trailer looks real good. im reminded that this is still the best looking and sounding comic movie, but god damn seeing this trailer just frustrates me even more. you couldnt have clark adamantly defend his innocence in the final film? really? you cut all of superman's character moments out for what? just blows my mind how the theatrical was cut
Am I being fucking trolled here?! He never tried to speak up for himself? What the hell do you think that senate hearing was? Here's a refresher as to him trying to defend himself:
Wait, so one of the biggest complaints about Superman in BvS is that he's depressed all the time by how some of the world views him and now you're arguing it looked to have no effect on him? Keep your point straight, Yeezus. What you said here doesn't make any sense given what so many (including yourself I might add) have pointed out.
And I guess having a hallucination about conversing with his dead father doesn't count as a mental breakdown.
Maybe because you're generalizing my complaints and inserting them with everyone else's?
That's what you're literally doing. 'Wait Yeezus, the main complaint by most that Superman is too depressed, your entirely separate complaint that he's acted like a robot is therefore lumped in with them!'
Get back to me when you're ready to have a serious debate and not strawmanning as per usual.
Liked this trailer a lot, can't wait to see it. Getting the two statue versions from Amazon so definitely gonna give this a watch when it comes out. Can't wait.
A "New low", and it isn't, come on now. It had too many good in it to be considered the worst, if anything, the fact that it has flaws that don't mesh with the good ideas is what brought it down.
It's not that it didn't happen. The problem is Superman is being told how he should be characterized, rather than doing the characterizing himself. Snyder's Superman is literally a blank slate for others to input their wishes and desires upon.
That makes no sense. How can one grow out of something if they were designed for a specific niche? Jor-El was bred as a scientist, so theoretically speaking, he should never be able to best a family that was bred to be combatants. Even if he realized that eugenics was a failure, he lacks the skill and body composition required to fight bred combatants effectively. The movie did a pisspoor job showing how such a radical shift would be possible, and it comes off as a contrivance.
A "New low", and it isn't, come on now. It had too many good in it to be considered the worst, if anything, the fact that it has flaws that don't mesh with the good ideas is what brought it down.
I couldn't possibly care less if he smiled doing the job or not. However, the problem is the way the writing sets up Superman's desire to save people. In the comics, it's a much more genuine desire. In BvS, it's treated as if it's an obligation. You never really see the genuine desire pull through, because other characters such as Pa, Ma Kent and Lois are always telling him about how great he is and how he must use his powers for the greater good (or in Pa Kent's case, discourage him from doing what he wanted because of the paranoia surrounding government attention and whatnot).
And yet Jor-El is a product of eugenics, how was he able to best someone who was supposedly better than he was in combat? It makes no sense and is one of the many Snyderisms in Man of Steel.
So let me get this right you argue he has no genuine desire to help people and that its treated as an obligation yet in the same film he is somewhat discouraged by Jonathan Kent to help people and he is told he doesn't owe the world anything.... Huh? Superman is shown to be altruistic despite it potentially leading to him having the crosshairs of the world's press and US govt at his neck.
Winning a one on one fight and then getting shanked at the end counts by Zod counts as a Pyrrhic victory at best. Plus I always thought the point was you could overcome what you're predestined to achieve or fail. Sort of like in the 90s sci fi film with Ethan Hawke Gattaca (wasn't sure whether to use spoilers)
trailer looks real good. im reminded that this is still the best looking and sounding comic movie, but god damn seeing this trailer just frustrates me even more. you couldnt have clark adamantly defend his innocence in the final film? really? you cut all of superman's character moments out for what? just blows my mind how the theatrical was cut
this scene is such a cop out. oh here we go about to have the serious discussion the film has been building towards-NOPE
of course snyder would opt for an explosion over superman talking ideologies
It's not that it didn't happen. The problem is Superman is being told how he should be characterized, rather than doing the characterizing himself. Snyder's Superman is literally a blank slate for others to input their wishes and desires upon.
That makes no sense. How can one grow out of something if they were designed for a specific niche? Jor-El was bred as a scientist, so theoretically speaking, he should never be able to best a family that was bred to be combatants. Even if he realized that eugenics was a failure, he lacks the skill and body composition required to fight bred combatants effectively. The movie did a pisspoor job showing how such a radical shift would be possible, and it comes off as a contrivance.
