Super Dark

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

undeadsuitor:

fine fine, sure, every hero needs to be weak, every hero needs to be super-flawed, and every hero needs to be morally ambiguous now

I mean, it worked for batman right?

They kinda do, since it's boring for heroes to be so powerful that nobody can realistically expected to be challenging them, and they must be flawed and morally ambiguous because it's identifiable. People don't like it when anyone is portrayed as perfect, both in fiction or real life, because they know that such a thing is impossible.

undeadsuitor:

See, thats the thing though, you complain that the Donner films have ruined Superman by creating an image that needs to be maintained against the (subjectively worse) comics, but haven't the Nolan movies done the same thing to batman? You said it yourself "but the Donner Nolan films have done nothing more than drag down all portrayals of Superman Batman since by putting in this immovable characterization of superman Batman into the public consciousness that nobody wants to be deviated even slightly from,"

Also, the Mark Hamill Joker was pretty damn campy compared to Ledger.

The differences between the "Dark Avenger" image that Batman's built up the last 2 decades and the "Big Blue Boyscout" image that Superman is stuck with is this:

1. Batman has actually been like that for a long time now, unlike Superman who has been stuck with an image he doesn't really have anymore.

2. The public apparently gives Bats leeway when it comes to this, he's free to change back to his old campy self as throwbacks or whatever, just look at the Brave and The Bold cartoon, while with Superman the general public will accept nothing other than "Big Blue Boyscout" when he goes on the big screen.

3. It's to Batman's benefit. Quite frankly, it has been awhile since the campy "truth, justice, and the American way" crap has been something people have wanted out of their superheroes. In fact, Superman is really the ONLY superhero anymore that can get away with being like that in this day and age. Even fun personified heroes like the Flash have their own set of problems they have to deal with, while Superman in the comics and the DCAU is much the same. Does that make them "dark"? No, but they aren't so limited to their campy old selves anymore.

Kamille Bidan:

Impossibilium:
One of my biggest problems I have with the movie (though there are many others), is the death of Pa Kent. Looking back in analysis, it ends up defining this version of Superman's worldview (and dour disposition) throughout the film. Letting your father die - when you know you can save him - just to protect your secret identity, that's some pretty dark shit right there. Again, it fits with the character as he's portrayed in this movie, but it's not necessary. It just gives him something in common with Spider-man and Batman, making this portrayal really unoriginal.

The thing is, in every Superman story I've read, Pa Kent is alive and well. I'm not that well-versed in Superman lore, so I'm sure there are some storylines that have him dead, too, but it's not common. I think it's only in this version because again, it makes the character darker, and that's what Snyder/Nolan/Goyer were going for. Plus, it was in the Donner movie. Which was the biggest problem with Superman Returns, being Singer trying to stick slavishly to what Donner did before him.

I had a problem with the death of Pa Kent as well. It seems that they did that just to follow off the Donner tradition and it's not just Man of Steel that did it. Smallville, All-Star Superman, Superman: Doomsday and post-2006 pre-New 52 Superman all killed Pa Kent. It bothers me as a man that his father is just so disposable, especially when the previous thirty years of Superman comics proved that Superman's parents and particularly his father can play an active and productive role in his life. In this version particularly, the death of Pa Kent was so stupid and so unnecessary. It seemed they only wrote it in because modern day Jonathan Kent would have been one more extra character they'd have to worry about writing poorly. Not that they did a particularly good job with the flashbacks. Kevin Costner was well cast but Pa Kent was basically there to die stupidly and to console Clark whenever he angsted about having powers and being 'different'.

Yeah, I felt the movie spent a whole lot of time focusing on Jor-El, who was good for backstory in the Superman mythos, but didn't influence who Clark is as a person. Yet this movie glosses over the his upbringing in Smallville in flashbacks, while spending the first half-hour of the film on Krypton. Gives Superman a very emotionless feel, when his wholesome down-home Kansas roots were what was really supposed to define the character. His adoptive parents gave Superman his moral compass; this movie they're just minor side-characters put in to hit certain story-beats so the character is still recognizable as the Superman everybody knows from the comics and previous movies, when this character is anything but. This character, they could've left out the Kents altogether and arrived at the same place, which I think is the wrong direction to go in.

