Amph This Movie Didn't Use Slow Motion: Man of Steel

Discussion in 'Community' started by Jedi_Master_Conor, Nov 9, 2006.

  1. Violent Violet Menace Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 2004
    star 4
    Superman's flying fight doesn't result in much building smashing in Superman II, due to technical effects limitations of the time, which renders their blows pretty weak sauce, but also the concern for supersonic wrecking balls tearing down buildings moot. Superman mostly punches them into billboards or walls which only dent. Not through the wall, the wall behind it, out the other side of the building, into the next building and two buildings behind that. You can argue that if they were able to make those shots in 78, they would have made them. But we have to go with what's presented on screen. Granted, Supes does punch Non out of the ground and actually all the way through the Daily Planet. But that happens once, not every time. And his hand hurts after doing it, so he probably gave it his all for that punch. While in Man of Steel, it seems effortless for them to throw punches like that. So the power levels at display are wildly different. It is conceivable for Superman to be able to fight them without risking tearing through countless bedrooms with the power levels at display in Superman II, as long as he sticks to rooftops. It might be dangerous and irresponsible for Reeve to take them on in Metropolis in Superman II, but nowhere near as dangerous as it would be for Cavill's Superman.

    Plus, in Superman II, the people that Zod and gang target are standing in the street to watch the fight instead of getting the hell out of there, so they pretty much have it coming. :p
    Last edited by Violent Violet Menace, Nov 15, 2013
  2. soitscometothis Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2003
    star 5
    Can anyone explain to me what was going on with the Kryptonians' powers in this movie? Normally in the comics Superman gets his powers from the rays of the yellow sun and Earth's gravity being far less than that of Krypton, same goes for the Phantom Zone criminals, but in this film it wasn't as simple as that: Zod & co didn't get their super-powers until their suits had been compromised... yet they still seemed to have super-strength/speed before that on Earth. Why? Were their suits strength-amplifying (this was what I had to assume in the cinema, but I don't know)? Why was Lois seemingly fine with a breathing-mask on Zod's ship despite it supposedly replicating Krypton's environment, which presumably would include increased gravity? And why would you want to transform the environment of a planet that gave you fantastic super-powers back to one where you were completely vulnerable?
  3. Violent Violet Menace Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 2004
    star 4
    Supposedly, it was a combination of the yellow sun and Earth's atmosphere. With the Kryptonians on Earth still breathing their own gas supply, they only had half of the abilities. That's how I understood it.
    Last edited by Violent Violet Menace, Nov 15, 2013
  4. soitscometothis Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2003
    star 5
  5. dp4m Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2001
    star 9

    And gravity.
  6. soitscometothis Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2003
    star 5
    But how was Lois fine on the ship when Supes had no powers. Why wasn't she crushed?
  7. dp4m Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2001
    star 9

    Apparently it wasn't a huge shift, but yeah...
  8. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    Because Lois is a secret Kryptonian citizen too!!
  9. Volderon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 23, 2007
    star 4
    After seeing this again on Blu Ray I like it a lot more. I always liked it but I had pacing issues with it the first time and too much action. That being said, I WAS in IMAX for it so it was REALLY loud and that might have something to do with it. But I thought on a second watch it was MUCH better, all around and I have grown to love it.

    Kind of like the Nolan Batman films, you have to watch multiple times to appreciate it.

    Also, watching Thor 2 and then seeing this a few days after made me thank god for MOS.
  10. darth-sinister Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2001
    star 9
    That one was comes from Donner's script.

    In MOS, Clark is still pushing himself and thus is growing stronger with the effort. Zod and the others are slowly adapting to Earth and thus their powers continue to increase. So that is why it is inconsistent in that film, whereas the original film, they had all of their powers as soon as they were near a yellow sun. And as to Clark's hand, well, he's still not used to pain.

    It isn't nearly as dense enough to cause physical pain to Lois. The lighter gravity only allows Kryptonians on Earth to fly and move real fast.
  11. soitscometothis Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2003
    star 5
    That doesn't make sense to me at all. Lois walks around like she's in Earth gravity, but the difference is great enough to allow the Kryptonians to fly?
  12. Violent Violet Menace Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 2004
    star 4
    I meant the power levels are different between the two films. I wasn't commenting on the internal consistency of MOS. With the considerably lower power levels on display in Superman II, it's not that irresponsible or strange for Superman to believe he can contain the damage caused by their battle. When the Kryptonians later discover and exploit his concern for casualties, Superman soon realizes that he can't contain the fight and leaves.

