Man of Steel

Cinge

Cinge

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
7,051
2,118
You know out of all that you listed the only one that even makes sense is the drone. I find it funny that people are upset he didn't just return it and told them "bad boys" and flew off. It's a reboot for a reason, its a new superman and obviously DC had no problem with it. I know its probably asking the impossible, but when you see a reboot, there are no "prior" behaviors or character templates you compare too, the point is to watch it like its "new". You can't say "Superman" doesn't do that, because there is no previous comparison, so its not ooc in that world/movie. But again, that's asking probably way too much of people attached to previous iterations, who just literally want the same thing over and over.
This superman is different, he doesn't want the government tracking him and its obvious he told them this prior to that last scene(he sounded exasperated when he told the general he wasn't going to find where he hung is cape) so he destroyed a mechanical device , a machine.

Superman returns wasnt a re-boot, it was actually a continuation of the previous movies(thus why he already had a relation with lois/metropolis and had a son). Returns had a model/character they had to follow and adhere too.

Anyhow, very entertaining, and I'm interested in sequels to see where they take this superman and also if DC starts to do what marvel is doing with a huge over-arc with each hero having their own sub arcs and interweaving while coming together at certain points.
 
TrollfaceDeux

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
bro, Snyderwasgoing for "Superman represents X and Y." Why else would he have Nolan? He wanted substance like Batman. He is supposed to be the Hope, or "God" to them and other shit. You only have to watch the trailers for his goals and shit. He failed like a shit director that he is. Michael Bay of our generation.
 
Caliane

Caliane

Avatar of War Slayer
14,679
10,243
there is a fundamental problem when you think a character can changed at a whim.
they can evolve, but should not just change at the whim of the author.
A character is not just a name. a character is the ideas and actions given. My version of superman he dresses in black, and fights crime with hits fits and a superrang in Gotham city to avenge his dead parents... uh... Call it superman all you want, but thats fucking Batman. you can not just take the name, then change everything underneath it as you want. only more silly when you refuse to even CALL them Superman..


Again, they can evolve. Superman started out being able to jump high. Strong. fighting corporate criminals.
Truth justice and the American way was added, during the radio show years after. flying the tv show more years later. To super criminals and the silver age. and of course the later reboots of infinate crisis.
Batman started out with a gun. he dropped that during the silverage campy years, which lead into the Adam west.
Until mid 80's with the Dark knight returns bringing in the age of grimdark. this evolution was still well within the characterization however, even with the giant tonal shift.
Tim burtans movies good.... but kindof out of character.. Batman murders like 10 people, including the Joker..

Much of this is years of refining the characters too.
Sometimes you get a seminal story that just utterly defines the character, and any interpretation after that, which is not in the same venue is officially WRONG. Dark knight, and killing joke for batman are really this. although, they kindof killed Batman as a character.
Powergirl. the grey/palmatti/conner/mounts run. The definitive powergirl.
Shazam Monster Society of Evil.

Movies are weird, in that they are effectively "what ifs" or alt universes.
You can have the Supergirl main comic. or superman Action comic. and that doesn't really reflect on All-star superman being definitive superman. or Supergirl:cosmic adventures in the 8th grade. (which is fantastic)
But since the movies are the only representation of these characters in the main stream, they should absolutely be the "definitive" take on the character. Not some random jack offs "my version"
Imagine Red Son Superman was the only movie superman. how lame would that be? (as entertaining as that book is)
 
L

Lost Ranger_sl

shitlord
1,027
4
Caliane_sl said:
you can not just take the name, then change everything underneath it as you want.
Click to expand...
Uh, yes you can. There are no rules when it comes to artistic license. If they want to write a comic/movie about Superman's struggle with tentacle-rape porn addiction then that is their right as the artist. No one is under any obligation to write characters only a specific way. What makes these characters so fun and versatile is that peoplecango "Hey, what if..." and write their own story. In this particular case they decided to say "Hey, what if Superman was less of a bitch and was actually willing to get his hands dirty?!". Personally I think people should be fucking around with the Superman character more often. The "Up, Up and Away!" vanilla version can be painfully dull.

If someone doesn't like how a character has been written then they can very simply choose to not watch/read that particular version. I'd prefer to see characters get fucked up from time to time if it means we also get some fantastic stories along the way. Personal preferences and all that.
 
McCheese

McCheese

SW: Sean, CW: Crone, GW: Wizardhawk
6,895
4,277
In this particular case they decided to say "Hey, what if Superman was less of a bitch and was actually willing to get his hands dirty?!".
Click to expand...
Pretty much this. It's a different take on Superman and I like it a lot. Call it emo, gritty, whatever; I call it entertaining and way better than the traditional "boy scout" Superman.
 
