- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Zack Snyder-isms: BvS is Man of Steel 2? And More Fun
Posted on 9/22/15 at 5:24 pm to Baloo
Posted on 9/22/15 at 5:24 pm to Baloo
quote:
That's a good point. I do think the lack of trust in the Superman character is a bigger issue, but they also run from the fundamental decency of the Kents. That's a gaping hole in the film.
The Kents weren't different people in MOS, they were the same, good, caring, simple people that they have always been. What they aren't is a fictitious Ozzie and Harriet living in a made up world of Americana, waving wheat, and gumballs and firecrackers.
Snyder and the DC universe have transplanted those same characters and set them in a real world settings, where having a child that can lift tractors and see through buildings would be met not a saviour, but a feared otherworldy alien. You people may not like that the settings of this story have changed to face the world of 2015 rather than 1939, but it gives the character of Superman a chance to be what he has to be in SPITE of the world around him, rather than because of it. If you still want to look at the old stories, you have Superman the Movie and Superman Returns. Don't deny others the chance to love this character in their own modern world- you did much the same in a different way than your fathers, allow kids today to do the same.
1
Posted on 9/22/15 at 5:31 pm to BigAppleTiger
I reject your depiction of the modern world as one that is without decency.
Posted on 9/22/15 at 5:33 pm to BigAppleTiger
quote:
Your posts have more to do with you being right.
About?
Posted on 9/22/15 at 5:35 pm to Baloo
quote:
I reject your depiction of the modern world as one that is without decency.
Well then I suggest you read a paper or perhaps the Poli Board. I don't think depicting the world as less decent makes the Kents less decent, only more fearful for a child they want to love and protect. It may not be admirable, but it is understandable.
Posted on 9/22/15 at 5:43 pm to BigAppleTiger
I don't think the Kents are fearful. Nor do I think they should be portrayed as relatable cowards instead of admirable, caring people.
And I also reject the Poli Board's hysterical rantings and general fear of the world around them. The modern world is great, and it is full of loving, decent people. And it is those values Superman represents.
And I also reject the Poli Board's hysterical rantings and general fear of the world around them. The modern world is great, and it is full of loving, decent people. And it is those values Superman represents.
Posted on 9/22/15 at 5:44 pm to Baloo
I'll start by saying that I've never been a fan of Superman. I've always found the character bland and boring :ducks:
However, I did really like MOS. I liked that it was a bit more serious tone. I liked the fact that he was raw, inexperienced, and still learning his place in the world. Now, I understand fans having an issue with that, but we have another film with him coming up and hopefully a lot more after that. We may eventually get the Superman that you all know and love. It's called a character arc. At least I hope so
However, I did really like MOS. I liked that it was a bit more serious tone. I liked the fact that he was raw, inexperienced, and still learning his place in the world. Now, I understand fans having an issue with that, but we have another film with him coming up and hopefully a lot more after that. We may eventually get the Superman that you all know and love. It's called a character arc. At least I hope so
Posted on 9/22/15 at 5:54 pm to BigAppleTiger
I'm probably in the minority, but regarding Pa Kent, I have an acceptance of why he did what he did.
Right before the tornado came, Clark and Jonathan just had an argument. Clark was talking about not wanting to live on a farm and saying that Jonathan was not his dad. In the argument he clearly showed that he was immature and not ready to currently be Superman. He was still very much a rebellious kid.
The whole consensus of why Jonathan didn't want the world to know about Superman was because of the huge impact it would have on not only the world, but on Clark as well. Agree with it or not, the world that was being established in the movie was one of more realism in how the world would react to Superman. He would have been pursued by tons of military forces from all over the world.
What would happen in these pursuits? Maybe mass destruction? If you thought Superman was careless and immature in how he used his powers in the movie, how would he have been had he tried to defend himself as a teenager? What kind of an impact would it have had on Clark himself? The world? He clearly wasn't ready. It was said as much in the movie. I just think you have to do what you can to not have your child be put in that kind of situation, and that's what he tried to do.
I believe Jonathan cared about his son and wanted him to have a normal childhood. He didn't want him to have the weight of the world on his shoulders, until he was ready. Martha Kent as well.
Superman has always had a battle in his head as to whether he will be a savior or not. In Superman 2 we see Clark give up his powers to become human so he could have a normal life with Louis. This is nothing new.
Ultimately he will obviously choose the right and save the world. We all know that. But this struggle makes him a more interesting character in my eyes.
I'm sure most of you will disagree with me, but this is just my opinion. Like I said, there are many things I didn't like about the movie, this was not one of them.
Right before the tornado came, Clark and Jonathan just had an argument. Clark was talking about not wanting to live on a farm and saying that Jonathan was not his dad. In the argument he clearly showed that he was immature and not ready to currently be Superman. He was still very much a rebellious kid.
The whole consensus of why Jonathan didn't want the world to know about Superman was because of the huge impact it would have on not only the world, but on Clark as well. Agree with it or not, the world that was being established in the movie was one of more realism in how the world would react to Superman. He would have been pursued by tons of military forces from all over the world.
What would happen in these pursuits? Maybe mass destruction? If you thought Superman was careless and immature in how he used his powers in the movie, how would he have been had he tried to defend himself as a teenager? What kind of an impact would it have had on Clark himself? The world? He clearly wasn't ready. It was said as much in the movie. I just think you have to do what you can to not have your child be put in that kind of situation, and that's what he tried to do.
I believe Jonathan cared about his son and wanted him to have a normal childhood. He didn't want him to have the weight of the world on his shoulders, until he was ready. Martha Kent as well.
Superman has always had a battle in his head as to whether he will be a savior or not. In Superman 2 we see Clark give up his powers to become human so he could have a normal life with Louis. This is nothing new.
Ultimately he will obviously choose the right and save the world. We all know that. But this struggle makes him a more interesting character in my eyes.
I'm sure most of you will disagree with me, but this is just my opinion. Like I said, there are many things I didn't like about the movie, this was not one of them.
This post was edited on 9/23/15 at 2:31 pm
Posted on 9/22/15 at 5:57 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:
but we have another film with him coming up and hopefully a lot more after that. We may eventually get the Superman that you all know and love. It's called a character arc. At least I hope so
That's kind of the OP....if this is MoS2 in Snyder's eyes and Batman is a more prominent character....? It kind of rings with Baloo's point that Snyder actively dislikes Superman, or at least the core idea of Superman. That spurs the reaction to MoS, because WB is doubling down on this universe. This is the film Superman for the next 10 years or so.
Posted on 9/22/15 at 6:12 pm to abellsujr
quote:
abellsujr
Like I said, sorry about getting wrapped up in that. Just don't like when it's perceived that critiques aren't valid, or are insignificant.
I've seen the rate of that rise slightly and being that this board is super awesome, I don't want it go down the path of being a place that it's impossible to talk about anything because opinions aren't appreciated.
That and I was right in the middle of a stressful day. My mistake for pushing.
Posted on 9/23/15 at 7:43 am to ThoseGuys
quote:
WB wants to be dark and gritty, 2 words never associated with Superman.
As I have said over and over. Chris Nolan was one of the best AND worst things to every happen to comic book films.
Marvel capitalized even more off his success with their own brand. WB stuck with the Nolan approach without Nolan.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News