That being said . . . I think the boy-scout campiness of the Donner films was wrong as well. Kinda did for Superman what the sixties Batman did for that character, which was define that character for a generation (or two), leaving little room for variation after that. Which is why Batman movies have been so dark, trying to get away from that image, and why this one is so dark, too. The balancing act that they were trying to do in this one - referencing the Donner films, while trying to ape the Nolan Bat-films - was something they failed at miserably. I think there's a better way to balance the light/dark elements of Superman (the Timm/Dini version probably the best example, as it usually is with DC characters).

Impossibilium:
Yeah, I felt the movie spent a whole lot of time focusing on Jor-El, who was good for backstory in the Superman mythos, but didn't influence who Clark is as a person. Yet this movie glosses over the his upbringing in Smallville in flashbacks, while spending the first half-hour of the film on Krypton. Gives Superman a very emotionless feel, when his wholesome down-home Kansas roots were what was really supposed to define the character. His adoptive parents gave Superman his moral compass; this movie they're just minor side-characters put in to hit certain story-beats so the character is still recognizable as the Superman everybody knows from the comics and previous movies, when this character is anything but. This character, they could've left out the Kents altogether and arrived at the same place, which I think is the wrong direction to go in.

While we're on the subject of Jor-El, I thought that his death at the hands of Zod was completely pointless. Firstly Jor-El was going to die anyway, secondly all the murder really does is give Superman an excuse to further angst at Zod in a 'You killed my father!' kind of way,an angst that he never shows because they're all written as such flat characters. It's kind of like when the Joker killed Bruce Wayne's parents in Tim Burton's Batman, it added absolutely nothing to the story at all.

I'm in the same boat as Bob really. The more I think about the movie, the more I realise how much I hated it, and I never liked it to begin with. There's no sense of character at all, Superman is basically 'Good guy with powers' and that's all his back-story seems to support, we get absolutely no sense of him as a person. I remember watching it and thinking that they borrowed very heavily from Superman: The Animated Series and John Byrne's Superman work, but had absolutely no idea what made them intelligent and interesting explorations/re-inventions of the character.

What's worse is that the people who made the movie were already sucking each other off before the thing even came out. Now they're sucking each other off even more and Warner Bros. is already talking sequel ('More bullshit') and a possible Justice League film. All on the 'strength' of this crappy movie.

I just miss heroes being HEROES and having a fun time reading fun and funny comic books. I don't know why many comic movies, DC movies in particular, are almost ashamed that their roots are in campy, colorful morality tales that delighted the young and young at heart.

Take it away, Squirrel Girl!
image

Kamille Bidan:
While we're on the subject of Jor-El, I thought that his death at the hands of Zod was completely pointless. Firstly Jor-El was going to die anyway, secondly all the murder really does is give Superman an excuse to further angst at Zod in a 'You killed my father!' kind of way,an angst that he never shows because they're all written as such flat characters. It's kind of like when the Joker killed Bruce Wayne's parents in Tim Burton's Batman, it added absolutely nothing to the story at all.

I'm in the same boat as Bob really. The more I think about the movie, the more I realise how much I hated it, and I never liked it to begin with. There's no sense of character at all, Superman is basically 'Good guy with powers' and that's all his back-story seems to support, we get absolutely no sense of him as a person. I remember watching it and thinking that they borrowed very heavily from Superman: The Animated Series and John Byrne's Superman work, but had absolutely no idea what made them intelligent and interesting explorations/re-inventions of the character.

What's worse is that the people who made the movie were already sucking each other off before the thing even came out. Now they're sucking each other off even more and Warner Bros. is already talking sequel ('More bullshit') and a possible Justice League film. All on the 'strength' of this crappy movie.

