Deadpool is so ridiculous - I love it!
Can't wait for the film to FINALLY come out.
I probably don't have to tell you but Netflix is supposed to be adding a bunch of the Marvel series. I'm stoked for DareDevil. I thought the movie wasn't that bad (Punisher was WAY worse). I wish they'd continue w Agent Carter ... I really liked that one. I definitely preferred it to Agents of Shield (aliens just aren't my thing).
Answer: according to the director only about 2000. If you pay attention the buildings were mostly empty. And it was his first time ever being a superhero. What did you expect? Heck, worse damage was done in the Justice League cartoon and people didn't complain then. Heck, Metropolis got WRECKED in Superman the Animated Series. And Superman himself wasn't really dark and brooding at all in MoS. The world around him was darker, but the man himself was spot on. Did you even see the scene where he starts flying for the first time? It literally made a baby smile. There's a video on YouTube. And people say the film was joyless. And don't even get me started on Arrow and Flash. I like the Marvel films, but I will go to the mat for DC. Batman v. Superman will have an awesomeness quotient to rival if not surpass The Avengers. I have found my hill to die on! XDThe teaser for DareDevil looked great! Vincent D'onofrio as Kingpin?? EPIC!! Punisher with Thomas Jane was tolerable (imho)... far superior to the "sequel" with that guy from Nip/Tuck. And dare I mention the abysmal Dolph Lundgren foray into the Marvel Universe?
But I digress... Despite quite a few awful Marvel films, they're still better than anything D.C.'s been putting out there. I mean, since when is Superman all dark and brooding? That's Batman's thing. I won't go into a rant here but I will pose these questions to all the Man of Steel fans: How many countless millions died or were severely injured during the Kryptonians fight in Metropolis?
An even greater question: What is up with the phallic Kryptonian ships? I mean, come on!
That's the director's figure not mine. (Though he may have said 5000 now that I think about it.) Were it my film, I would have set the number slightly higher. But not millions. I mean, things like this happen on the regular in the DC universe. If millions died every time, earth would be a desolate, unpopulated wasteland inside of a month.You're a good man, Mindfire. I respect your dedication to DC. I also respect your opinion and maybe SOME buildings were empty but too hard to believe that only 2000 people died in that alien invasion. I call it that because in my opine that's the genre of movie it is.
I mostly agree here regarding the DC films from 2005 onward- except I actually liked the Dark Knight Rises. The plot holes aren't as bad as people make them out to be and you can connect the dots if you try. I honestly think the script just needed one more draft to make it shine.That being said, DC has yet to impress me with its films (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight and The Watchmen excluded). I mean Green Lantern was a trainwreck, Superman Returns while not a bad film was (again just my opinion here) mediocre.
The Dark Knight Rises was both horrible and laughable in so many ways I couldn't possibly list them all.
It's my sincere hope that Batman vs Superman, Aquaman, Wonder Woman and Justice League are great.
I'm a DC fan too. Hell, Batman is my all-time favorite superhero. I also think Bale did a great job in the first two and did the best he could with what he had to work with in the third. It couldn't have been easy following the incredible Michael Keaton and then Kilmer and Clooney's abysmal shitpiles.
A lot of people don't like DareDevil, but I think that Affleck can make a convincing Batman. Only time will tell.
If the Alien and Prometheus movies have taught us anything, it's that xeno-cultures have a penchant for designing things that unintentionally resemble human genitalia.I'll end with this: No comment on the Kryptonian penis ships? :biggrin:
And Clooney? Why would you bring him up. He's never played Batman before.
If the Alien and Prometheus movies have taught us anything, it's that xeno-cultures have a penchant for designing things that unintentionally resemble human genitalia.
Is the forum glitching? Because I see blank posts. [emoji14]You're joking right? Have you not seen BATMAN AND ROBIN? It single-handedly killed the franchise. Joel Schumacher even apologizes for making it in the DVD special features. If you haven't seen it, I recommend never watching it. It will scar you for life.
It's a fair cop. But I can see how they wouldn't notice. I didn't notice until I watched Honest Trailers.No. I'm sorry but the director had to sign off on those designs. I blame them, not fictional xeno-cultures.
The teaser for DareDevil looked great! Vincent D'onofrio as Kingpin?? EPIC!! Punisher with Thomas Jane was tolerable (imho)... far superior to the "sequel" with that guy from Nip/Tuck. And dare I mention the abysmal Dolph Lundgren foray into the Marvel Universe?