Hardly. Zod's MO was to be a general that would ensure Krypton's survival that's why when he found a suitable planet for terra forming he said humans be damned I am going to terra form this fucker, diplomacy , US military and Superman be damned. Again I have to remind you, Jor El got killed by Zod.
He only has Mexicans worshiping him as a God. What would he inspire people to do? Put on capes and fly? This will be one time I won't believe a man can fly. Maybe he could be inspirational if he gave a press conference and a senate hearing explaining himself... but we know what happened when he did or tried to do that.
Edit. I feel kinda silly. I forgot about him inspiring Batman as people mentioned above.
So let me get this right you argue he has no genuine desire to help people and that its treated as an obligation yet in the same film he is somewhat discouraged by Jonathan Kent to help people and he is told he doesn't owe the world anything.... Huh? Superman is shown to be altruistic despite it potentially leading to him having the crosshairs of the world's press and US govt at his neck.
This is exactly why he's treating the hero business as an obligation. He knows he has powers, but he's been discouraged from helping others due to the fear of attracting unwanted attention from Pa Kent (DESPITE having that whole great power = great responsibility conversation), and then there's this notion from Ma Kent that selfishness supersedes all ("You don't owe this world a thing"), which really isn't what Superman is about. There's no indication that Superman is doing this because he genuinely wants to, he gets burned out by the paranoia that Kent instilled onto him. I can't even call this Superman Altruistic when he's just being told what to do instead of acting on his own accord.
Winning a one on one fight and then getting shanked at the end counts by Zod counts as a Pyrrhic victory at best. Plus I always thought the point was you could overcome what you're predestined to achieve or fail. Sort of like in the 90s sci fi film with Ethan Hawke Gattaca (wasn't sure whether to use spoilers)
Again, Man of Steel never communicated the extent of the limits of eugenics used in Krypton, so how do we really know if Jor-El can go beyond what he's given?
Again, Man of Steel never communicated the extent of the limits of eugenics used in Krypton, so how do we really know if Jor-El can go beyond what he's given?
Because he does on the base level of being a scientist out maneuvering a general. And you're reading way to too much into pa Kent's warning. He makes a point of finding the right time, not completely suppressing himself. And he was right.
Set up in the most horseshit way possible. The movie expects you buy that but when you think beyond plot, it's absolutely superficial and treats its audience as a bunch of idiots.
We're supposed to just believe that "MARFA" is what turns Batman to Superman's side? And all of a sudden Bruce feels like he's failed him? Wow, what an asspull.
Because he does on the base level of being a scientist out maneuvering a general. And you're reading way to too much into pa Kent's warning. He makes a point of finding the right time, not completely suppressing himself. And he was right.
You do realize just because you have the smarts, doesn't necessarily mean you can beat out other aspects such as body composition. Jor-El was seen going on even field with combatants. We're talking combatants who had their body built to fight. It's still a contrivance.
Set up in the most horseshit way possible. The movie expects you buy that but when you think beyond plot, it's absolutely superficial and treats its audience as a bunch of idiots.
We're supposed to just believe that "MARFA" is what turns Batman to Superman's side? And all of a sudden Bruce feels like he's failed him? Wow, what an asspull.
Why do folks always forget the rest of the sentence? He says "they're letting them kill Martha." It's a huge difference that said a lot about Clark in his potential final moments of life. Batman realized how wrong he's been and immediately turns from being an angry meter of justice to a hopeful hero.
Set up in the most horseshit way possible. The movie expects you buy that but when you think beyond plot, it's absolutely superficial and treats its audience as a bunch of idiots.
We're supposed to just believe that "MARFA" is what turns Batman to Superman's side? And all of a sudden Bruce feels like he's failed him? Wow, what an asspull.
He failed him by not listening when Clark was pleading that Luthor was manipulating them and then nearly killing Clark. If he would have actually listened they probably could have stopped the creation of Doomsday which would have meant Superman didn't have to die.
You do realize just because you have the smarts, doesn't necessarily mean you can beat out other aspects such as body composition. Jor-El was seen going on even field with combatants. We're talking combatants who had their body built to fight. It's still a contrivance.
I really don't know what you're saying here. You're agreeing it's out of sorts a scientist beats a general, and yet can't connect that to the message that the system they came from was wrong from the start. It's why jor has a natural birth.
