Lex has a pretty good argument to make against Superman in Man of Steel Two
it really throws lex luthor under the bus, actually
man of steel spoilers
like lex luthor is a character whose tragedy is that he is a brilliant person who simply cannot believe that such goodness as superman can exist, and that he is choking humanity's potential, and that at any moment superman can snap and prove himself just as corruptible as anyone else and in that moment he becomes something not to be aspired to but to be feared
and lex and superman could be friends and do great works but luthor makes himself superman's enemy due to mistrust and jealousy
then you throw lex luthor into the man of steel universe, and lex says "superman is a giant menace, he is strangling humanity's potential and he could never sustain being the force of good that he claims to be" and then everyone else says "whoa lex luthor is fucking right the only reason anything bad at all happened was because superman was here and thousands if not millions of people were killed in his battles and then in the end superman chose to kill someone else which shows he can in fact cross that line and what's to stop him doing it again"
and then the movie contrives a way to have lex luthor lose, even though this time he is completely right, just because he is the villain
Letting Luthor have a point about Superman would be an inspired take on the character. It'd give him nuance and a good reason to hate Superman, rather then the usual "Superman destroying humanity potential" angle for the 5352342 time.
I'm glad it was not the trainwreck the internet led me to believe, but I did think there were a lot of problems. There were some genuine, great moments, but as a film it's just disjointed and kind of flimsy. They did a real ham-fisted job with the scoring in a lot places too; the actual music I thought was pretty great, but it was used in a very smack-you-over-the-head sort of way and it kinda got annoying. Thematically, I don't think they did a spectacular job tying the latter half of the film to the first half, and there is almost no transition between
"Joe" and "Superman".
It also wasn't a whole lot of fun in the way Batman Begins was, which is kind of a downer.
It over all, it was okay. Hardly the game changer that I think DC wanted it to be, but what else is new.
Even without the phantom zone projector, there is still a way to take away Zod's powers. They can replicate Krypton's atmosphere.
As for the "he has no choice" thing, as I mentioned earlier, all the earlier collateral damage really weakens that scene. It wasn't the first "he has no choice" scene. Superman was clearly unable to stop Zod from killing thousands of people when they were smashing through dozens of buildings so why didn't he try to use lethal force earlier?
The scene would have been much stronger if they had shown Superman saving people from the collateral damage earlier. Instead of having Zod start off with Superman's level of power, have him start out much weaker. Have Zod take advantage of Superman's compassion by intentionally causing lots of collateral damage so that Superman has fly around trying to protect/save civilians while fighting Zod at the same time. However, Zod absorbs more of the sun's energy and his strength grows as the fight continues, making it harder for Superman to save the civilians. Finally, Zod's power reaches Superman's level and Superman is no longer able to protect civilians from Zod and that's when he has to kill Zod.
What good would replicating Krypton's atmosphere do?
It would make Superman and Zod normal, but it seems like it would kill off the population of Earth in the process
And even if it didn't, what then? They capture him and somehow revert the process? Then you've got a super-powered Zod again and no kryptonite to stop him with.
They can do it in an enclosed space.
Knock Zod out, throw him in a specialized chamber with Kryptonian atmosphere.
I'm really confused now about
whether it's the radiation that's the source of Superman's powers or the atmosphere. Or both? Thanks, Goyer.
It seems to me it's a combination of things, including the lesser gravity of Earth, due to its smaller size. The implication is that The Red sun of Krypton is "less powerful" than the yellow sun of Earth, so Kryptonians have more "power hungry" cells, although neither species derives its energy directly from the sun, I assume, so it's kind of silly to make that distinction. They also clearly make a big deal, both on the Kryptonian ship and with Martha Kent's little story about how it "was so hard" for baby Clark when he first arrived on Earth, breathing and what not. It seems silly that just the "atmospherics" of the ship would be an issue for the more relevant powers in question, but there's every reason to believe that whatever artificial gravity they used would be more like Krypton's than Earths. They should have come at it from the other angle, and demonstrated how difficult it would be for Lois to even move under Kryptonian gravity, but whatever, that's hardly the worst mistake Snyder made in this film.
