Man of Steel

For some people Avengers would have been the best film of 2012, and it was a comic movie not to mention i think the Dark Knight was probably these best film in a lot of peoples eyes in 2008. Not everyone is into movies like Django or Zero Dark 30 etc. Regardless a movie as good as Avengers or Dark Knight would be great and noone here will be complaining.

Vvoid_sl said:

Well, we already know he does the whole crab fishing thing, but I think it ties back to what his mother says to him when the voices are overwhelming his head. She says to listen to her voice and picture it as an island all alone in the middle of the ocean. I think he sort of just does that as he gets older, submerges himself in the water where he can't hear every little thing that is happening for a few minutes. His own little island, so to speak.

I have decided that I have a full on Rock Hard Weekend rager for this movie now. I pretty much did the moment I saw the first pics/clips, but this just "stiffens" my resolve. I'm going to bust the biggest, cleanest nut right in the movie theater. Hopefully it is worth it. I'm more excited for this movie than the Hobbit, or even the continuation of the Marvel franchises. If they do it right, Superman can be legendary, moreso than even Batman (at least to nerds like me, not necessarily box office-wise). I hope they at least get close.

Click to expand...

...what do you mean "clean" nut?

Best movie of the year is hyperbolic I'm sure, but I'm just pumped about the Plenty-O-Asskicking part.

Salshun_sl said:

Is it really evil if you do compromise for those you love if they've been violently wronged? If you refuse, it shows your moral compass was stronger than your love for them, and then what is the fucking point of loving them in the first place? You're essentially saying "I love you as long as I don't have to change", and what kind of shit is that? If Superman's intent is truly making the world a better place, then he has to make the call when you being around anymore goes against that. I gave you 5 chances, you're still a fuck-up, time to die.

Then again, this also gets into saving individuals or saving the world eternal. This is why I really don't like Superman, his morality seems to fly in the face of the old adage "break some eggs to make an omelet". You cannot believe that everyone is capable of achieving redemption but on the other hand label people as "evil". It doesn't work, at all. It's no better than tolerating bad children vs. having mortal enemies, both cannot work. He needs to take out the trash for a better Earth, or this constant struggle will never end while he fucks around shooting for a balance that is unachievable.

Save the people worth saving, worth redemption, but remove the people that will prevent the good and savable from progressing. At this point, it seems like he's playing a fucking game with us, and is zero help.

We don't need self-limiting heroes.

Click to expand...

I'm a few months late to the thread, but the thing about superman is that his entire premise is that he is not a "ground level hero" like spider-man or daredevil or batman. He is a cosmic level hero. He's similar to captain america in that what he is, is the manifestation of an ideology. the ideology that there is ALWAYS a better way. Always. we've all seen that JLU episode where an unrestrained superman fights darkseid. he says something to the extent of always having to be careful living in a world of paper where the slightest bit of excess can tear down a city block. Superman CAN single handedly annihilate the entire DC universe. but he doesn't. because there is a better a way.

unfortunately, this ideology cannot survive the real world because there are gray areas and superman only functions in black or white. so you'll never see a batman story with superman in the lead because they are ideologically opposite characters. That's why they work so well together. you'll never see a story about superman where lois lane gets raped. you'll never see a story where jimmy olsen gets brutally murdered. you'll never see these stories because a real life superman can't come out of that situation the same. (which is why supreme power and invincible are great stories) for lack of a better description, superman is too cosmic to face that situation. that is part of his charm, but as a character that's his real weakness. He will never be put into a situation that forces his resolve to change, though to be fair that may be simply a fault of comic book writers not having the chops to pull it off.