This is exactly why he's treating the hero business as an obligation. He knows he has powers, but he's been discouraged from helping others due to the fear of attracting unwanted attention from Pa Kent (DESPITE having that whole great power = great responsibility conversation), and then there's this notion from Ma Kent that selfishness supersedes all ("You don't owe this world a thing"), which really isn't what Superman is about. There's no indication that Superman is doing this because he genuinely wants to, he gets burned out by the paranoia that Kent instilled onto him. I can't even call this Superman Altruistic when he's just being told what to do instead of acting on his own accord.
Again, Man of Steel never communicated the extent of the limits of eugenics used in Krypton, so how do we really know if Jor-El can go beyond what he's given?
Again I repeat he wants to help people out of his own genuine desire to help people, despite being warned against it by his father. You can't claim he has no genuine desire to help people when everyone around him is giving not completely unreasonable advice to keep his head down. Is it paranoia, when he's proven right. Finally, not everyone is fucking Ben Parker. Superman is altruistic cos he still wants to help people despite how much shit he gets from the public, the press and govts.
Maybe because you're generalizing my complaints and inserting them with everyone else's?
That's what you're literally doing. 'Wait Yeezus, the main complaint by most that Superman is too depressed, your entirely separate complaint that he's acted like a robot is therefore lumped in with them!'
Get back to me when you're ready to have a serious debate and not strawmanning as per usual.
The reason that opinion exists is because there are at least 8 scenes in BvS that emphasize it.
1. When he's at work and he sees the news of Wallace having spray painted "FALSE GOD" on the statue.
2. When he's at home listening to Senator Finch on the news.
3. His depression leads to a hallucination about his father.
4. The conversation with his mother on the farm.
5. Showing up to the Senate hearing.
6. His expression change when all those people in Mexico reached out to him.
7. When Bruce is talking shit about Superman during his conversation with Clark at Lex's event.
8. His conversation with Lois on the balcony after the Capitol Hill incident.
You basically ignored all of that to suddenly favor some off the wall assumption that Superman's character is tone deaf to everything. Your complaint has no merit. So again, get your point straight. You would have been better off sticking to just "Joker" Lex.
I really don't know what you're saying here. You're agreeing it's out of sorts a scientist beats a general, and yet can't connect that to the message that the system they came from was wrong from the start. It's why jor has a natural birth.
No, I connected it by saying that because of the system he came from, it shouldn't be possible for him to go head to head with bred combatants. Just because he has the foresight to realize that Krypton's system was shit, doesn't magically give him the ability to go fight as if he was bred from a family of combatants. You make it sound like it's completely logical for Jor-El to break off from being a scientist into another role when the film doesn't show how that could be a possibility.
Why do folks always forget the rest of the sentence? He says "they're letting them kill Martha." It's a huge difference that said a lot about Clark in his potential final moments of life. Batman realized how wrong he's been and immediately turns from being an angry meter of justice to a hopeful hero.
Set up in the most horseshit way possible. The movie expects you buy that but when you think beyond plot, it's absolutely superficial and treats its audience as a bunch of idiots.
We're supposed to just believe that "MARFA" is what turns Batman to Superman's side? And all of a sudden Bruce feels like he's failed him? Wow, what an asspull.
When people talk about stuff like this, I now wonder if they hate the ending of Civil War too. Civil War ending spoilers:
Hey Guys! Winter Solider killed Stark's dad, glad we didn't really explain how he died over the course of any of these movies or we'd been really screwed! Oh yeah! Captain America knew the whole time too! Civil Disagreement only feels like Civil War over super convenient bullshit too.
If you get super reductive and snarky, a lot of things look stupid as hell.
When people talk about stuff like this, I now wonder if they hate the ending of Civil War too. Civil War ending spoilers:
Hey Guys! Winter Solider killed Stark's dad, glad we didn't really explain how he died over the course of any of these movies or we'd been really screwed! Oh yeah! Captain America knew the whole time too! Civil Disagreement only feels like Civil War over super convenient bullshit too.
If you get super reductive and snarky, a lot of things look stupid as hell.
I thought Civil War's ending was much better executed than BvS's (and I say this as someone who grew up immersed in DC lore. Never got into Marvel until I played MVC1 and then started reading their comics).
