Skip to main content

Man of Steel: Who Booked This?!

Seriously, your top heel is jobbing to a freakin' scientist in the build up to the main event (and don't give me that 'gets his heat back' sneak attack excuse)? Way to build up your challenger, Goyer. A workhorse like Shannon deserves more than this.

Babyface is also a completely unrelateable goody two-shoes whose no selling all over the place and what is up with Zack Snyder's obsession with sinewy abs and big bicep?

Other than that movie was okay.
 
I really loved it, although the constant flashbacks made me feel like I was watching Lost after a while, but the second half where we got to see Superman cut loose and PUNCH DUDES full force and destroy cities and shit was pretty boss.  It was the biggest and most global we've seen Superman on the big screen, and felt suitably epic for the story being told.  I understand the criticisms and can certainly see why people might hate it, but it was a giant improvement on Superman Returns and I like the Lois & Clark dynamic there. 
 
Also, the next night I saw This Is The End and it may have been one of the funniest movies I've ever seen, so it was a good weekend at the theater for me. 
 
Spoiler space added to discuss a specific plot point:
 
Couple of people wrote in about the Zod death after I posted this:
 
Not the first time, but a long time, etc, etc.  Anyway, here's my real problem with Man of Steel.  I thought it was mostly good (strong referenceable backstory, Lois is a dumb ass, real consequences to the destruction), but I did have a major problem.  In the comics, Superman DOES NOT KILL.  Ever.  When he had to kill Zod in the post-Crisis reboot, it fucked him up.  He ran into space to find himself.  He had violated his entire coda.  But here?  He offs the first really bad guy he meets!  What's next, play Operation with the new Lex?
 
And another guy adds…
 
I keep hearing people complaining about Superman killing Zod in Man of Steel, and saying that's not what Superman does. However didn't Superman kill Zod at the end of Superman II? He threw Zod off a cliff and this was after Zod lost his powers. Anyway I loved MOS.

I wouldn’t really call Superman II canon or anything, but yeah, he killed the Kryptonians in the Byrne-verse, and don’t forget that he killed the shit out of Doomsday and even dropped him at the end of the universe to die repeatedly for eternity, so it’s not necessarily that he NEVER kills, it’s that he needs to be pushed EXTREMELY far to justify it.  And really, Zod was going to burn a bunch of innocent bystanders alive and wouldn’t ever stop trying to wipe out the human race, so what other choice did Superman have in the moment?  He’s an fallible human being, not a soul-less alien, that’s part of the point of the movie. 

But as I said, I can totally dig how people might hate the plot point and take the movie down a notch as a result, and that’s cool. 

Comments

  1. The fragmented narrative is Nolan's forte and I think Goyer took the wrong approach with this, because unlike Batman, Superman's origin works better as a point A to point B story. I think moments like showing Clark getting bullied as a kid supplimenting Zod's threat and Jonathan Kent's death shown AFTER Clark becomes Superman was a bit messy and it messed up the power and the anticipation of said events in the story. That being said...it's easily my favourite Superman film, and the action sequences were out of this world awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm a huge Superman fan and after hearing about this movie, especially the BIG moment that I won't spoil here, I just don't think I have the heart to see it. It's just not Superman to me.

    It's bad enough what he does, but to do so after carelessly throwing bad guys through buildings without a care for the people inside? Not trying to take the fight to somewhere less populated? That's not Superman. That's The Authority.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Only good thing to come from Zod being killed is that it gives them the plot for Batman/Superman the movie: in terms of Talia getting Zod's corpse and tossing it into the Lazarus Pit to bring him and giving Shannon the chance to play crazy crazy like he does so well

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jesus, and I thought your inane booking ideas were strictly wrestling.

    ReplyDelete
  5. So you'd deny the world the joy of more Michael Shannon as Zod?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Superman kills Zod.



    Just fucking say it. If you hate the plot point like a lot of people do, don't be a god-damn coward. Spoil it to EVERYONE you encounter online so they can share your outrage and anger over it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. And like I said; take comfort that there is a ready made out to negate this bullshit decision in the form of Talia tossing the corpse of Zod into the Lazarus Pit and bringing him back to life

    ReplyDelete
  8. Or Ra's Ahl Ghul if you don't want to see Michael Shannon's simulated sex O-Face when he's getting laid on camera

    ReplyDelete
  9. Not everyone wants to be a dickhead about spoilers. Just because I hate something about the movie doesn't mean I'm going to ruin it for others.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Given that it would completely nullify what's supposed to be a pivotal moment in Superman's career? Yes. It would make the whole thing even MORE pointless.