Superman Returns is on TV right now, and I just caught the sequence where he makes his first reappearance and saves the plane
And whatever the other problems with that movie, I thought that was a really great scene and felt very "Superman," because he saved people and showed concern for their well-being and there's that great moment where everyone's reaction to him coming back is to flip out and start cheering like fucking crazy because they're so thrilled that he's here and everything seems a little brighter now that Superman is back, it's a really wonderful few minutes
And Brandon Routh was so delightfully cheesy with the way he delivered the "safest way to travel" line from the first Reeve movie
Problems with that movie aside, at least it was a continuation of the idea that Superman is a good thing to have in the world and people should always be happy to see him
Lex has a pretty good argument to make against Superman in Man of Steel Two
it really throws lex luthor under the bus, actually
man of steel spoilers
like lex luthor is a character whose tragedy is that he is a brilliant person who simply cannot believe that such goodness as superman can exist, and that he is choking humanity's potential, and that at any moment superman can snap and prove himself just as corruptible as anyone else and in that moment he becomes something not to be aspired to but to be feared
and lex and superman could be friends and do great works but luthor makes himself superman's enemy due to mistrust and jealousy
then you throw lex luthor into the man of steel universe, and lex says "superman is a giant menace, he is strangling humanity's potential and he could never sustain being the force of good that he claims to be" and then everyone else says "whoa lex luthor is fucking right the only reason anything bad at all happened was because superman was here and thousands if not millions of people were killed in his battles and then in the end superman chose to kill someone else which shows he can in fact cross that line and what's to stop him doing it again"
and then the movie contrives a way to have lex luthor lose, even though this time he is completely right, just because he is the villain
Letting Luthor have a point about Superman would be an inspired take on the character. It'd give him nuance and a good reason to hate Superman, rather then the usual "Superman destroying humanity potential" angle for the 5352342 time.
no.
no, it most certainly is not inspired. it is moronic.
superman represents a lot of things, but at the core I believe the key component of superman being superman is compassion. the flight and durability and super-strength are incidental, and compassion makes superman what he is. he seeks to help people, to protect them and keep them safe and even comfort them when need be, because they are people, and because helping people is just the right thing to do.
lex luthor is cynicism. lex luthor sees superman and thinks "it won't last." "he's faking it." "he's up to something." lex luthor thinks "why should I be compassionate when I cannot guarantee that others will be compassionate to me in return? Why should I be compassionate when I do not need compassion myself? What's in it for me?" as superman is the ideal of interest focused outwards towards others, lex luthor is the epitome of interest being focused on the self- and he cannot comprehend that there is actually someone selfless out there, and in so doing girds himself against them, because one day their foolish compassion will dry up and on that day luthor will be ready.
that's why the john byrne(?) reimagining of luthor as a ruthless businessman instead of a mad scientist is genius. that is an inspired take on the character, because it works with who luthor is and who we know ruthless businesspeople to be in a way that deepens him and binds him more tightly into a role that we recognize and that makes sense for him to occupy. of course luthor is a fiendish capitalist at the head of a business empire in his own name, because getting and staying in that position works perfectly with his own self-interest and cynicism and focus on ending up "ahead".
writing luthor, practically a personification of cynicism, to have legitimate grievances against and points against superman, a personification of compassion, is not inspired. it is shortsighted and stupid and childish in the same way as cloaking a work of fiction with drab colors, violence, and brutal cynicism to give it the impression of being mature. if someone in a position writing superman fiction says "hey, what if lex luthor was right?" they not only shouldn't be writing superman stories, they should probably also take a look at why they're writing fiction at all.
I just got back from this movie. I will offer the DEFINITIVE MAN OF STEEL OPINION sometime later, but right now I will leave these points.
1. Goyer is a criminal and belongs in prison.
2. Snyder's sense of pacing is the perfect example of a director's reach exceeding his grasp.
3. The casting in this film was good. Russel Crowe is great and the guy who played Superman was just the perfect big goofy bastard in parts (and directed horribly in others)
4. You know the whole last act reminded me a lot of Miracle Man, this would have been an awesome beginning to a Miracle Man franchise (conceptually, because it was still written by Goyer and directed by Snyder)
Lex has a pretty good argument to make against Superman in Man of Steel Two
it really throws lex luthor under the bus, actually
man of steel spoilers
like lex luthor is a character whose tragedy is that he is a brilliant person who simply cannot believe that such goodness as superman can exist, and that he is choking humanity's potential, and that at any moment superman can snap and prove himself just as corruptible as anyone else and in that moment he becomes something not to be aspired to but to be feared
and lex and superman could be friends and do great works but luthor makes himself superman's enemy due to mistrust and jealousy
then you throw lex luthor into the man of steel universe, and lex says "superman is a giant menace, he is strangling humanity's potential and he could never sustain being the force of good that he claims to be" and then everyone else says "whoa lex luthor is fucking right the only reason anything bad at all happened was because superman was here and thousands if not millions of people were killed in his battles and then in the end superman chose to kill someone else which shows he can in fact cross that line and what's to stop him doing it again"
and then the movie contrives a way to have lex luthor lose, even though this time he is completely right, just because he is the villain
Letting Luthor have a point about Superman would be an inspired take on the character. It'd give him nuance and a good reason to hate Superman, rather then the usual "Superman destroying humanity potential" angle for the 5352342 time.