Completely agree with you about Burton's Batman, and another example of how Man of Steel is just copying what came before it, while taking it completely out of context. When I came out of the theatre, my first thought was that they should have actually copied the first episodes of Superman: TAS, but now I realize that they did. They just changed it from Braniac to Zod, and in the process made it make no sense. The TAS episodes had Braniac destroy Krypton, but since Zod would have no reason to destroy his own planet, they made it the Kryptonians themselves do the deed - again adding another unnecessary layer of darkness.

I had this feeling even before I saw the movie: Zod should not be the first villian for Superman to face. This movie's plot proved that. Like someone else brought up, there's no reason for the people of Earth to trust Superman in this scenario. As far as they'd be concerned, Kal brought on all this destruction of the planet himself, or just as good as. If the Zod fight had happened in a later movie, at least Superman would have built up the people's trust in him as a hero, fighting outside threats, rather than what basically equalled a full-scale Krytonian invasion before Earth even knew Kryptonians (or any other alien race for that matter) existed. Having to face something like Braniac would have made a lot more sense - he killed my planet, now he's trying to kill yours, so I'll stop him, and I'm the hero, no questions asked. Zod would then be in the sequel to start raising those questions, which Lex Luthor would answer in the third film by getting extra funding to create something like Mettallo or Parasite to help protect against further Kryptonian threats. Now, they're probably going to do that in the second movie, before Superman has even proven himself a hero. Right now he's just some alien that punched another alien, levelling a whole town and city in the process. Still copying the Spider-man shtick of guy trying to do right while everyone thinks he's just as much the problem.

This Superman is just a copy-paste of other superhero's origin stories, which is sad considering he was one of first.

immortalfrieza:
I can't accept that I like something and others don't. So I will brush off valid arguments as "Nostalgia Goggles". Because DERP

I can't stand this argument. First and foremost I have never had an attachment to the Superman character and I saw the original movies way too recently to have nostalgia for them, but in my eyes as a long term Cinephile and Christopher Nolan/David S. Goyer fan this movie is pandering dreck that desperately wants to be taken seriously but also contains a freaking rediculous pseudoscience Doomsday device and can't go ten seconds without cramming in useless, badly shot action scenes that do nothing but detract from any kind of drama the movie wants to make. The characters are one note without having the good sense to be remotely entertaining. And the usually competent Zack Snyder can't keep the camera still for 5 seconds. The Donner films held up better decades after they were intended to be watched than this movie did on my second viewing because Richard Donner knew how to film a movie. This thing doesn't even hold up against previous summer superhero movie Ironman3 since that actually grappled with personal issues and semi complex themes while this movie deals with neither. It just makes drawn out excuses for the big stupid way to long fist fight at the end. Also Superman returns was in no way panned by critics though it was called out for being a weaker immitation of the originals which makes me confident the originals would be similarly acclaimed now as they were then. . This movie was dark and serious only its colors and lack of personality.

I like the movie because it's darker and more grittier. Because of that, the feeling "hope" it puts so much emphasis on feels greater. If the movie was some "happy-puppy" movie, it wouldn't have the same weight for me. I think they did a good job with this. For the longest of time, I actualy like Superman.

Superman should fail, he should make mistakes. I think it does make him more human and more relatable. And ofcourse the action was great. I think Zack Snyder did a great job with the films direction. Writing had some holes, but I could look past those.

The Dubya:

Mcoffey:

And as far as the shocking twist (no pun intended), Superman literally had no other options, and he didn't have time to think of one. And doing that destroyed him. He wasn't stoic about it, or making an awkward joke like Iron Man or Capt. America would be, he broke down. I don't mind seeing Superman pushed to those lengths, as long as it is clearly shown that this is something that will never be okay for him. I firmly believe that will be the last time we see Superman pushed to such lengths in this series.

Tony Stark's wise-cracking is mostly a defense mechanism. He hates showing signs of weakness and vulnerability to anyone (other than Pepper Potts, really), so even in the worst of times he tries to reassure himself up with his humor, results may vary whether it works or not.

...wait, are you implying that Captain America "makes awkward jokes"?? Erm...which alternate universe Captain America are YOU talking about? I mean he may say uplifting jokey stuff to lighten the mood a bit, but Tony Stark he is not.