    You never saw them bring back the three Kyrptonians that he killed in the 80s because SURPRISE. It would cheapen the impact.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Spoiling bad shit means people don't have to spend money on shit products. You'd rather lie and let a person spend money on a movie they'll hate than warn them that it's a shit sandwich and have them waste their hard earned cash?

    ReplyDelete
  12. No, because I seem to be in the minority that even disagrees with the idea in the first place. I'm a huge Superman fan with a certain ideal of how Superman should be, so I'm bias. I will say that there are things that I really, REALLY disagree with it, but I'm not going to be "that guy" that screams spoilers at people.


    What next? You'll defend the guy that drove by bookstores on the release of the sixth Harry Potter book, shouting "Snake kills Dumbledore"?

    ReplyDelete
  13. to be fair, Superman actually felt remorse for doing that. The movie had zero moment of regret/remorse and treats it like it was something GOOD because Superman has to shed blood to be a "true" hero.

    So yeah, undo undo undo. Especially since Michael Shannon as Zod is too good to waste in a single movie. AND it gives us a ready made plot for the Batman/Superman film that yet exists

    ReplyDelete
  14. Plus I want a freaky ass sex scene between Marion Cotillard and Michael Shannon God-damnit!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Voldemort's snake killed Dumbledore? What version of HP6 did you read?

    ReplyDelete
  16. You should check your spelling before you post

    ReplyDelete
  17. You should read your posts before you post them

    ReplyDelete
  18. Didn't you do the same thing after Serenity opened because you didn't like a key plot point in that one?

    ReplyDelete
  19. No, your above post is not correct logic.

    ReplyDelete
  20. i keep hearing from my friends its great...


    i keep reading online its ok.


    im getting thats its "good" but nothing mind-blowing.

    ReplyDelete
  21. They should make a horse be Superman's kryptonite.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Special effects were top notch. That said, I rewatched the '78 film, and while the special effects were cheesy, there was a charm Reeve gave the role. I thought that charm was seriously lacking here.


    I'm not a big fan of how people are telling me "well, this is a different telling of the story, so lighten up". Personally, I miss being able to intelligently engage with an individual without them calling me a dullard.


    And I would argue the family getting burned, b/c you can tell thousands have already died from their battle.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I meant to write that Lois was NOT a dumbass. Oh well.

    ReplyDelete
  24. 1) The Byrne-written killing was VERY frowned upon at the time and in fact, Byrne left the title shortly after. Also, the whole thing absolutely destroyed Superman. He had a complete nervous breakdown and left Earth because he felt his mental state was a threat. And for years, it haunted him much like Gwen Stacey on the bridge with Spidey.

    2) Dubbilex (a powerful psychic) read Doomsday's mind during the whole fight and said he wasn't much more than a mindless beast bent on pure destruction. So Superman's willingness to kill Doomsday was different because Doomsday didn't exactly have much mental capacity. And you could say that by breaking his rule about killing, it killed Superman to do it.



    And as I said, him killing Zod would have been more understandable if Superman had shown more care for the people around him, not carelessly busting through buildings.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think it was meant to be like Batman Begins, but either there was less thought behind it, or they got dumb lucky with how the format worked in BB. Who knows.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Right? I thought I was alone here in adhering to a discarded continuity!


    Sadly, I'm not joking.