I'm torn on superman. I love that he is a character that chooses the hard path every single time. it would be easy to kill luthor. it would be easy for him to go around to all the other dc heroes rogues gallery and lobotomize them (justice lords are awesome), but that's the thing. everyone. EVERYONE knows that that's NOT what superman does. That's what makes him who he is. He takes the high road no matter what.

on the other hand, as much as i appreciate a character with a moral backbone stronger than adamantium, unless you are a brilliantly creative writer, it makes for a rather 2 dimensional character. it's harder to assault his moral character than it is his physical one, so comic book writers tend to make increasingly outlandish stories (infinite crisis, i'm looking at you) in order to showcase his heroism.

so, to me, that's why i'm never all that gung-ho about superman movies. you have to de-power him in order to make anything a challenge. and without a challenge he can't be heroic. But, as soon as you depower him he looses the essence of what makes him superman.

If the action stuff is looking so good then they should have showed us at least a little by this point. I'm kinda skeptical.

Tuco_sl said:

Yeah I think hollywood's unwillingness to pit Superman against a guy stronger than he is is just inability, uncreativity or laziness. I'd love to see Superman and some bad dude make a permanent mark on geography with an all out f ight.

Click to expand...

I think the problem there is that in order to introduce a villian who can threaten superman, the movie then becomes about the villian. Everyone knows who superman is. the general populace doesn't know who darkseid is. they don't know who toyman is. they don't know who the martians are. so in order to make a movie with a believable villian, you have to spend a lot of screen time ON the villian. which is fine for dark knight, and dark knight rises. it's not okay for a reboot to do that. you need to have a villian that people know about or at least makes sense for the context. Everyone knows lex luthor, which makes him the safe villian. except he's safe. everyone knows him and he's boring now. general zod is definately not a household name, BUT he makes sense as a villian in a reboot because he shares an origin story with the protaganist.

i'm not saying that those are the only options for villians, just that you can't have crazy cosmic level villians because they are "introducing" superman to us. yes, we all know who is he, but not this version. maybe he'll be identical, maybe he won't, i have no idea. but this film version of superman has to be established with a lot of screen time before we can spend a lot of screen time on making the villian understandable to the masses. If you're not doing a reboot then all of this is null and void. the animated version of superman gets to have all the cool characters in them like captain marvel, martian manhunter, zatanna, etrigan, etc because that version is essentially never rebooted. they just assume that anyone interested in watching those movies, are going to effing watch those movies. they don't have to do an origin story every 3 years because WE ALL KNOW WHO SUPERMAN IS AND WHAT HE'S ABOUT LET'S JUST WATCH HIM PUNCH STUFF.

I know people here always say it, but bruce timm needs to be put in charge of live action DC movies.

I can't accept Darkseid as the villain in a Superman movie unless he is played by Michael Ironside.

Lost Ranger_sl said:

I can't accept Darkseid as the villain in a Superman movie unless he is played by Michael Ironside.

Click to expand...

dude, i know... i keep seeing michael ironside pop up in random roles and all i can think of is how fat and old darkseid has gotten.

Lost Ranger_sl said:

I can't accept Darkseid as the villain in a Superman movie unless he is played by Michael Ironside.

Click to expand...

I'd be fine with him being *voiced* by Michael Ironside, I definitely don't want to see Michael Ironside playing Darkseid.

They need to put him against someone stronger than he is, that way when the fight destroys a ton of shit, the next movie is logically about mankinds fear of superman being too strong and what would happen if he were to turn against them. Cue Lex Luthor leading the charge against Superman until bad guy X shows up and the movie ends with Supes saving the day but mankind still somewhat fearful.

That's the intriguing part about Supes though, there's really no one that can compete with him. Even knowing this, he restrains himself, which makes the alien a better human than any native.

I'll just recommend here, I recently watched the, "Superman vs. The Elite" DC animated feature, and it's great. It's based on the storyline in, "What's so funny about truth, justice, and the american way?".

Caliane_sl said:

The whole "superman is all powerful" thing isn't even remotely true in DC. sure sometimes he gets the plot armor powerup.

Orion, Mongul, Darksied, Amazo for example.......stuff

Click to expand...

Pre-crisis or post crisis superman??!?! Not a huge comic book reader but I have a feeling that's a relevant question!