As for the scene in question:

So basically you are saying that if you go into a sperm bank and destroy some of the samples (let's say those pieces were given by people who are dead now just to paint a better parallel) then you've actually killed people? O_o

The Dubya:

Mcoffey:

And as far as the shocking twist (no pun intended), Superman literally had no other options, and he didn't have time to think of one. And doing that destroyed him. He wasn't stoic about it, or making an awkward joke like Iron Man or Capt. America would be, he broke down. I don't mind seeing Superman pushed to those lengths, as long as it is clearly shown that this is something that will never be okay for him. I firmly believe that will be the last time we see Superman pushed to such lengths in this series.

Tony Stark's wise-cracking is mostly a defense mechanism. He hates showing signs of weakness and vulnerability to anyone (other than Pepper Potts, really), so even in the worst of times he tries to reassure himself up with his humor, results may vary whether it works or not.

...wait, are you implying that Captain America "makes awkward jokes"?? Erm...which alternate universe Captain America are YOU talking about? I mean he may say uplifting jokey stuff to lighten the mood a bit, but Tony Stark he is not.

As for the scene in question:

MovieBob:
behind the abysmal "World War Z," no less.

Wait wait, how was World War Z "abysmal"? Are we talking "not as good as the book"? Are we talking "it's not legendary like Zombieland"? Exactly to what standard are we talking that "abysmal" is an appropriate qualifier?

ImSkeletor:
Snip

It IS nostalgia googles, but of a different sort. Even those who have never seen the Donner films view Superman as this incorruptable pure pureness invincible character, the embodiment of all that is good, the Donner films merely popularized this perception. As a result most people expect him to be like this all the time and few are willing to accept him as anything else. I've seen all the complaints about MOS around here, and most of them are just people complaining that Supes isn't the beacon of hope and justice they think he's "supposed" to be, even being so makes him a worse character. The other complaints, like yours, are whining about the fight scene being over the top, drawn out, and that the whole movie is just an excuse for it, as if that wasn't the best part of the movie, or the characters being "one note" despite the fact that MOS is a 2 hour long movie, not a T.V. series or long running comic book where the characters have both the time and reason to act differently.

Arppis:
I like the movie because it's darker and more grittier. Because of that, the feeling "hope" it puts so much emphasis on feels greater. If the movie was some "happy-puppy" movie, it wouldn't have the same weight for me. I think they did a good job with this. For the longest of time, I actualy like Superman.

Superman should fail, he should make mistakes. I think it does make him more human and more relatable. And ofcourse the action was great. I think Zack Snyder did a great job with the films direction. Writing had some holes, but I could look past those.

I agree on all counts. That purely good invincible character that the general public believes Superman has to be all the time has always been boring to me. That, and that hope and justice only mean something if the world isn't always filled to the brim with it already.

Captcha: against the grain

Yes captcha, I am against what most other people think, and I'm better for it.

What I have gathered from seeing the style of the Nolan/Goyer team is the inevitable Justice League movie's tone is going to be gritty, realistic, dark, blah, blah, blah. I am only making an educated guess on that of course but it seems like this is what they are shooting for in their take on the DC universe. My opinion once again based on the previous films is it can work at times; Dark Knight is still my favorite batman film so far. But as Jim Sterling said in one of his Jimquisition shows about dark gritty stories: in order for a story to be well rounded and carry emotional weight sometimes you have to "lighten the fuck up!"

immortalfrieza:

ImSkeletor:
Snip

Derp

I'm growing increasingly convinced you have never seen another movie in your life. You can have great well rounded character in two hours. Thousands and thousands of movies have done it. Other films have relatively one note characters that are vaguely entertaining to watch as opposed to this. You can like this movie. I'm not taking it away from you but your pathetic self congratulation for covering your ears whenever anyone has a opinion opposite to yours is as tiresome as it is laughable.