    ReplyDelete
  27. You're like a Final Crisis Miracle Machine of Shit. I like your gimmick.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Too soon. Go with the George Reeves suicide jokes instead to play it safe.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Yes but the online world is full of miserable d-bags, so a good from the online community is an incredibility in reality.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Zod essentially did suicide by cop - it's not like Clark wanted to kill him.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I found it funny that some of the message board types were already praising Superman Returns over Man of Steel. I personally have liked SR for years so its funny to see an about face from the fanboys on that one.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Talia's is kinda dead in the DC movie universe at the moment - assuming they are still holding out hope that they can convince Christian Bale and/or Joseph Gordon Levitt to return as some combo of Batman / Nightwing.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I rewatched Batman Begins this past weekend as a counterpoint to Man of Steel and the flashbacks really only happen in the first act. Once Bruce returns to Gotham from his training, it's a fairly straight forward narrative.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I thought it was an interesting take on the story. As far as Superman ending Zod, I don't have a problem with it, due to the fact that Zod wouldn't die under any other circumstances. Instead of the usual "you thwarted my evil plan, see you next month" villain escape, it was a "fuck you, this ends NOW." ending, which I'm sure sets up Luthor and/or another villain for the inevitable sequel.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Yeah...I understand the sentiment, but if you haven't actually seen the moment in all it's beautiful context, then you really can't say a thing about it. I found it to be truly profound and well executed.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Thing is Goyer is a great story man and a terrible script writer. Nolan's skills actually managed to cover up Goyer's faults, and once he had enough power he had his brother Jonah take over script duties and Goyer kept purely as the geeky ideas man. Put Goyer on script and Snyder behind the camera...two guys that need a proper leash, and it could have gone worst than it actually did. I think hope they realise if they had just been a little more coherant with the flashbacks they could have gotten rid of a large amount of complaints from some fans.

    Begins flashbacks works because they all formed a singular forward moving narrative. (such as framing the flashbacks with the ninja training and building it all up to the batman reveal) with this film...we see superman early...and then we don't see him for another half an hour, yet they are still telling us the story of why and how Clark wants to be a hero.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I'm not a Superman fan so perhaps I'll enjoy it more and not feel upset by character inconsistencies. Mark Waid did have a particularly striking assessment though when he said "Earth would be better off if Kal-El died on Krypton"

    ReplyDelete
  38. davidbonzaisaldanamontgomeryJune 17, 2013 at 11:13 PM

    It's good but nothing mind-blowing.

    ReplyDelete
  39. davidbonzaisaldanamontgomeryJune 17, 2013 at 11:19 PM

    "Real consequences to the destruction"

    Um, what? Was that in the cut that wasn't shown in my theater? Because the "Man of Steel" I saw had Superman (sometimes voluntarily) and Zod leveling skyscraper after skyscraper (even in the area that hadn't been hit by the weapon) that surely cost the lives of thousands upon thousands. Yet eight people crawl out of the rubble that was once a city and that girl wearing the Daily Planet plot-armor was like, "He saved us!" And despite doing 9/11-damage to the city multiple times over, it basically smash cuts to everything hunky dory at the Daily Planet. It makes the line "You can save all of them" pretty ironic because he was fucking shit at saving anyone other than Lois.

    I still liked it (but in a "I like it" type of reaction I had to Captain American, and not the "that was fucking awesome" I had from Iron Man 1, Avengers, and the Batman series), but I thought the onslaught of action in the hour was a bit overkill. Even Michael Bay had to be sitting somewhere going, "SOMEBODY STOP THE DAMN MATCH!"

    ReplyDelete
  40. davidbonzaisaldanamontgomeryJune 17, 2013 at 11:26 PM

    Yeah, Goyer's pretty weak when he handles a script on his own or especially directs. And Snyder is a guy who needs to be told to reign it in at times (like the out-of-character suped-up [pun?] Matrix action scenes in Watchmen). But MoS turned out good enough where it could've gone wrong in spectacular fashion.

    ReplyDelete
  41. davidbonzaisaldanamontgomeryJune 17, 2013 at 11:27 PM

    I think it was Goyer who said over the weekend that if they bring in Batman into Man of Steel's universe, it won't be from anything in Nolan's universe, which is closed.

    ReplyDelete
  42. davidbonzaisaldanamontgomeryJune 17, 2013 at 11:46 PM

    OK good, because I do not take anyone besmirching my beloved Amy Adams lightly.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Mandarin plot twist not nearly a bigger F.U. to comic book fans than Jonathan Kent doing everything he can to prevent Superman from being a hero.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I like how people ignore Superman trying not to kill Zod, Zod saying "I'll kill everyone on Earth if you don't', the Phantom Drive not working, and Zod being as strong as Clark within hours of being on Earth.

    He. Had. No. Choice. And it still broke his heart.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Did you even watch the film? How is Superman SCREAMING after killing Zod a lack of remorse?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Best Superman movie, but that's not high praise.