TrollfaceDeux

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
You just turned T H E American hero into an emo faggot.

I pity the children.

At least Captain America wasn't this fucked up. Thank you Marvel. True American Company.
 
Cinge

Cinge

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
7,051
2,118
Caliane_sl said:
But since the movies are the only representation of these characters in the main stream, they should absolutely be the "definitive" take on the character. Not some random jack offs "my version"
Click to expand...
And I disagree. If the owner of a IP or some such gives someone license to "Re-boot" , then the person receiving has free reign to do what he/she wants. That's the whole point of re-booting, to do something different. Obviously the original owner has some input in a advisory capacity and might have put in some "cannot do or don't dos", but as long as they agree how is it "Wrong"?

But hey to each their own. I can separate versions of IPs. I don't compare current batman to old ones, I don't compare this superman to the last one and on and on. If I watch a movie and its a re-boot, it starts over. It's a new movie and new characters. I knew nothing of this superman when I stepped into that theatre, nor any preconceived notions on how me must behave or go about his business.

It was a good movie and much better then previous versions imo, in terms of a super hero movie. The best? no, I still think avengers has that mark, but that was a culmination of quite a few arcs so it was well fleshed out by then and I had a lot more investment by that time.

That's not to say I didn't have any gripes, but I don't lose sleep over them or over-analyze them nor think that this new version somehow stole my kids, raped my wife and killed my dog all in one go.
Why superman went to the indian ocean machine, would love to hear official reason. Also how did zod and his cronies view kyrpton's destruction, if it showed them going through that portal/gateway to the phantomzone before it even started?
 
Caliane

Caliane

Avatar of War Slayer
14,679
10,243
Lost Ranger_sl said:
Uh, yes you can. There are no rules when it comes to artistic license. If they want to write a comic/movie about Superman's struggle with tentacle-rape porn addiction then that is their right as the artist. No one is under any obligation to write characters only a specific way. What makes these characters so fun and versatile is that peoplecango "Hey, what if..." and write their own story. In this particular case they decided to say "Hey, what if Superman was less of a bitch and was actually willing to get his hands dirty?!". Personally I think people should be fucking around with the Superman character more often. The "Up, Up and Away!" vanilla version can be painfully dull.

If someone doesn't like how a character has been written then they can very simply choose to not watch/read that particular version. I'd prefer to see characters get fucked up from time to time if it means we also get some fantastic stories along the way. Personal preferences and all that.
Click to expand...
Then its not the same character. A character is more then just a name.
 
TrollfaceDeux

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
SFCiyJL.jpg
 
L

Lost Ranger_sl

shitlord
1,027
4
Caliane_sl said:
Then its not the same character. A character is more then just a name.
Click to expand...
A character is what the current writer chooses to make him. People really need to lighten up. Big names get changed all the time and it is all in good fun. That is why we have Abraham Lincoln cutting the heads off vampires, and Hansel and Gretel hunting down witches. You need to take Superman off the pedestal if you think that for some reason he is above that.


Edit: We could likely go back and forth on this subject forever. So we'll just have to agree to disagree I think.
tongue.png
 
Miguex

Miguex

The lad himself
<Gold Donor>
2,229
1,779
regarding indian ocean choice, i just assumed it was because he could get there in like 15 minutes, would have taken that plane 24 hours.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,619
50,990
Miguex_sl said:
regarding indian ocean choice, i just assumed it was because he could get there in like 15 minutes, would have taken that plane 24 hours.
Click to expand...
Also the world engine was unmanned, so dropping the phantom engine on it wouldn't have solved the problem of having a bunch of angry kryptonians rampaging on your planet?
 
TomServo

TomServo

<Bronze Donator>
6,432
8,477
I felt like the optimism and hope of superman was still at the core of the movie, and a different take on how that is presented. Caliane is right in that superman's powers and core identity reflected the times and media he is portrayed in. Hardly fucking batman though.
 
Valishar

Valishar

Molten Core Raider
766
424
Phazael_sl said:
Does not alter the fact that supes essentially commited genocide.
Click to expand...
Calling what Superman did in this movie genocide is kinda like me blowing up a sperm bank with nobody working inside and calling it mass murder. The first scene of the movie demonstrates that Kryptonians can make babies the old fashioned way, they just think it's gross, and want to do it the traditional Brave New World style.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.