But I digress... Despite quite a few awful Marvel films, they're still better than anything D.C.'s been putting out there. I mean, since when is Superman all dark and brooding?
. It would have been interesting to see what DC would have done if Marvel out-Justice-Leagued the Justice League.
Except Zod is extremely narrow-minded. He's genetically programmed for war. He's mentally incapable of taking anything but the confrontational route. The idea of asking nicely for anything does not compute in his brain. If you want something, you march in and take it. He doesn't see any other way, it's all he knows. When all you've got is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. That was the entire point of his character.The three things that really-really bugged me about MOS was, one, Pa Kent's ridiculously melodramatic forced death. It was supposed to make me cry, but I laughed aloud instead. Two, why does military mastermind Zod attack and reveal himself to be an enemy when all he had to do was ask Kal-El nicely? Just say "Hey Kal-El, we're fellow Kryptonians and need your blood to start a new Krypton on another planet. Want to join us?", then murder him after. I mean Kal-El doesn't know they're bad until they tell him. Not a great tactical move from a general.
You say that as if Superman's never killed anyone before. Heck, he killed Zod in Superman II- and smiled. And as far as he could see in the moment, there were no other options. It was his first day ever being a Superhero. Cut him some slack. I could also make an argument that Superman was not only in the right, but had the authority to kill Zod since, as the Last Son of Krypton, he's the only remaining vestige of Krypton's legitimate government by default. Besides, it's been all but confirmed that his encounter with Zod and it's traumatic ending are the reason Superman adopts the no-kill principle.Third, Superman doesn't kill, or at least he doesn't kill when there are so many other options. To me, that changes a fundamental aspect of his character. He's a boyscout. He's good to a fault. He's supposed to be diametrically opposite of Batman.
Zod's spraying his heat vision--
Superman covers Zod's eyes with his arm--
Superman's arm burns. Zod's eyes burn.
Superman begs Zod to stop shooting.
Zod doesn't stop, Superman doesn't let go, and Zod burns to ash.
That would have been traumatic, but still heroic. (And it would have shown Superman had some idea how to wrestle someone with eye-beams.) I wish Snyder & Goyer had used that.
Except Zod is extremely narrow-minded. He's genetically programmed for war. He's mentally incapable of taking anything but the confrontational route. The idea of asking nicely for anything does not compute in his brain. If you want something, you march in and take it. He doesn't see any other way, it's all he knows. When all you've got is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. That was the entire point of his character.
You say that as if Superman's never killed anyone before. Heck, he killed Zod in Superman II- and smiled.
And as far as he could see in the moment, there were no other options. It was his first day ever being a Superhero. Cut him some slack.
I could also make an argument that Superman was not only in the right, but had the authority to kill Zod since, as the Last Son of Krypton, he's the only remaining vestige of Krypton's legitimate government by default.
Besides, it's been all but confirmed that his encounter with Zod and it's traumatic ending are the reason Superman adopts the no-kill principle.
That actually furthers my point. Because one of the major themes of the movie was that Krypton's system of artificial reproduction and genetic predestination had rendered its people impotent and, for lack of a better word, inbred. Consider the ruling council, ostensibly genetically programmed to govern, and they were content to simply let Krypton die despite Jor-El's repeated warnings that its core was unstable. Competent leadership would have done something anything in the face of a disaster of that magnitude. But they just carry on like it's business as usual. I think if the earth was about to blow up, even our Congress would be forced to take some sort of action.He's supposed to be genetically engineered to perfectly fit his role as a general. So if he fits into your interpretation of his character then the Kyrptonians did a pretty bad job in creating a general. A perfect--scratch that--any competent general would and should be trained in tactics and part of tactics would be knowing the value of subterfuge. I mean why fight your enemy for something when you can have them just give it to you willingly.
Well, a burst of effort is probably less difficult than a sustained application of force. You could say that if he attempted to fly upwards, Zod would simply counter with an equal and opposite force. As for the other options, maybe he just couldn't think of them in the stress of the moment. Things are alwayI said he doesn't kill when there are so many other options available to him. He can't use his flying ability to drag Zod into space? He can't pluck Zod's eyes out or cause him so much pain that Zod can't focus on using his heat vision any longer? Bite his ear off for gosh sake. Superman has enough strength to break Zod's neck but can't use it to simply aim Zod's head way long enough for the humans to escape?