    Dialogue was shit (Just awful corny superhero movie lines)

    Cinematography was shit (Transitions/establishing shots just didn't exist)

    Directing was shit (Snyder is a hack)

    Plotting was shit (NEEDS MOAR FLASHBACKS)

    Writing was shit (Zod was a total pussy, Superman was a lame duck character, but that's a problem with the IP, not Goyer in particular. I mean...I just hate, hate, hate Superman as a character)

    CGI was mixed (armor and ships looked awesome, Krypton looked like a video game, Metropolis in the final fight looked too glossy)

    Acting was mostly good (Shannon, Adams, Murder Bitch were great, Costner was ungodly terrible, even Supes was decently charismatic)

    Action was mostly good (Krypton fight scene was disjointed as fuck, Murder Bitch fight scene was incredible)



    Movie was too long, and too cerebral (Superman is not a deep character), plus the Kryptonians plan made little sense (why can't they just go to Mars?), weird attempts at making it deep (WTF whatles?).


    Though major, major props to the Murder Bitch/Goliath fight scene. One of the best superhero movie fights I've ever seen. I heart Kryptonians...as stupid as they are.

    ReplyDelete
  47. That's the whole point that people seem to miss. It wasn't that Clark killed him to save just the one family. He killed him because Zod made it clear that he would never stop killing and that would be his only purpose going forward.


    Besides, I think there has to be something that makes Clark try to adhere to a "no killing" policy. If he just started out with "no killsies" as a rule, he'd look kind of stupid. The trauma that this killing caused will give us a plausible reason for why he doesn't punch Lex Luthor's head off after talking to him for five minutes.

    ReplyDelete
  48. The only plot whole I saw was in the beginning, when Jor El had the codex and they still shot at him like idiots despite the fact their whole way of life would crumble should it be destroyed.

    Zod and crew needed the codex to make the babies, because old school baby making is "HERESY!". So they come looking Kal to see if they can find it. And then they find out he IS the codex, but they can just harvest it from his remains and don't need him alive.

    The best way to kill him is to convert Earth into New Krypton, nullifing his powers so they could probably just shoot him in the face at a later point.


    They actually have a very good reason to be on Earth and to do what they did.

    ReplyDelete
  49. As a lifelong Superman fan, I had absolutely no problem with Zod's end. It's not like Superman hasn't done it before. Hell, at the end of Superman II, the Kryptonians are stripped of their powers and tossed down an infinite abyss. And then Superman smirks about it.


    Another history lesson: In the post-Crisis Byrne Super-verse, Superman's "I don't kill" policy was formed BECAUSE he couldn't handle what he did to Zod and his flunkies. After the deed is done in Man of Steel, they show that Superman was upset with what he did, leading to probably the same type of credo. Works for me.


    As far as the "tossing Kryptonians through buildings and putting lives in jeopardy" - they were evacuating. It's not a complete mea culpa there, but it makes it a bit more understandable.

    ReplyDelete
  50. What ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? No remorse? Did you pay attention to the angst-filled scream after he did the deed, or did you go off to Baker-world to start fantasy booking how this is all Cena's fault?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Scott: "He’s an fallible human being, not a soul-less alien, that’s part of the point of the movie."


    I think the point might more be, as Batman would put it, that he's a fallible super-powered alien. I'm very much looking forward to a World's Finest movie that stays true to their modern-era relationship.

    ReplyDelete
  52. For all the complaining that people are doing about the ending of Man of Steel and problems with the flick, at least it didn't feature Lex Luthor trying to pull of ANOTHER land scheme. For that, I will be eternally grateful.


    I really enjoyed the movie as a kick-off to the franchise and I look forward to more DC Comics movies in this same vein. Man of Steel wasn't the Christopher Reeve Superman, and that's a definite bonus point after the disappointing Superman Returns.

    ReplyDelete
  53. As someone who's currently reading the 5th Harry Potter book, I'd say you failed at not revealing spoilers. :-)

    (And yes, I realize enough time has passed that it's not really a spoiler anymore. Just messin' with ya.)

