Man of Steel (2013)

[The Roofdog]

Ages, but it's a film, and I'm happy to assume they managed to get most people out, because it's a film, and they show people running from the area early on.

I'm perfectly happy to accept shorthand on these things, but Snyder and Goyer don't even do that: they couldn't show Superman holding up one building, saving a single person or even just a line of dialogue that indicates he gives a shit during that extended Metropolis fight until he catches Lois Lane. This stuff is integral to the character as far as I'm concerned.

[Blumf]

Incidentally, where in the film is it established the Superman really doesn't like killing, even to save the lives of innocents? Without that the Zod slaying scene looses some of it's weight and the whole deaths of thousands by the planet engine thing could be seen as not much of an issue for Kal-El

[Replies From View]

He saved the world though, which is 6 billion odd people. A few thousand makes no difference really.

People who wouldn't have been in danger in the first place if Superman hadn't arrived on earth and brought Zod with him.

[checkoutgirl]

Incidentally, where in the film is it established the Superman really doesn't like killing, even to save the lives of innocents?

Good point, I think the original Superman was a bloodthirsty tyrant. I might be wrong on that though, any Superman nerds who can confirm this ?

[Tiny Poster]

There's also that bit after Zod & pals visit Kal-El's mother, and he just blindy pushes him over several miles of land, with no regard for anything in their path. Humans included.

It's a stark contrast to the pre-lycra Clark, who saves lives even though his dad tells him not to.

Kyle Baker knocked up this game in honour of the final Zod/Kal-El set-to:

http://www.qualityjollity.com/MMOSGAME/MassMurdererOfSteel.html

[checkoutgirl]

People who wouldn't have been in danger in the first place if Superman hadn't arrived on earth and brought Zod with him.

Can't argue with that, although I'm not sure his baby spaceship had a steering wheel, it was probably on autopilot or something.

I bamlem Tor El for the whole sorry mess. It was his fault, the dirty stinker!!

[eluc55]

Incidentally, where in the film is it established the Superman really doesn't like killing, even to save the lives of innocents? Without that the Zod slaying scene looses some of it's weight and the whole deaths of thousands by the planet engine thing could be seen as not much of an issue for Kal-El

Well, it's an origin story, so I guess the idea is that it's never come up, until Zod and his cronies arrive.

At that point he tries to avoid killing them, but eventually has to kill Zod to save the family. That's the first time he's been presented with that situation, and judging from his reaction afterwards, that's the moment he realises he must never kill, no matter what's at stake.

So in answer to the question:

where in the film is it established the Superman really doesn't like killing, even to save the lives of innocents?

... I guess the answer is: at the point he kills someone and is tormented by it.

[Tiny Poster]

I can see where you're coming from. I only realised it was bad and wrong to kill people after I'd done it once. I still have the odd restless night.

[checkoutgirl]

... I guess the answer is: at the point he kills someone and is tormented by it.

They missed a trick there, imagine a Superman who enjoyed the odd murder like Dexter. That would be great. To a lot of people it wouldn't be Superman but sod those people. I like it when nerds get annoyed.

[eluc55]

I can see where you're coming from. I only realised it was bad and wrong to kill people after I'd done it once. I still have the odd restless night.

That's a ridiculous comparison, though.

Superman isn't just killing an ordinary criminal and then realising murder is wrong - something any idiot should know - he's killing a superhuman alien to save a whole planet, and realising that even then, no matter what's a stake, he musn't kill again.

So, yeah, people saying "I only realised it was bad and wrong to kill people after I'd done it once" are wilfully ignoring the fact that Zod's an all powerful near-god. A better comparison would be to say "is it justified to kill a terrorist, if it saves hundreds, or thousands, of lives."

Suddenly Superman making a choice and then regretting it doesn't seem illogical or out of character, at all.

[eluc55]

In short, you're trying to equate killing a random person with killing an alien who can murder millions of people and suggesting that the morality of his choice is equally clear cut, when it's perfectly obvious it isn't.

[Mister Six]

I think they do show it's evacuated. When the world conversion starts[nb]or possibly when they leave the Daily Planet[/nb], you see hundreds of people fleeing through the streets, and police officers telling them where to go.

They evacuated the WTC on 9/11, too, and look how that turned out. The fact that the Daily Planet isn't evacuated until buildings within eyeshot are collapsing is an indicator that more people died than didn't, I think, and obviously there are people still around by the time the machine's destroyed, otherwise what's that family doing in the bank?