Not sure why explaining the Starks' death was huge? It was hinted at in the Winter Soldier and expanded upon in the first few minutes of Civil War. Otherwise, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Also, Captain America never knew that Bucky was responsible, only that the Starks died in a car crash. It's also worth noting that this is not the only conflict. Unlike BvS, the primary conflict was built around the Sokovian Accords and how neither Tony and Steve was accommodating in their beliefs. The secondary conflict was a much more personal one for both Steve and Tony: avenging the killer of Tony's parents vs. Steve showing that Bucky was compromised and manipulated.
I have to agree that the Marvel Movie premises are sometimes bigger than the stories. Age of Ultron? Three days of Ultron. Civil War? Hot headed disagreement. BvS didn't deliver in the titular fight either. I think companies should start putting more thought in their titles.
I thought Civil War's ending was much better executed than BvS's (and I say this as someone who grew up immersed in DC lore. Never got into Marvel until I played MVC1 and then started reading their comics).
Not sure why explaining the Starks' death was huge? It was hinted at in the Winter Soldier and expanded upon in the first few minutes of Civil War. Otherwise, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Also, Captain America never knew that Bucky was responsible, only that the Starks died in a car crash. It's also worth noting that this is not the only conflict. Unlike BvS, the primary conflict was built around the Sokovian Accords and how neither Tony and Steve was accommodating in their beliefs. The secondary conflict was a much more personal one for both Steve and Tony: avenging the killer of Tony's parents vs. Steve showing that Bucky was compromised and manipulated.
Set up in the most horseshit way possible. The movie expects you buy that but when you think beyond plot, it's absolutely superficial and treats its audience as a bunch of idiots.
We're supposed to just believe that "MARFA" is what turns Batman to Superman's side? And all of a sudden Bruce feels like he's failed him? Wow, what an asspull.
Sigh... Who keeps saying that the people who disliked the movie understood it? Because with shit like this...
Batman shifts because he's fucking Batman. The entire corner piece of his being is his mother's death. The entire reason he runs around in a goddamned costume like a crazed idiot is because he couldn't save his mother. At this point Batman does shift, though not entirely yet, because he's offered that chance at redemption. He has both found a connection point with Superman and a way of redeeming himself. He won't put Superman in the same position that he's been in his entire life. That breaks through the ice and also puts him on the path of logic of the entire situation (that Lex is manipulating Superman, too).
Now, people keep saying this changes him entirely, and that's definitely not the way I read the movie. It shifted him enough to help/get his redemption, and let Superman fight Doomsday, but he's not totally shifted until the end. At the end of the movie Superman proves his thesis wrong from the movie. He didn't turn bad. In sacrificing himself he stayed 'good.' That's when he realizes he needs to live up to Superman's legacy. He also realizes that logically his legacy is best served by gathering super humans because the threat levels that are going to happen are beyond his power.
That stuff is all on top of his existential crisis throughout the movie of him losing his legacy and nothing he's done mattering because of beings like Superman and Zod dropping down to earth.
I could write pages more on this shit, but I don't have time. This is the basics of what's going on. Watch the movie again. Or don't. I don't care, but at this point you clearly don't understand the movie enough to comment.
Am I being fucking trolled here?! He never tried to speak up for himself? What the hell do you think that senate hearing was? Here's a refresher as to him trying to defend himself:
Sigh... Who keeps saying that the people who disliked the movie understood it? Because with shit like this...
Batman shifts because he's fucking Batman. The entire corner piece of his being is his mother's death. The entire reason he runs around in a goddamned costume like a crazed idiot is because he couldn't save his mother. At this point Batman does shift, though not entirely yet, because he's offered that chance at redemption. He has both found a connection point with Superman and a way of redeeming himself. He won't put Superman in the same position that he's been in his entire life. That breaks through the ice and also puts him on the path of logic of the entire situation (that Lex is manipulating Superman, too).
Now, people keep saying this changes him entirely, and that's definitely not the way I read the movie. It shifted him enough to help/get his redemption, and let Superman fight Doomsday, but he's not totally shifted until the end. At the end of the movie Superman proves his thesis wrong from the movie. He didn't turn bad. In sacrificing himself he stayed 'good.' That's when he realizes he needs to live up to Superman's legacy. He also realizes that logically his legacy is best served by gathering super humans because the threat levels that are going to happen are beyond his power.
That stuff is all on top of his existential crisis throughout the movie of him losing his legacy and nothing he's done mattering because of beings like Superman and Zod dropping down to earth.
I could write pages more on this shit, but I don't have time. This is the basics of what's going on. Watch the movie again. Or don't. I don't care, but at this point you clearly don't understand the movie enough to comment.