no.
no, it most certainly is not inspired. it is moronic.
superman represents a lot of things, but at the core I believe the key component of superman being superman is compassion. the flight and durability and super-strength are incidental, and compassion makes superman what he is. he seeks to help people, to protect them and keep them safe and even comfort them when need be, because they are people, and because helping people is just the right thing to do.
lex luthor is cynicism. lex luthor sees superman and thinks "it won't last." "he's faking it." "he's up to something." lex luthor thinks "why should I be compassionate when I cannot guarantee that others will be compassionate to me in return? Why should I be compassionate when I do not need compassion myself? What's in it for me?" as superman is the ideal of interest focused outwards towards others, lex luthor is the epitome of interest being focused on the self- and he cannot comprehend that there is actually someone selfless out there, and in so doing girds himself against them, because one day their foolish compassion will dry up and on that day luthor will be ready.
that's why the john byrne(?) reimagining of luthor as a ruthless businessman instead of a mad scientist is genius. that is an inspired take on the character, because it works with who luthor is and who we know ruthless businesspeople to be in a way that deepens him and binds him more tightly into a role that we recognize and that makes sense for him to occupy. of course luthor is a fiendish capitalist at the head of a business empire in his own name, because getting and staying in that position works perfectly with his own self-interest and cynicism and focus on ending up "ahead".
writing luthor, practically a personification of cynicism, to have legitimate grievances against and points against superman, a personification of compassion, is not inspired. it is shortsighted and stupid and childish in the same way as cloaking a work of fiction with drab colors, violence, and brutal cynicism to give it the impression of being mature. if someone in a position writing superman fiction says "hey, what if lex luthor was right?" they not only shouldn't be writing superman stories, they should probably also take a look at why they're writing fiction at all.
Luthor having a good reason to be against Superman doesn't mean he can't still be an asshole whose wrong about Superman at the end of the day. The sequel can subvert this by having Superman being a changed person who learnt from his experiences in Man of Steel so he's not so inexperienced or irresponsible in battle. It'd be a grayer interpretation then their relationship is typical portrayed and give Lex greater depth as a character rather then keeping him as a shallow cynical villain. Both sides can be right without ruining either character. This can add complexity, though I don't think Goyer is the guy who can write such a script properly.
Luthor having a point about Superman being dangerous doesn't mean he can't also be self interested or a fiendish capitalist. That said, like I said above it doesn't mean he still can't be wrong about Superman, either. That's why it'd be a grey area not a black and white one that you incorrectly assume I meant. Amanda Waller went through a similar phase during the Cadmus arc in Justice League Unlimited.
This Luthor also needs to be consistent with this new movie universe the movie started. They're going to update the character anyway so why not explore new territory most adaptions haven't? Creators putting their own spins on established characters isn't always a bad thing. Whether they'd succeed doing that with Luthor remains unknown, of course. They might have other plans for the character anyway.
If anyone, if anyone defends the dialogue in this movie, I will poop in their sock drawer.
Some of the actors got around this but when I find myself actively rewriting lines of dialogue in my head as I watch a film, becoming an editor instead of a viewer, something horrible has happened
If it happens once or twice in a movie, whatever, no script is perfect, but in this picture it happened all the time
I dunno if anyone mentioned it but the Wall Street Journal is reporting that WB is fast tracking Man of Steel 2 for next year and Justice League for 2015.
Avengers 2, Justice League and Star Wars 7 all in one summer.
I just got back from this movie. I will offer the DEFINITIVE MAN OF STEEL OPINION sometime later, but right now I will leave these points.
1. Goyer is a criminal and belongs in prison.
2. Snyder's sense of pacing is the perfect example of a director's reach exceeding his grasp.
3. The casting in this film was good. Russel Crowe is great and the guy who played Superman was just the perfect big goofy bastard in parts (and directed horribly in others)
4. You know the whole last act reminded me a lot of Miracle Man, this would have been an awesome beginning to a Miracle Man franchise (conceptually, because it was still written by Goyer and directed by Snyder)
You need to include Snyder, his boss, and his co-writer Chris Nolan then. Goyer didn't write the film by himself and is the lowest on the food chain between the three, even if he did.
I dunno if anyone mentioned it but the Wall Street Journal is reporting that WB is fast tracking Man of Steel 2 for next year and Justice League for 2015.
Avengers 2, Justice League and Star Wars 7 all in one summer.
Um...
Aren't they forgetting something?
Or are they not gonna do a Batman movie before Justice League?
I dunno if anyone mentioned it but the Wall Street Journal is reporting that WB is fast tracking Man of Steel 2 for next year and Justice League for 2015.
Avengers 2, Justice League and Star Wars 7 all in one summer.
Um...
Aren't they forgetting something?
Or are they not gonna do a Batman movie before Justice League?
They have said Batman is gonna take a break for a while
The reported solo films being developed are Wonder Woman and Aquaman.
I dunno if anyone mentioned it but the Wall Street Journal is reporting that WB is fast tracking Man of Steel 2 for next year and Justice League for 2015.
Avengers 2, Justice League and Star Wars 7 all in one summer.
Um...
Aren't they forgetting something?
Or are they not gonna do a Batman movie before Justice League?
They need to make a World's Finest movie to introduce their new Batman before Justice League IMO.
Is it just me, or does a year seems like an awfully short timeframe to fast track a sequel?
I mean if they were shooting it lotr-style to begin with, that's one thing, but it seems like not a lot of time if they're spinning things up as of now.
Is it just me, or does a year seems like an awfully short timeframe to fast track a sequel?
I mean if they were shooting it lotr-style to begin with, that's one thing, but it seems like not a lot of time if they're spinning things up as of now.
If anyone, if anyone defends the dialogue in this movie, I will poop in their sock drawer.
Some of the actors got around this but when I find myself actively rewriting lines of dialogue in my head as I watch a film, becoming an editor instead of a viewer, something horrible has happened
If it happens once or twice in a movie, whatever, no script is perfect, but in this picture it happened all the time
Superman Returns is on TV right now, and I just caught the sequence where he makes his first reappearance and saves the plane
And whatever the other problems with that movie, I thought that was a really great scene and felt very "Superman," because he saved people and showed concern for their well-being and there's that great moment where everyone's reaction to him coming back is to flip out and start cheering like fucking crazy because they're so thrilled that he's here and everything seems a little brighter now that Superman is back, it's a really wonderful few minutes
And Brandon Routh was so delightfully cheesy with the way he delivered the "safest way to travel" line from the first Reeve movie
Problems with that movie aside, at least it was a continuation of the idea that Superman is a good thing to have in the world and people should always be happy to see him
I won't argue it got the Superman concept much better than MoS but it's still a terrible film and even if my opinion of MoS still drops overtime I'd rather watch it than SR.
Posts
in comparison to all the other things
they're setting up a justice lords movie
You know if they really went for it, that might be a thing I would watch
Just have each character's movie deviate from the character in some way, with Batman's culminating in him just gunning down the Joker
Post-credits scene is the reveal of the Justice Lords, inviting Batman to join their ranks
I'm glad it was not the trainwreck the internet led me to believe, but I did think there were a lot of problems. There were some genuine, great moments, but as a film it's just disjointed and kind of flimsy. They did a real ham-fisted job with the scoring in a lot places too; the actual music I thought was pretty great, but it was used in a very smack-you-over-the-head sort of way and it kinda got annoying. Thematically, I don't think they did a spectacular job tying the latter half of the film to the first half, and there is almost no transition between
It also wasn't a whole lot of fun in the way Batman Begins was, which is kind of a downer.
It over all, it was okay. Hardly the game changer that I think DC wanted it to be, but what else is new.
And whatever the other problems with that movie, I thought that was a really great scene and felt very "Superman," because he saved people and showed concern for their well-being and there's that great moment where everyone's reaction to him coming back is to flip out and start cheering like fucking crazy because they're so thrilled that he's here and everything seems a little brighter now that Superman is back, it's a really wonderful few minutes
And Brandon Routh was so delightfully cheesy with the way he delivered the "safest way to travel" line from the first Reeve movie
Problems with that movie aside, at least it was a continuation of the idea that Superman is a good thing to have in the world and people should always be happy to see him
no, it most certainly is not inspired. it is moronic.
superman represents a lot of things, but at the core I believe the key component of superman being superman is compassion. the flight and durability and super-strength are incidental, and compassion makes superman what he is. he seeks to help people, to protect them and keep them safe and even comfort them when need be, because they are people, and because helping people is just the right thing to do.
lex luthor is cynicism. lex luthor sees superman and thinks "it won't last." "he's faking it." "he's up to something." lex luthor thinks "why should I be compassionate when I cannot guarantee that others will be compassionate to me in return? Why should I be compassionate when I do not need compassion myself? What's in it for me?" as superman is the ideal of interest focused outwards towards others, lex luthor is the epitome of interest being focused on the self- and he cannot comprehend that there is actually someone selfless out there, and in so doing girds himself against them, because one day their foolish compassion will dry up and on that day luthor will be ready.
that's why the john byrne(?) reimagining of luthor as a ruthless businessman instead of a mad scientist is genius. that is an inspired take on the character, because it works with who luthor is and who we know ruthless businesspeople to be in a way that deepens him and binds him more tightly into a role that we recognize and that makes sense for him to occupy. of course luthor is a fiendish capitalist at the head of a business empire in his own name, because getting and staying in that position works perfectly with his own self-interest and cynicism and focus on ending up "ahead".
writing luthor, practically a personification of cynicism, to have legitimate grievances against and points against superman, a personification of compassion, is not inspired. it is shortsighted and stupid and childish in the same way as cloaking a work of fiction with drab colors, violence, and brutal cynicism to give it the impression of being mature. if someone in a position writing superman fiction says "hey, what if lex luthor was right?" they not only shouldn't be writing superman stories, they should probably also take a look at why they're writing fiction at all.
1. Goyer is a criminal and belongs in prison.
2. Snyder's sense of pacing is the perfect example of a director's reach exceeding his grasp.
3. The casting in this film was good. Russel Crowe is great and the guy who played Superman was just the perfect big goofy bastard in parts (and directed horribly in others)
4. You know the whole last act reminded me a lot of Miracle Man, this would have been an awesome beginning to a Miracle Man franchise (conceptually, because it was still written by Goyer and directed by Snyder)
Luthor having a point about Superman being dangerous doesn't mean he can't also be self interested or a fiendish capitalist. That said, like I said above it doesn't mean he still can't be wrong about Superman, either. That's why it'd be a grey area not a black and white one that you incorrectly assume I meant. Amanda Waller went through a similar phase during the Cadmus arc in Justice League Unlimited.
This Luthor also needs to be consistent with this new movie universe the movie started. They're going to update the character anyway so why not explore new territory most adaptions haven't? Creators putting their own spins on established characters isn't always a bad thing. Whether they'd succeed doing that with Luthor remains unknown, of course. They might have other plans for the character anyway.
Some of the actors got around this but when I find myself actively rewriting lines of dialogue in my head as I watch a film, becoming an editor instead of a viewer, something horrible has happened
If it happens once or twice in a movie, whatever, no script is perfect, but in this picture it happened all the time
http://gingerhaze.tumblr.com/post/53161819121/this-actually-happened
Avengers 2, Justice League and Star Wars 7 all in one summer.
You need to include Snyder, his boss, and his co-writer Chris Nolan then. Goyer didn't write the film by himself and is the lowest on the food chain between the three, even if he did.
And I'm not talking about Star Wars
if mtmte actually ends at 22
i will make a list of people who didnt buy it
i will find you
and i will kill you
yes
and it will be an idyllic paradise
hey the plan was good enough for ra's al ghul
Um...
Aren't they forgetting something?
Or are they not gonna do a Batman movie before Justice League?
You are more radical than the League of Assassins!
The reported solo films being developed are Wonder Woman and Aquaman.
They need to make a World's Finest movie to introduce their new Batman before Justice League IMO.
I mean if they were shooting it lotr-style to begin with, that's one thing, but it seems like not a lot of time if they're spinning things up as of now.
First Class had a similar schedule.
If the apocalypse is like RPM then deal
It worked for Saw!
.......................
.........
Antimatter you will hate me for saying this but what the fuck is mtmte?
More Than Meets The Eye. It's a comic about robots. In space.
It is good.
Why I fear the ocean.
Bane posts at Penny Arcade.
Oh I thought it was a DC book.
Some of it was okay. A lot of it was not.
I won't argue it got the Superman concept much better than MoS but it's still a terrible film and even if my opinion of MoS still drops overtime I'd rather watch it than SR.
I mean, they were lifted straight from Birthright and All-Star Superman out of context, but they were still good lines.