    ReplyDelete
  54. Film is patchy, but Superman flying Zod away from the Kent farm yelling 'YOU NEVER THREATEN MY MOTHER' and pounding him with titanic right hands before the 'FUCK YOU' throw into the petrol station is the best comic-book film scene ever.

    ReplyDelete
  55. And throw in that Zod, on Earth for less than a day, was as powerful as Superman had gotten IN 33 YEARS. I think it's pretty obvious that Zod would've been too powerful for Superman to deal with increasingly with each passing day.

    ReplyDelete
  56. The Superman II defence is flawed. There's a deleted scene that shows the three of them being arrested. The scene was used in the Richard Donner director's cut. So it's very likely that Donner intended to use the scene, but the director that replaced him edited it out.

    ReplyDelete
  57. The thing with Batman Begins is it's almost the same film as MOS (dead parents, legacy, fixing a broken city, running away from who you are), but Batman Begins is just so absolutely brilliant in ensuring there's not a single wasted moment.


    And that, sadly, is all Nolan. Goyer isn't close to a bad writer, but he wrote the script with the director, so the two of them were already visualising as they wrote. Whereas I'm convinced the Kryptonian dragon, and the world engine tentacles were added AFTER Snyder signed on - because neither of them fits at all with the world as is.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Am I the only one in the world who actually really liked Superman Returns?

    ReplyDelete
  59. I actually loved how Zod slowly learned how to control his powers over the course of the fight. Technically, Superman had an advantage because he could fly, but he also didn't since he was originally outnumbered.

    ReplyDelete
  60. No. I dug it. Not tremendous, but I love the idea that Singer doesn't paint Lois's fiancee as a putz - he's every bit as heroic as Superman.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Perhaps its because I'm not a dedicated or "traditional" Supes fan who grew up reading the comics (I'm more of a causal fan who digs Superman as the OG of superheroes and loved the cartoons, movies, etc) but I thought SR told a great story with interesting characters I actually gave a damn about, from a filmmaker who respected the character and took a lot of time, money and energy to craft a worthwhile film people would remember years after its release. Contrast that to "Man of Steel," which I thought was far more of an empty calories popcorn flick with amazing visuals but little real substance and longevity. I didn't hate MOS and was entertained for the most part, but I have no intentions or interest of every watching it again.


    I have a feeling I'm going to get my ass kicked here.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I don't understand this viewpoint at all, and you're not the only one who has it. Didn't show remorse? I must have watched a different movie, because the Superman I saw looked like someone who realized he committed a tragic act and was quite remorseful about what he had to do.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Maybe, but you're also forgetting Super Villain Defeat Rule #1: No Body, no Proof of Death. Otherwise, Batman would've killed Joker scores of times.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Yeah, Nolan's Batman trilogy will have nothing to do with whatever larger DC movie-verse they're putting together now. Which is good, because doing a Justice League movie with a Batman that isn't Bruce Wayne doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

    ReplyDelete
  65. I was thinking about that: Zod and his team had to know what being on Earth could do to them, but they avoided embracing it out of what seemed to be spite.

    Near the end, Zod has the chance to bust out his hidden blade but instead shed all of his Kryptonian armor to fully embrace the power that Earth could give him. It kind of felt like that was the point Clark knew he was in deep shit.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Yeah, it's not like Zod had lost his powers and Superman willingly threw him into a pit or anything dickish like that.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Humans don't survive falls into the abyss.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I wouldn't say I "really liked" Superman Returns, but I thought it was fine. It's one of those movies that was an enjoyable 2 hours (or however long it was), and then once it ends I had no real desire to see it again.

    ReplyDelete
  69. "The movie had zero moment of regret/remorse and treats it like it was
    something GOOD because Superman has to shed blood to be a "true" hero. You've officially outed yourself as giving opinions without having watched the movie. That makes every post you made on the subject even more obselete than they already were. Bravo.

    ReplyDelete
  70. I liked Man of Steel ok, wasn't great, could've been.


    However, like Scott said, "This Is the End" was fucking hilarious.