If the choice is (mostly empty) buildings being destroyed during a cool fight scene, or no buildings being damaged, and superman keeping everyone alive, I'm afraid I choose the former...

It's not, though. There's also having the spaceship appear above NY the day before, giving them time to evacuate everyone (except the Daily Planet journos, who are determined to cover the story - adds a nice character beat and doesn't make them look like fucking idiots for waiting until the building next door is being flattened before they run). Also allows for a 'Ha - we already evacuated the city! Stupid aliens. Oh, wait - they're going to nuke the planet' scene, which could me mildly amusing/surprising.

it's perfectly in keeping with what happens in the superman shows and comics where enemies/monsters are always getting thrown through buildings. 

The tone's different, though, when you're dealing with a film and not a static image or cartoon. Especially when it's consciously shot in a very serious, realistic style (unlike, say, The Avengers, which also very pointedly didn't outright flatten a shit-ton of buildings, and which went for big, action-movie fireballs when stuff exploded rather than massive clouds of dust and bits of crumpled metal).

He saved the world though, which is 6 billion odd people. A few thousand makes no difference really.

If you think that then you seriously don't get Superman.

[checkoutgirl]

If you think that then you seriously don't get Superman.

I can live with that.

[lazyhour]

How was it suggested that Superman realised he mustn't ever kill again after snapping Zod's neck? I really can't remember.

[Mister Six]

It wasn't. That scene still doesn't work, even if you extrapolate that from it. It needed some kind of 'I must never kill' thing beforehand to set it up. Otherwise it looks like he's getting all upset for doing something utterly sensible.

[The Roofdog]

Maybe if he'd heat-visioned that dog to death to stop Kevin Costner's stupid sacrifice and was feeling all guilty about it. Writes itself.

[Tiny Poster]

How was it suggested that Superman realised he mustn't ever kill again after snapping Zod's neck? I really can't remember.

He went "AAARRRRGGGGHHH". And then in his next scene he was all jolly but firm with the army lad, and the army lady said she thought he was hot.

[eluc55]

It wasn't. That scene still doesn't work, even if you extrapolate that from it. It needed some kind of 'I must never kill' thing beforehand to set it up. Otherwise it looks like he's getting all upset for doing something utterly sensible.

I disagree. He's just commited genocide, and killed the last living member of his race[nb]Presumebly the rest are alive, but trapped forever in the phantom zone.[/nb].

It's hardly suprising that he's traumatised, or that it would stop him killing again in the future.

How was it suggested that Superman realised he mustn't ever kill again after snapping Zod's neck? I really can't remember.

It wasn't. It's been said in interviews with the director (or writer) that the scene was included in part to explain his aversion to killing even the most dangerous and powerful enemies.

They can build on it in the next film.

[Blumf]

I think they really needed a bit more, pre-Zod, Superman action. Have him rescue some murderous wrong-uns whilst people go "Hey, you could have let them die, they are bad" and Superman goes "No citizens, I are the good and killing is yucky, I read it in a book see" (wink to the Christians in the audience)

As it stands, he could just be upset that killing Zod meant he'd never have contact with anybody from his home world again, and not be arsed about it otherwise.

[eluc55]

As it stands, he could just be upset that killing Zod meant he'd never have contact with anybody from his home world again.

What's wrong with that, though. At this stage, that's all they need to do with it, and then they can choose if they want to go down the "never kills" road next time, with this event as the origin of that decision.

They don't need to set it up earlier in the film, at all. The only reason it's become an issue is because people assume Superman doesn't kill, so this seems out of character initially. They can now use that in the next film, to explain that aversion to killing, even in the most extreme circumstances.

Pretend it's not superman. Him killing Zod suddenly isn't a problem. He's just killing a deadly alien warlord and he's upset because it was the last of his kind. The scene makes perfect sense.

Acknowledge it is Superman and that superman doesn't kill... it's still not a problem, because they've laid the foundations for the very character trait everyone whinging about; namely that he never kills, no matter how desperate the situation. It sets the stage for future films.

[checkoutgirl]

He went "AAARRRRGGGGHHH". And then in his next scene he was all jolly but firm with the army lad, and the army lady said she thought he was hot.