    However, in MOS, Cavill learns pretty quickly that he can break off the peak of a mountain just by falling from a height and effortlessly fly through a corn silo, but despite witnessing these things, in my opinion, doesn't display any awareness of the hugely destructive force of his abilities, or any attempt at restraint.
    Last edited by Violent Violet Menace, Nov 15, 2013
  13. Violent Violet Menace Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 2004
    star 4
    Double post.
    Last edited by Violent Violet Menace, Nov 15, 2013
  14. Kenneth Morgan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 27, 1999
    star 4


    Be advised: bad language, sometimes (but not all the time) bleeped.
  15. VadersLaMent Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 3, 2002
    star 9
    Perhaps people have a charisma issue. Chris R. and gang of the original Superman movies just blew us away. So much so that the utter ridiculousness and incredible inconsistancies are overlooked. I had a few issues with MoS but it makes at least as much sense as Superman 1 and 2 and I'll not even mention the rest.
    Saintheart likes this.
  16. Violent Violet Menace Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 2004
    star 4
    My problem with it is that it's ****ing depressing. What kind of Superman movie is depressing?
    JoinTheSchwarz and dp4m like this.
  17. Volderon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 23, 2007
    star 4
    Wow I got the complete opposite of your reaction. I thought it was very uplifting. It's about faith, faith in yourself, faith in humanity, and also about sacrifice. Jonathan sacrificed himself for his son, Superman was willing to do the same for the human race against that world engine in India. He admitted to Lois he may be weaker and may not be able to make it. Lois, Dr Hamilton, the Colonel, all started believing in an alien they just met not 2 hours ago. And Zod was ultimately defeated because he refused to sacrifice himself, instead choosing to sacrifice others.
    Last edited by Volderon, Dec 6, 2013
    Saintheart and GenAntilles like this.
  18. GenAntilles Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2007
    star 4
    Yeah I found Man of Steel on an emotional and intellectual level much for hopeful and uplifting than the Donner films were. In Man of Steel the characters rise above tragedy and horror to do good and inspiring things. Johnathan sacrificing himself, Clark fighting the World Engine, Hamilton and Hardy sacrificing themselves, Perry holding Jenny's hand and staying with her, etc...

    The Donner films never really had anything that deep or emotional, everything was always nice and happy.
  19. EmpireForever Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2004
    star 8
    The fact that Lex Luthor employs a complete buffoon as his one and only henchman leads me to believe that no one working on that production was attempting to make anything at all intellectual. Superman is for the children, and doesn't attempt to, really, tackle any kind of significant subject matter. It's a spectacle, focusing largely on the innovative special effects and Superman's super-ness.
  20. Kenneth Morgan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 27, 1999
    star 4
    I disagree. I thought the original Donner film (which I preferred over "Superman 2") had a good emotional core: Clark discovering his heritage and learning to use his powers for good, rather than just showing off. There's also his willingness to place preserving human life as his top priority, as well as his growing love for Lois. Plus, it stays true to the real core of the character as "a friend", as he first introduces himself to Lois.

    If I want an angst-ridden loner, I'll go with Batman or Spidey (the original, not the current pretender).
  21. Kenneth Morgan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 27, 1999
    star 4
    It's based on a comic book for children. It's a fun adventure; it's not "Taxi Driver".
  22. Kenneth Morgan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 27, 1999
    star 4
    I'm not sure how Superman murdering someone is uplifting. I prefer the novel "Miracle Monday", which has a much more uplifting and complex message regarding the question, "Should Superman kill someone to save others?"
  23. EmpireForever Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2004
    star 8
    I wasn't bashing it; I'm saying you're looking under the wrong rock if you're looking at Superman for anything but levity.
  24. GenAntilles Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2007
    star 4
    Eh, most of the drama of learning who he is is pretty glossed over. Johnathan and Martha Kent just find him and take him in, no expressions of worry about what he represents. They touched on some issues but only on the surface. Superman never needed to earn the people's trust, he just did his thing and they immediately loved him. No concern about a super powerful alien living amongst them. In Man of Steel Johnathan is honest with Clark, he lets him know his powers could let him be a hero or a villain. He could save man kind or enslave it if he wanted.


    He murdered in the Donner film when he threw a depowered and helpless Zod down a pit, then let Non do the same, then let Lois do the same to Ursa. At least in Man of Steel he has emotional anguish at killing instead of smiling and moving on with his day to happy music.
  25. Violent Violet Menace Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 2004
    star 4
    I have to agree with you on this point. This is something that I had made a note of myself long ago. That scene makes Superman look like a psycho. And what's worse is that Lois is encouraged by this behavior and repeats it herself. So we got two protagonists who smile to the camera and throw their defeated defenseless enemies into the abyss in a kid's movie. Way to go, role models!

    Imagine the jolly music PSA: Remember, Superman doesn't take prisoners, kids! :D Th-th-that's all folks! ;) Now eat your rice krispies!

    Oh, and be sure to smack a Jap!
    Darth_Invidious likes this.