ruling Council never moved on from Jor-El's theory of planetary destruction. The second time around it's because Clark has no idea of his origins, which is what the audience knows. 2mins is hardly worth complaining about.

But 20 mins is. That's the point, the entire 20 mins we spend on Krypton is summarised later on in less than 2 mins, we just chewed up valuable screen time which could have been better served in character development. The argument is we really didn't need Krypton to be fleshed out at all. In some ways Krypton should have been left a mystery so that its discovery is a journey for both Clark and the audience. As it stands in this film we already know what Clark is about to find.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Exactly.

Furthermore, 20 minutes of Krypton's origin without an adequate dramatic set up or any real purpose or narrative drive to the rest of the story is just exposition.

 

[Jaxon]

The Krypton sequence was superb, it set up Jor-El, Lara, Zod, the council, their roles, the reason for his departure, the reason Zod would want to find Kal-El (the codex), so much story and gave us the technology level.
When Clarke is being told your focus is on how Clark reacts to it. Watch it, seen how carefree he is when being told and how relieved he is to hear his name. Here is a person who has never felt physical pain, never needed to be afraid of anything, his aura of carefree but undertones of lonliness really shine through there.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

But how much of that story was important in the scheme of things? What did the details of the council, the reason for departure etc, really add to the drama of Clarks story?

In Batman Begins, we KNEW that Thomas Wayne was a great doctor and help to all of Gotham but we were told that with concise and well placed story telling, we didn't need a 20 minute backstory to explain that. The facts and the background details get more attention than the relationships, the characters, the drama. That's why that scene was unnecessary. Instead, tell us more about WHY these battery grown Kryptonians are inferior, show us more of how heartbreaking saying goodbye to Kal-El is... They put TOO much plot in an origin story. Zod, Jor-El, Johnathon Kent... All supporting characters that seemed to speak more lines of dialogue than Kal himself did. The origin story should focus more on character.... An end of the world threat, large scale destruction.... That all just distracted from the one thing that was going to compel and invest in a new saga of Superman stories.

 

[BH/HHH]

But how much of that story was important in the scheme of things? What did the details of the council, the reason for departure etc, really add to the drama of Clarks story?

In Batman Begins, we KNEW that Thomas Wayne was a great doctor and help to all of Gotham but we were told that with concise and well placed story telling, we didn't need a 20 minute backstory to explain that. The facts and the background details get more attention than the relationships, the characters, the drama. That's why that scene was unnecessary. Instead, tell us more about WHY these battery grown Kryptonians are inferior, show us more of how heartbreaking saying goodbye to Kal-El is... They put TOO much plot in an origin story. Zod, Jor-El, Johnathon Kent... All supporting characters that seemed to speak more lines of dialogue than Kal himself did. The origin story should focus more on character.... An end of the world threat, large scale destruction.... That all just distracted from the one thing that was going to compel and invest in a new saga of Superman stories.

Its all scope, you have to add abit more to get the narrative across. Otherwise the Krypton scenes wouldn't have made sense. That sequence sets up the main plot of the film, we meet Jor El who of course is integral to the story even after he dies. We meet Zod and his reasons for been the way he is with the whole genetics thing which of couse leads us into the codex. Clark been the first natural birth is abig part of this. Zod & co been sent to the Phantom Zone shows why they're still alive after the planets gone boom. So yes it is all important to the main story.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

The 20 mins of the Krypton scene was my favorite of the entire movie... it as pure sci-fi, breath-takingly beautiful, etc...

The Smallville scene was my second fav... the last battle was the worse... it was actually an anti-climax for me...

Yeah. I'd appreciate the Metropolis battle more if the Smallville battle wasn't so great. The Smallville battle owns because it shows the effects of super-speed on an average person, it was well set up, had real sets to make the atmosphere more believable, Superman actually saves a person onscreen (sure he saved the family, but others are presumed to have died), and Hardy's awesome moment against Faora.

The final battle has impressive choreography, but is more of an extended destruction fest, rather than a really well done SCENE.

That being said, the death of Zod was handled REALLY well, IMHO.

 

[Bren]

So how would it have been if the entire Krypton parts were moved from the beginning to a holographic or even another dream sequence when he meets AI Jor El?

At that point we'd even know there is Kryptonian technology that could delve into your mind. And then you see the twisted way Zod uses that tech.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I dunno, I enjoyed the Krypton stuff. The main hook of it, aside from seeing Jor-El be badass, seemed to explain Zod's revolution and his relationship to the house of El. Lara second guessing Jor was interesting to see, too.

Also, I'd probably watch an entire Jor-El movie if Russell Crowe would be in it.

 

[The Guard]

I never thought I'd see the day when fleshing out the characters of Jor-El, Lara, Zod and the concept of Krypton itself was considered unnecessary. Wow.

And I think people are misremembering what all was actually "repeated" from the beginning in that Fortress sequence.

 

[InJustice]

But 20 mins is. That's the point, the entire 20 mins we spend on Krypton is summarised later on in less than 2 mins, we just chewed up valuable screen time which could have been better served in character development. The argument is we really didn't need Krypton to be fleshed out at all. In some ways Krypton should have been left a mystery so that its discovery is a journey for both Clark and the audience. As it stands in this film we already know what Clark is about to find.

In that summary, you lose the fleshing out of General Zod which would be pretty significant and makes him come across as a stereotypical villain with no depth to his character. Moreover, you lose out on why the Council let the planet rot (implying that no one gave a damn about saving Krypton, which we know by Lara and Jor-El's actions, are not true). The summary loses out on a lot of things, that I'm not sure that it's worth cutting. Even if you use an alternate method and change the Krypton sequence to a flashback sequence during Jor-El's conversation with Kal-El, it's an awkward one due to transitioning between the rocket's launch to the rocket's landing on Kansas. Implying that Jor-El knew where the rocket was going to land, when that actually isn't the case (he only knows of the planet rather than the country that the rocket lands).

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Goyer wrote the script. We're lucky he repeated that twice only.

I didn't mind it myself.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

But 20 mins is. That's the point, the entire 20 mins we spend on Krypton is summarised later on in less than 2 mins, we just chewed up valuable screen time which could have been better served in character development. The argument is we really didn't need Krypton to be fleshed out at all. In some ways Krypton should have been left a mystery so that its discovery is a journey for both Clark and the audience. As it stands in this film we already know what Clark is about to find.

That's a really good point.

I think you're right, Clark's 'search' for answers would have been a bit more engaging if we'd felt that sense of discovery ourselves.

I mean, I wouldn't have minded them explaining it with flashbacks/memories. There could have easily been some way for the ship to actually show Kal-el what happened.