He went "AAARRRRGGGGHHH" a lot in this film. Anytime he had to do something a bit difficult he went "AAARRRRGGGGHHH". There are plot holes all over the place, the film is like Blackburn Lancashire there are that many holes. Why did Zod want to stay on Krypton while it was about to explode if he's bred to protect his species ? Why did twisting Zod's neck kill him when Supes used him as a baseball bat for half an hour ? Why did Zod need to kill everyone to live on Earth, why couldn't they just move down here and get on with it ? Why didn't Supes save his father, surely he could have without giving away his identity ? You could write a book about the inconsistencies there are that many. If you liked it then they won't matter much the first time you see it. And Russell Crow flying around on a dragon, that's worth the price of a ticket on it's own.

[Tamarind Massacre]

My main problems with the neck snapping scene were:

We'd watched them throw each other through buildings for what felt like hours.  What was the point of all that, when evidently it left them unscathed?  If wrestling moves were the only way for them to inflict damage on each other,It would have been over quicker if they had just wrestled each other in one spot, and it would have done less damage to Metropolis and its inhabitants.

After Superman snaps Zod's neck, we don't get a shot of the family he was aiming for to show that they were alright.  In fact, for a second, I thought Superman might be distraught because he didn't quite manage to save the family.  (The "killing is bad" thing makes no sense to me; was all the demolition up to that point supposed to merely incapacitate?  How was it now kill-or-be-killed long before?)

So my own explanation is that Zod and Superman were by that point as bored of all the fighting as I was, so Zod let Superman snap his neck just to get it over with.  Then Superman went "ARGGGGGHHHHHH thank god that is over, I was starting to think that there wouldn't be any of Metropolis left for me to be Clark Kent in in the next movie."

[DukeDeMondo]

I never thought I'd find myself enjoying any Zack Snyder film ever again, but I enjoyed Man of Steel a great deal. I look forward to seeing it again come the great festival of Zack Snyder stuff I can tolerate for half a second. It will screen alongside two thirds of Dawn of the Dead and the bits in Watchmen that have thon big blue cunt swanning about space with his balls out and knackering tanks with his brain and so on.

There's plenty wrong with it, mind. The first 40 minutes are an absolute mess, and the Krypton prologue should have been chucked to fuck, especially since Digi-Jaga and his flying ball bearings do a far better job of summing up the whole affair when they reappear an hour or so later. From that point on, though, I liked most everything, and a lot of stuff I absolutely loved. When your woman starts punching folk into the street, for example, I thought my knickers were done for. I've heard some critics talk about how it "descends" into characters battering other for nearly an hour at the end. Descends my arse. That final third is fuckin sublime. Every punch and kick and stomp was a thing worthy of adulation. Not a crack to the teeth was wasted, not a boot in the ribs nor fist in the kidneys. A carnival of crunching throats and caving faces. Hoors in all directions throwing other through banks, farmhouses, off the sides of trains, etc. Most every shot in those battering bits has something astounding in.

Other stuff I liked: all the Christ malarkey, although I think Superman Returns did that better. The first flying sequence, which reminded me of those beautiful moments in Ang Lee's Hulk where our man just bounds through the sky with this look of utter bliss on his face. God that film was wonderful. Folk don't deserve it. 

Also, the "no humour" criticism I find a bit baffling. The last half, at least, had plenty of laughs.

So yes. I liked it a lot, even though some of it was verging on awful. When I watch it again, I'll probably skip the first half hour.

[Rolf Lundgren]

Nothing happens in the last third though except people hitting each other. The CGI looks alright but there's only so much admiring of that you can have. Then when you think it's over Zod gets up and asks for another fight that goes on for 10 minutes.

I was in a miserable mood when I went in which might have coloured my view of things but it was really dull. All the scenes felt really empty, like there was only about 10 people in the cast and everyone only had a few lines. Too much of an emphasis on the action or arty moody shots and a complete absence of fun. 

[Incandenza]

I liked it despite thinking it was actually quite crap. An appalling script, far too long, filled with misfires, but enough SUPER moments in it for me to be entertained. I loved how they handled the origins, considering how many superhero origins I must have sat through in the past few years, it was nice to at least have the format of it played around with a bit.

[Glebe]

My 2 cents...

Fantastic design (definite Giger influence) and action, terrible flashback structure, some cheesy, unconvincing dialogue scenes... after all I heard I wasn't expecting much so I wasn't too disappointed. The CG fight stuff was amazing, even though it was kind of obvious, it kinda suited the superhuman-speed that Superman and his Kryptonian chums possess. Kind of like watching the best computer game battle ever. Anway, overall not too impressed. Anyone else have a crush on Faora?