No. I'm saying that the it was much better set-up in CW than BvS, and arguing against the poster's notion that it was a Civil Disagreement rather than a Civil War (which I interpreted as saying that it's convenient because it's one-dimensional when it was the opposite).
Dr. Arnim Zola: HYDRA was founded on the belief that humanity could not be trusted with its own freedom. What we did not realize was that if you tried to take that freedom, they resist. The war taught us much. Humanity needed to surrender its freedom willingly. After the war, S.H.I.E.L.D. was founded, and I was recruited. The new HYDRA grew, a beautiful parasite inside S.H.I.E.L.D. For 70 years, HYDRA has been secretly feeding crises, reaping war. And when history did not cooperate, history was changed.
Steve never knew that Bucky killed the Starks until he saw the same footage that Stark saw by the end of Civil War. All he saw was that HYDRA was implicated in the Starks death, he never knew that Bucky was the one that HYDRA sent. The whole point behind the fight was for Rogers to show Stark that Bucky wasn't inherently responsible, he was manipulated and controlled to do HYDRA's bidding for them. If you take the video for what it is, it never directly showed that Bucky killed the Starks, just that Starks were killed in a mission that HYDRA interfered in.
How the hell does Batman swing Superman into those pillars? I get he's suppose to be the alpha male and unless it was through some type of device, that's some Superman type power, lol.
How the hell does Batman swing Superman into those pillars? I get he's suppose to be the alpha male and unless it was through some type of device, that's some Superman type power, lol.
How the hell does Batman swing Superman into those pillars? I get he's suppose to be the alpha male and unless it was through some type of device, that's some Superman type power, lol.
Sigh... Who keeps saying that the people who disliked the movie understood it? Because with shit like this...
Batman shifts because he's fucking Batman. The entire corner piece of his being is his mother's death. The entire reason he runs around in a goddamned costume like a crazed idiot is because he couldn't save his mother. At this point Batman does shift, though not entirely yet, because he's offered that chance at redemption. He has both found a connection point with Superman and a way of redeeming himself. He won't put Superman in the same position that he's been in his entire life. That breaks through the ice and also puts him on the path of logic of the entire situation (that Lex is manipulating Superman, too).
Now, people keep saying this changes him entirely, and that's definitely not the way I read the movie. It shifted him enough to help/get his redemption, and let Superman fight Doomsday, but he's not totally shifted until the end. At the end of the movie Superman proves his thesis wrong from the movie. He didn't turn bad. In sacrificing himself he stayed 'good.' That's when he realizes he needs to live up to Superman's legacy. He also realizes that logically his legacy is best served by gathering super humans because the threat levels that are going to happen are beyond his power.
That stuff is all on top of his existential crisis throughout the movie of him losing his legacy and nothing he's done mattering because of beings like Superman and Zod dropping down to earth.
I could write pages more on this shit, but I don't have time. This is the basics of what's going on. Watch the movie again. Or don't. I don't care, but at this point you clearly don't understand the movie enough to comment.
First of all, you have no right to tell me (or anyone for that matter) that I don't understand the movie. You’re not some God-given interpreter of art whose word is mighty and no one else’s is, so get off your high horse with your “y-you don’t understand!” crap. Not to mention, it makes for a terrible preface to your argument.
Especially when you put forth a subjective argument that there are issues with. Obviously the corner piece of Batman is his tragedy in losing his parents, which much has been made very evident in the movie as well as in the Batman mythos as a whole. The fundamentals of the conflict are like this: Superman is manipulated by Lex into a hero match because his mother is the collateral damage, Batman launches himself into the conflict because of the danger that Superman represents and how everything Batman stood for is minimized because of this danger.
My problem has always been that the way Superman and Batman come to terms (for lack of a better word) is completely contrived, between the dialogue selection to Martha instead of mother. The only reason Batman gets his “redemption” is because Superman had the luck to say that his mother needs to be saved. Otherwise, Superman was going to be dead and the “bad ending: dimension would have been the reality for Batman and the other members of the Justice League. What’s worse is there’s no real reasoning behind Bruce feeling like he let Superman down by the end. They barely even know each other, and only went in on one mission together. All of those warranted concerns that Batman had about a God destroying mankind is thrown out the window for the service of the plot, in fact, they never really revisit it in
light of Superman’s death, or during his fight against Doomsday