ImSkeletor:
Snip

Pal, I could easily turn most of what you said right back at you. "I'm growing increasingly convinced you have never seen another movie aside from the Donner films in your life." I've been saying this entire time that Superman hasn't been a invincible perfect boyscout for a LOOOOONG time, and people like you are just "covering their ears" and saying something akin to "SupermanMUSTbeperfectNOEXCEPTIONS!!!" over and over again, which "is as tiresome as it is laugable". The fact that people everywhere aren't praising MOS for making such poor character much more relatable even if they panned everything else proves this. Oh, and characters tend to be one note when they only have 10 minutes total of screentime, which all the characters except Superman, Jor El, and Zod only have around that much, and all 3 of them are significantly more nuanced. I bet you and anyone you know acts pretty one note in the span of 10-15 minutes.

One more thing, the Donner films were TERRIBLE, downright awful, even going by the standards of the time not to mention now. A boring invincible protagonist that can do things like TURN BACK TIME whenever he feels like it, a plot that was cliched even back then, hammy lines with poor acting, and villains with no more deeper motivation for their actions than either "I want more money" or "I want to RULE THE WORLD!!!" If those movies had been released today instead of 40 years ago they would be considered some of the worst movies that have ever been made, especially the last one, and if you took off your nostalgia goggles for a minute you'd realize it.

Not that I expect you or anyone like you to actually LISTEN to anything I've said on this post or any other, you couldn't justify your baseless hatred of this movie anymore if you actually did.

Mcoffey:
I still feel that the big punch-out at the end wasn't Superman "forgetting" to rescue people. Zod had him on the ropes the entire time. There was never a free moment for him to rescue civies, and if he tried to take one, it probably would have ended with Zod killing even more people. By the time Superman and Zod have their big fight, hundreds of people had already died. He couldn't fix that, certainly not with Superpowered psychopath raging around. Superman had to focus on stopping Zod first and foremost.

And as far as the shocking twist (no pun intended), Superman literally had no other options, and he didn't have time to think of one. And doing that destroyed him. He wasn't stoic about it, or making an awkward joke like Iron Man or Capt. America would be, he broke down. I don't mind seeing Superman pushed to those lengths, as long as it is clearly shown that this is something that will never be okay for him. I firmly believe that will be the last time we see Superman pushed to such lengths in this series.

I think that the twist, as you called it, will be the dawn of a few things for new Supes.

immortalfrieza:

ImSkeletor:
Snip

.

Awww thats so sad. You have to ignore everything somebody says so you can enjoy a movie they don't. See we adults can watch a movie and have someone else think differently than them and be okay with it and understand others have different perspectives and that as long as they provide reasons their opinion is not baseless. I like tons of stuff no one else does, but I can deal with that and hopefully, someday you will be able to as well and let me finish with this. I was beyond hyped to see a more complex version of superman in theaters, but that was not what I saw. I saw the same old boyscout put in a context where it doesn't work.

ImSkeletor:
Snip

Are you going to continue doing my work for me? As before, I can turn most everything you just said back at you. "You have to ignore everything somebody says so you can hate on a movie they don't."

ImSkeletor:

See we adults can watch a movie and have someone else think differently than them and be okay with it and understand others have different perspectives and that as long as they provide reasons their opinion is not baseless.

Heh, that's one of the funniest things I've seen in a while. I HAVE provided perfectly valid reasons for my opinion and YOU have been anything but okay with it, and your own reasons for YOUR opinion have yet to be anything but baseless.

ImSkeletor:

I was beyond hyped to see a more complex version of superman in theaters, but that was not what I saw. I saw the same old boyscout put in a context where it doesn't work.

If you didn't see it, you didn't see it, but it wasn't just there, but right in front of you staring you in the face. I also was beyond hyped to see a more complex Superman, and that's what I got. At least compared to the Donner films, this Superman is par for the course everywhere else these days. I saw a Superman with deep seated emotional issues struggling to find his place in a world that he doesn't really belong in, a world that he can easily bring under his heel at anytime and constantly fighting the urge to avoid doing that. I saw a Superman that for once was forced to fight against someone who could actually beat him, and trying his hardest to avoid killing those people until he finally had no choice but to do just that. Of course, this is what the comics and DCAU Superman was like, so they pulled that off well enough.