    ReplyDelete
  71. davidbonzaisaldanamontgomeryJune 18, 2013 at 12:26 PM

    Plus, I wish more studios would have definitive movie arcs for super hero films like the Dark Knight Saga (or even the Singer/Ratner X-Men films). In the comic book world, there's so many different stories and continuities, and that's a perfect way to keep movie franchises going indefinitely (which is what the studios want) while also giving actors the ability to not feel locked down in a superhero role for too long and have satisfying conclusions to these stories. It's annoying when you have something like Raimi's Spider-Man films that don't have a definitive end to that story/characters/universe because all the behind-the-scenes stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Doesn't matter. No proof of body, no proof of death. How do you know Superman didn't have giant cushions or a net just in case Lois slipped and fell in?

    ReplyDelete
  73. Why did they need to destroy Superman?

    Why not ask Clark for some blood and settle Mars?



    I mean...if Zod is a being of no choice and a slave to Krypton's continued survival...why would he risk destroying Kal completely by shooting giant lasers at him and not just make a deal? And I mean a real deal, not "WE WILL BURY YOU!"


    Not a plot hole, just Zod being a moron.


    Speaking of Zod being an idiot. Why did he remove his armor? Why didn't he use his arm spike again? How did a trained military officer lose in a fist fight against a guy that never learned how to fight? Why are eye lasers more dangerous than gun lasers? Why didn't he just drop shit from space onto Earth until they turned on Superman?


    Zod is REALLY fucking stupid.


    Also, Johnathan Kent was terrible. Awful performance from Costner. Stupid, nonsensical lines that lead nowhere, and a goofy as shit death that was unnecessary and emotionally flat.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Costner and Crowe were having a contest of who could be more bad ass, for reasons unknown.

    Zod already had some of Clark's blood. It was implied that this wasn't enough and that they needed a lot more than that.

    Getting humanity to turn on Superman wouldn't work. What exactly are they going to do? Ask him to politely die?

    ReplyDelete
  75. Getting humanity to turn on Superman wouldn't work?


    Yeah, but if what you say is true, WHY THE FUCK WAS POPPA KENT ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT THAT?


    Seriously, that angle went NOWHERE!


    Superman couldn't be hurt by humans, but...y'know...they could've explored that on screen. Giving some of those Bay-esque military blowjob scenes some actual importance.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Here's where we get into common territory. I think there was supposed to be a theme of both Jor-El and Pa Kent not being the best fathers that history has ever known, but it got lost in the shuffle of everyone being heroic. Which is just shoddy with all the people involved know better.

    Jor-El was unwavering in his belief that both the Kryptonian society and race should be wiped out. Zod may have been a dick who wanted to control the nature of their society, but at least he wasn't blowing a party horn and throwing confetti about their impending annihilation.


    Pa Kent didn't seem to have much faith in humanity and was extremely selfish in his desire to see his son live a normal, unburdened life. He did a great job raising a great person (it's obvious that Clark's first thought is to always help, punitive measures are below that on his to do list), but he saddled him with way too much baggage. The whole movie is essentially Clark largely rejecting taking on the role either of his father's wanted him too ("Krypton had it's chance").

    He won't be resurrecting the Kryptonians any time soon, and he also won't stand idly by while the world needs him and his skills. The move should have ended with Clark going to his father's grave and apologizing or some sort of narration stating the same to be followed by Martha telling him what she did anyway.



    The US military cooperated a lot in this movie, so I don't think there was ever a chance of Clark going at it with the them. You know, because we're sensitive to the feelings and emotions of immigrants these days. No matter where they're from.

    ReplyDelete
  77. I agree there.


    But the movie was both Bay-like (in that it was stupid) and Nolan-like (in that it's actions scenes were mostly badly shot).


    The whole thing about Jor-El and Poppa Kent being bad dads would've worked a lot better if that was EVER acknowledged on camera. I'm all for death of the author, but there's interpretation and there's denial.


    The story was poorly told and poorly directed with good performances.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Elephant steak....AAAARRGGHH....

    ReplyDelete
  79. Superman has been one of the worst characters of all time for a while now. He's boring and dull and uninteresting to write for because his whole MO is being better than everybody else.


    And yes, endings where the stronger more physically capable antagonist gets beaten in a straight up fight by the protagonist is bullshit.


    And how did Superman use his powers better? He threw Zod through buildings? How the fuck would that hurt more than a superpowered punch to your trachea? How do mile-wide haymakers hurt more than a superspeed chop to your groin?


    And why did Zod have trouble adapting when his female second in command used her superpowers perfectly?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment