main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

Amph Here's Some Money, Go See A Swap Thing: DCU/Elseworlds Discussion

Discussion in 'Community' started by Lazy Storm Trooper, Jul 2, 2013.

  1. dp4m

    dp4m Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Eh, one thing I can't fault Goyer / Snyder for is "Superman as Jesus" -- it's essentially baked into the original mythology by the Jews who created it and made more explicit by Puzo / Donner in Superman the Movie.

    The church scene was awful, but it wasn't awful because of this...
     
  2. darth-sinister

    darth-sinister Manager Emeritus star 10 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 28, 2001

    Jonathan saying maybe shows that he doesn't have all the answers, which shows that he is more of a real person than a caricature that always knows what to say. He believes that Clark was right and wrong, because there is no clear answer. Clark has to accept that there is consequences because any decision he will make will have them. If not towards him, then towards those that he cares for. This then leads to the tornado flashback where Jonathan tells Clark not to risk it and opts to let himself be killed, so that Clark will be protected as well as Martha. This in turn ties into Jor-El providing him a suit and Clark's ultimately realization that the best thing that he can do is to create a dual identity, so that he won't worry about Martha or Lois, while also operating in public with the suit.

    That they know of. They don't know what his limits are until they're presented aboard the ship and we know that more will be coming in this next film. There's also harm to his loved ones, such as we saw when Zod and his people showed up at the farm and tossed Martha around like a rag doll.
     
    GenAntilles likes this.
  3. Ender Sai

    Ender Sai Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2001
    There are two types of people in this thread; those who liked and understood Man of Steel, and those who didn't and didn't. The latter can keep their opinions to themselves, or **** the **** off by way of under a bus. I'm tired of people wandering around saying "ME NO AM UNDERSTAND. HOW PA KENT BE SO BAD."

    We get it, you didn't like it, now shut up and sod off. Or the reverse.
     
  4. Boba_Fett_2001

    Boba_Fett_2001 Chosen One star 8

    Registered:
    Dec 11, 2000
    KEEP YOUR OPINIONS TO YOURSELVES UNLESS THEY AGREE WITH MINE
     
    -Jedi Joe-, Darth_Invidious and dp4m like this.
  5. Sith_Sensei__Prime

    Sith_Sensei__Prime Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    May 22, 2000
    Here's the one major difference between Zack Snyder's Man of Steel and all other live action iterations of the character and that's Snyder brought Superman into our world rather than bringing the audience into Superman's.

    Snyder's hated Donner's Superman movies which he stated in an interview with the BBC:

    Snyder wanted to make sure the audience knew that if Superman existed in our world that it wouldn't be pretty and there would be dire consequences, which he noted in an interview with Collider:

    Basically, Snyder wanted to make the anti-Donner Superman movie, where you don't really want to fly with Superman but rather stay away whenever he's around.
     
  6. darth-sinister

    darth-sinister Manager Emeritus star 10 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 28, 2001
    And this is a problem how? He has a point that Superman smiled despite the fact that California was nearly destroyed and Lois was dead. Hell, it's one of the reasons the time travel bit has been derided because there were no consequences. Just turn back time and everything is back to normal. So he isn't a fan. Not a crime. It kept him from aping it. Remember that Singer was blasted for his love for the Donner film by the fandom.
     
    Ender Sai likes this.
  7. Ender Sai

    Ender Sai Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2001

    Not at all; but we never agree and no views have been changed.

    And given that it just ends up spamming up 2-5 pages at time of recycled arguments, it's pointless to even bother trying to discuss Man of Steel.

    When BvS:DoJ comes out, I'm sure they'll get tiredly rehashed anyway.

    EDIT: I love how Sith Sensei Prime just either can't do analysis, or can't not be disingenuous. He didn't say that, SSP, you're a liar and you should be ashamed.

    Said Snyder:

    "I was 12 years old but it made me say 'why would you do this? You just ruined it for me because I believed that was real until that moment and now I know I'm watching a movie'."

    In this statement, we have a few key points in order:

    * Snyder watched the film at 12
    * The wink to camera "ruined" the film for him
    * Up until that moment (the wink), he [Snyder] believed the story was real

    Here is the full article.

    yet, SSP said:

    This is neither true, nor stated in the article, or what a reasonable and intelligent mind would take from Snyder's comments.

    Sith_Sensei__Prime - were you being deliberately false here? Or are you just not very good at interpreting text?
     
  8. Sith_Sensei__Prime

    Sith_Sensei__Prime Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    May 22, 2000
    I would agree with you here that Jonathan is being selfish and very protective of his son. Pa Kent is telling Clark to stay in the closet because the world isn't ready for you, and people typically fear and hate what they do not understand. You're different and you'll never be accepted, it's best you spend your life with me on the farm.

    That's real world writing and thinking. It's without hope or faith in humanity; the Superman movie that Snyder and Goyer wanted to tell with their Jonathan Kent, "with great power comes great indifference."
     
  9. A Chorus of Disapproval

    A Chorus of Disapproval Head Admin & TV Screaming Service star 10 Staff Member Administrator

    Registered:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Quite possibly, the answer of "maybe" actually meant "maybe". As in "I'm struggling to answer this because I want to keep my son safe from harm as any sane parent would while trying to figure out how to teach him to help others... but, since this is my first time caring about a super powered alien, I don't have any easy answers". Maybe.
     
    Thoix Heoro likes this.
  10. Sith_Sensei__Prime

    Sith_Sensei__Prime Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    May 22, 2000
    The problem might be that Snyder went too far in the opposite direction. He knows the "S" on Superman's chest is for hope, but he doesn't know how to make the character a symbol for it. We know Clark doesn't get hope or optimism from Pa Kent. It seems like Snyder had two objectives, (1) don't make Superman likable in Donner's film and (2) make it violent and not fun. I think he did a great job on both accounts.
     
  11. Sith_Sensei__Prime

    Sith_Sensei__Prime Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    May 22, 2000
    Snyder feelings towards Donner's Superman movies is much in line with people feelings about Man of Steel in that they were fine with the movie until the battle with Zod ruined the film for them.

    Additionally, Snyder does say wink to the camera "ruined the film" for him. "Ruined the film" not that part bothered him and he still enjoyed it, but he says "ruined the film" for him. How are you interpreting "ruined the film?"

    You read and hear only what you want to hear.
     
  12. Ender Sai

    Ender Sai Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2001
    Fail.

    "Everything you know about him in the last three minutes [of Man of Steel] is who he is; he doesn't want to kill. In classic superman mythology, he never kills. He always prevents as best he can. All the things you equate with Superman, I believe are still true, [Man of Steel] just offers an explanation for why that is the case."

    So in addition to being a liar and/or terrible analyst, you ignore stuff in your own sources?

    Here's more background for your to ignore as you smash through the discussion like a Godzilla-sized toddler:

    “One of the original authors of the Superman comics, Joe Shuster, was an immigrant. I thought it was fascinating how Superman — an infant from a distant planet — was placed in Kansas, which is the most iconographically central location in the U.S. Clark Kent represents a dichotomy: He’s a complete foreigner, literally an alien, but trying to come into his own in Kansas. And he holds a mirror up for ourselves. In many ways, Clark Kent’s dilemma is the American dilemma. Wherever we’re from, we all have this very strong desire for acceptance. When he’s young, most of Clark Kent’s efforts are directed toward being like everyone else. So the fact that he’s not like everyone and never will be is very difficult for him to accept. And he’s adopted too, which could be hard for a kid. I have four adopted children, so I know how that is.”
    “A very large part of Superman has stayed on Krypton, but he can’t leave his adopted country because if he does the whole world could be destroyed. If he steps in to save everyone, he’ll never be accepted as a normal guy. It’s not an easy choice. Because after all that sacrifice, what does humanity have to offer Clark? You have to admit, it’s not much. In one scene, a priest tells Clark to take a ‘leap of faith.’ And that’s pretty much it for Superman. By the way, his Kryptonian name of Kal-El means ‘God’ in Hebrew.” (It actually translates as “Voice of God.”)

    ...

    “I wanted the movie to have a mythological feeling. In ancient mythology, mass deaths are used to symbolize disasters. In other countries like Greece and Japan, myths were recounted through the generations, partly to answer unanswerable questions about death and violence. In America, we don’t have that legacy of ancient mythology. Superman (who first appeared in ‘Action Comics’ in 1938) is probably the closest we get. It’s a way of recounting the myth.”

    So you can misuse sources to incorrectly attribute quotes to a flawed argument, but can't research them for context?

    =D=
     
    Thoix Heoro likes this.
  13. Sith_Sensei__Prime

    Sith_Sensei__Prime Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    May 22, 2000
    This is irrelevant to Snyder not wanting to make another Donner-like film. I left it off because it had no bearing as to why he didn't like the Donner film.

    You failed to make a point of all this. How is this relevant to Superman winking at the camera ruined the film for Snyder discussion?

    I would say that last paragraph where Snyder wanted to use mass death to symbolize disasters would more emphasize the point that Snyder wanted his Man of Steel to show that the violence is real and it's not funny or fun.
     
  14. Ender Sai

    Ender Sai Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2001
    Yet he's said that the fallout from the MoS fight would be addressed.

    How is it relevant? Richard Donner's mantra throughout all of Superman: The Movie was verisimilitude. Truth. Snyder contends Superman is earnest, which he is. He's not corny, and the wink to camera sucked the truth out of the film. Un-suspended his disbelief.

    Instead he wanted to tell Superman as an American myth, and when Superman doesn't control the initiative in Metropolis there's substantial damage which will be dealt with. But in the most human moment he has to break Zod's neck and his heartbreak after is palpably human - emphasising how he's picked his human heritage over his Kryptonian lineage.

    Snyder's film is deeply layered and nuanced, and for myopic fans who wanted Donner Mk2 it's a disappointment because it's not Donner Mk2 and thus they don't get it.
     
  15. Sith_Sensei__Prime

    Sith_Sensei__Prime Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    May 22, 2000
    Right. Snyder said Donner ruined the film because Superman winked at the camera. That's what I said. I was not being dishonest.

    And right, Snyder wanted to make a film the opposite of Donner, which is what I said.

    Yeah, the fallout from Man of Steel will be addressed by Batman, which I noted a couple a pages ago.
     
  16. GenAntilles

    GenAntilles Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Pa Kent's own words disprove your assertion. He tells Clark he's going to change the world, that good or bad, who he is will make the world a different place. He want's Clark to keep his powers hidden UNTIL he's ready to take up the responsibility. A young boy is not ready for that responsibility.

    Clark's very existence will change everything for humanity. The idea humans aren't alone in the universe, religion, science, everything will change. Clark would have to be ready to face a world turned upside down and be able to lead it through and show that those changes aren't a bad thing.

    The message Snyder and Goyer wanted to tell with their Jonathan Kent is 'with great power comes even GREATER responsibility'
    Jonathan always knew Clark would be Superman or something like it, he just wanted Clark to wait, be patient, learn and understand who he was. Learn the effect he would have on the earth and everyone around him. He didn't want to throw all that weight on a boy, that's why he said 'maybe' because the world might be better off with those kids dead than Clark revealing himself to the world and screwing up. An angry child with those powers, scared and alone, that could cause an even greater harm to the earth than a bus of dead kids.
     
  17. Sith_Sensei__Prime

    Sith_Sensei__Prime Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    May 22, 2000
    I disagree. Pa Kent did know that Clark would change the world, but he didn't know if it would be for the good or bad. Moreover, Pa Kent didn't really guide Clark.

    I would say that Jor El is the character that Snyder and Goyer used to tell Clark he would be the symbol of hope and inspiration; not Pa Kent.
     
  18. GenAntilles

    GenAntilles Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Jonathan raised Clark, who he is as a person is due to Jonathan, not Jor-El. Jor-El didn't raise him.

    Clark is the good person he is because of Jonathan. Every scene with Clark and Jonathan was Jonathan teaching and guiding Clark.
     
  19. Sith_Sensei__Prime

    Sith_Sensei__Prime Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    May 22, 2000
    I'm not saying that Jonathan didn't raise him to be a good person. I'm saying he not the character that Snyder and Goyer used to tell Clark that he's will be the symbol of hope.

    Pa Kent rather Clark stay on the farm and stay hidden for as long as possible.
     
  20. GenAntilles

    GenAntilles Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 24, 2007
    The moment with the flashback of Jonathan looking at Clark as a child wearing a cape shows that being Superman is what Jonathan hoped Clark would become. A symbol of hope for the world and a hero.

    And Clark was able to become that BECAUSE Jonathan was smart enough to teach Clark to be responsible and not use or show is powers to the world until he was ready, until he could answer the questions they had. When he found the Scout Ship, when he found the Jor-El program, when he learned who he was, then he was ready to reveal himself to the world.
     
  21. Ender Sai

    Ender Sai Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2001

    Why are you arguing with people who formed a conclusion in advance of seeing the film and couldn't adapt to what they saw?
     
  22. dp4m

    dp4m Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Nov 8, 2001
    You recall I was pretty optimistic before I saw the film... right? :p
     
  23. Ender Sai

    Ender Sai Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2001
    You don't get a pass, dp, you're all sinners in my eyes.
     
  24. dp4m

    dp4m Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Fortunately, Jesus Cavill will save us, right?

    I'm Jewish? Can I kill Super Jesus? Is that how it works?
     
  25. darth-sinister

    darth-sinister Manager Emeritus star 10 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 28, 2001

    Except that Jonathan also says that Clark was sent to Earth for a reason and that no matter how long it takes, he will eventually find out what that reason is. And then he will decide if he's ready to stand before the human race or not. Then Jor-El tells him why he sent him to Earth and what his hopes were for the future of both races. Then Father Leone tells him that he needs to have faith in the human race that they will accept him and that the trust between them will come later. That's not too bad of a message and shows that Jonathan wasn't completely heartless, much less so fearful that the day wouldn't ever come.

    First off, we have Lois's efforts to find out who Clark is which leads her to trace back all the various accounts of someone who did something fantastic, which lead her to hear tales of how Clark had saved people's lives and affected them for the better. Including seeing the oil rig fire survivors, the waitress that Clark stood up for and Pete Ross whose life was saved by Clark, thus changing how he felt about him. Second, after learning what his purpose is supposed to be, Clark starts to make an effort to live up to that ideal. He puts his faith in humanity and goes out there to save the day. He earns the trust of Colonel Hardy and impresses both him and Lois with his taking out the World Engine. Third, I already touched upon Jonathan. Fourth, Donner's film was also violent. We had a cop shoved into a speeding train, a mugging complete with a gun shot, a police shoot out, Lex's earthquake and Lois dying. Plus, we had what Donner finished for the second film including killing three astronauts, Clark being beat up by a truck driver and later dishing it out back to him, the Phantom Zoners battering the army and the secret service and the parts of the Metropolis showdown that he filmed before he was fired.

    As to fun, there wasn't a whole lot of it, but it wasn't a bit campy like the Donner film. Which doesn't play well with today's audiences.
     
    Thoix Heoro and GenAntilles like this.