ImSkeletor:
Snip

"You liking the movie is fine its a subjective thing, your dismissal of others is pathetic"

Heh, says the only person in this conversation that's actually doing that. Even if what you say is true, look in a mirror for a good while before you judge me.

Fine, go, but ignoring me and walking away won't change the fact that I've been the only one this entire time with anything even resembling an open mind here and you haven't.

Oh, and I'm flagging you for insulting me, another thing you've done and I avoided doing, not that there hasn't been a great temptation do so.

immortalfrieza:

ImSkeletor:
Snip

"You liking the movie is fine its a subjective thing, your dismissal of others is pathetic"

Heh, says the only person in this conversation that's actually doing that. Even if what you say is true, look in a mirror for a good while before you judge me.

Fine, go, but ignoring me and walking away won't change the fact that I've been the only one this entire time with anything even resembling an open mind here and you haven't.

Oh, and I'm flagging you for insulting me, another thing you've done and I avoided doing, not that there hasn't been a great temptation do so.

Alright I have come back to apologize for the insult. I stand by everything I said but that. That was too much. I posted in anger which was a mistake. Ill take my probation or suspension or whatever. Cause I deserve it. You brick walling me drove me crazy but is not an excuse.

ImSkeletor:

immortalfrieza:

ImSkeletor:
Snip

"You liking the movie is fine its a subjective thing, your dismissal of others is pathetic"

Heh, says the only person in this conversation that's actually doing that. Even if what you say is true, look in a mirror for a good while before you judge me.

Fine, go, but ignoring me and walking away won't change the fact that I've been the only one this entire time with anything even resembling an open mind here and you haven't.

Oh, and I'm flagging you for insulting me, another thing you've done and I avoided doing, not that there hasn't been a great temptation do so.

Alright I have come back to apologize for the insult. I stand by everything I said but that. That was too much. I posted in anger which was a mistake. Ill take my probation or suspension or whatever. Cause I deserve it. You brick walling me drove me crazy but its not an excuse.

Fine, I accept your apology, at least you've proven to be at least somewhat reasonable at the end of this.

What are you people talking about? Man of Steel isn't dark. It's moody, slow, melancholy and poorly paced. But dark? Hardly...

Personally I don't even understand the problem at all. Don't get me wrong, I think Man of Steel is a deeply flawed movie, but the killing shouldn't be what bother people.

Has anybody (And by this, I mean Bob as well) even seen Superman II?

Because in that movie, Superman kills Zod. Not only that, but he does it in a much more callous and evil way. There is no 'If I don't kill him he'll fry that family alive' - he just does it because he can.

No no, he just depowers the Kryptonians without their knowledge and then this happens:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUORL-bvwA0

So he plays alongs, instead of just telling them they may as well surrender. Then - knowing full well that Zod is now as weak as a normal human - he crushes every bone in his hand and throw him down a bottomless pit.

What more, Lois joins in the fun, throwing a wise crack before in turn killing Feora (sp?) and the scene ends with Lois and Clark laughing, smiling and embracing each other like the psychopath that they are. Yay family fun!

Is it okay because they're on a brightly colored set and it's a soaring Williams' score in the background? Because what Superman does in that movie is cold, calculated, first degree murder. And he doesn't seem to give a fuck about it. More importantly, he didn't have to do it.

And let's not even get started on Lois here...

In the much 'darker' Man of Steel he at least tries to reasons with him and only kill him when given no real choice... and then you can tell he feels it. Granted, it only take him a few minutes to get over it, but that's mile better than not showing an hint of regret like he's freaking Dexter Morgan.

Again, I still think Man of Steel is a bad movie, but this isn't the first time he kill on the big screen... why is it a big deal now? And why are people talking like the Donner Superman could do no wrong? He obviously did.

I so want zack snyder to make a dbz movie.

the man of steel had so many plot holes, lois used as a plot device through the whole movie, missed the entire idea of superman, missed what the character is about so utterly and completely.

Its the same problem with the dark knight rises, nolan and co do not get the characters, they do not care about the characters, a batman that just quits being batman after a year or two? over a girl that hated his guts? emo bruce common. does so many unbatman things, its darn near silly to call it it a batman movie, as it is to call man of steel a superman movie.

mos is a mess, the fights were spectacular as hell, the plot was garbage, the characters were garbage, the sheer wanton destruction is gorgeous porn would have love a goku vs buu done that way with whole cities getting leveled, but superman is supposed to have a bit more of a care for the puny humans around him, not just lois and some no name scrub human family after 100s of thousands have been killed in his little slug fests with zod and his merry men.

and love how jorel manged to put the super suit on a ship that was over 10,000 years old. who writes this stuff?

Mahoshonen:
I haven't seen Man of Steel yet, but I've been thinking about how I would do a Superman trilogy. Now this isn't any better than trying to rewrite the Star Wars prequels, but I got some time to kill at work so bear with me.

Movie One: Start with Kal-El's baby pod landing in the Kent farmstead. Show scenes of Clark Kent's upbringing, but don't dwell on it too much. Eventually, Clark wanders off to find out who he is. He finds the Fortress of Solitude, finds a bunch of prerecorded messages by Jor-El telling Clark he's the sole survivor of Krypton, and that he needs to save his new home from the fate that befell Krypton. But Clark is kinda scared to see what that actually happened. So instead he goes to Metropolis, becomes mild mannered news reporter Clark Kent, and uses his superpowers to save folks from burning buildings and such. This goes on for a montage until Zod shows up and starts rambing that they need to militarize the entire planet. Superman says that that isn't happening, and the two have a big punch up outside the Fortress of Solitude until Superman punts Zod onto Venus (where the Greenhouse effect traps him.) But in the fights aftermath, Supes finally realizes he needs to see how Krypton was destroyed:


Superman realises that he needs to come up with a plan to defeat this far-off foe. But in the meantime, the movie Stinger shows that Clark Kent has been asigned to cover the Presidential Campaign of one Alexis Luthor.

Movie Two: Lex Luthor is now President. Lex wants Superman out of the picture because he's fundamentally opposed to a Magic Space Alien in Tights being the living embodiment of human behavior ("Our flaws are what make us great!" or some such nonsense). So Lex starts a dust up with someone on Superman's B-list of emenies and requests Superman sort it all out-hoping to arrange that he gets killed in the prossess. The whole movie is an allegory for the importance of overcoming ideological differences, as it ends with Superman and Lex forming a sort of detente.

Movie Three: Darkseid at last shows up. Superman's plan for defeating him? The Justice League. Rather than have separate movies for Wonder Woman, Green Lanturn, and Flash, introduce them here to ease audiences into the interpretation of the character you are going for. Nows the time to go for the big fight-to-end-all0fights rather than blow your load in the first movie. If you are feeling especially frisky, toss Doomsday in and watch the fireworks. In any case, Superman wins gby the smallest of margins.

And that's it from in and impromptu fanfiction.

awesome!

that's the stuff that movies are made of!
i don't need my beloved comic converted into a movie
- i want some more about that character but eventually in another medium...
so the intent is not "bringing stories from a comic to the big screen" but filming a new comic-issue by a new author...
(how many different authors did you say "amazing Spiderman" ,who still counts as ONE SERIES, has? around 10? lets not even start on bats or all the alternate dimensions...)

that's how i see the Dark Knight Triology...
Nolan did his own Batman Comic Series in which

but you may want to keep the basic idea of the character... else there wouldn't be much sense even taking said character...
(exept you are too lazy to characterize [bad - because the movie could't stand on its own]or want to play with the expectations linked to the image an established character has in the heads of the viewers [iron man 3 - good - used as a device to tell a story - provoking something in the audience])

so in the end i think it is about taking a character, putting him in a situation and seeing how he deals with it.
...and hereby showing who he is....

cerebus23:
I so want zack snyder to make a dbz movie.

wonderful :,D

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here