Interestingly enough, the movie wasn't originally going to end that way. In the original ending, Zod was sent back into the phantom zone with the others. Zack Snyder actually changed the ending because he felt people would find it anti-climactic. He and Goyer came up with the theatrical ending, to which Christopher Nolan objected because he felt that killing Zod would be out of character for Superman. Snyder's counterargument was that Man of Steel was an origin story, Superman as a character wasn't fully formed yet and as such had no reason to be so averse to violence, but an experience like this would provide a credible, relatable reason why he would choose to avoid such actions in the future. After hearing his reasoning, Nolan- perhaps begrudgingly- approved the new ending.As for Superman 2, yeah that was one of issues I had with that movie. But according to wikipedia "The three Kryptonian villains are arrested in the TV version. In The Richard Donner Cut, Superman reversed the rotation of the Earth to keep the three Kryptonian criminals from being freed from the Phantom Zone." That latter one got my eyes rolling, but my point is many others see Superman apparently killing a helpless Zod as problematic too.
The writing was not brilliant. But I appreciate the ideas behind it and respect the intentions. It all makes sense, from a certain point of view. But I am very much a big-pictureNot really, he's been saving people all his life. It's hardly his first heroic moment. He holds up an burning oil rig for one. And if he apparently can't see any other options, when so many obvious ones are there, that's just bad writing, the hand of the writer forcing the plot into a direction that doesn't necessarily follow. I would have been able to accept Superman killing if it hadn't been so poorly executed. I mean as a writer, if you're going to put a character into a no-other-choice situation then you better darn well make sure there aren't a bunch of obvious options lying on the table, which there are.
That could be interpreted as Zod's character flaw: impatience and bull-headedness. I mean, look at the way he conducts himself in the opening of the film. His response to the council's inaction? Overthrow the government! Okay, that could be considered an appropriate- AND ALSO EUGENOCIDE! Um... Zod, I think you've gone a little too far there.As for cutting him some slack, he has years and years of practice with his powers but doesn't know how to used them more effectively than someone who has only had them for a few days/weeks/months? Which might be another issue with Zod going agro like he did. Why not get accustomed to your powers and become acclimated to Earth before confronting Superman? Did I miss something because what was the hurry?
By Last Son of Krypton, I mean the only surviving member of it's population who isn't a criminal. As far as Krypton is concerned, that makes his word law by default. It doesn't really matter what their succession law is, because the only remaining alternative is the guy who was exiled for treason.But he's not the last son of Krypton. Zod and his crew are Kryptonian too, and they were actually part of its ruling body. I could argue that they have more right to claim legitimate governance than Superman. Superman was raised on Earth, so knows little to nothing about being a Kryptonian or Kryptonian law.
And besides who knows what Kryptonian succession laws are? But for the sake of argument let's say that he has legitimate Kryptonian authority. That doesn't automatically mean he has the right to execute Zod. Zod and his troops were tried and sentenced by Kryptonian law to banishment in the Phantom Zone. So shouldn't Superman at most only have the authority to return them to the Phantom Zone? I mean their crimes on Krypton included killing yet they weren't executed, so there must be some sort Kryptonian law against execution. But it's hard to say who has what rights because we don't have a book on Kryptonian law to reference. So we could argue rights till we're both blue in the face.
Not so much back-peddling as they meant it to go in from the beginning but just sort of forgot to express it in a clear and effective way. But it's all good. They got Ben Affleck and Chris Terrio to help them fix it.Well, it makes me wonder if that's just the writers/producers back peddling because of the backlash. And if that's what the initial plan was, why not include that tid-bit in the movie's denouement. There was plenty of time for it, and it wouldn't have taken long. IMHO it would have made killing Zod actually matter within the context of the one movie. If that's the case it's just bad writing and planning. Because revealing it in the next movie, to me, makes it lose its power. Instead of a great "ohhhh" revelation moment at the end of a film, it's an "oh OK. *Shoulder shrug*" sort of moment at the beginning of another film.
I'll readily admit that this movie has problems. But I still like it. And in spite of your misgivings about the film, I think we can all agree that this scene was pretty perfect:One of the reasons I really get worked up over this movie is because there is a lot of great stuff in the film, but it all gets overshadowed and spoiled by a mountain of what I consider stupidity. It's made worse by the fact that it all could have been avoided because most of the major flaws are easily fixed by a few simple tweaks in how scenes play out.
I'll change the subject slightly by posing these questions:
In Superman Returns, how in the hell can Superman even get close to an entire island made of Kryptonite let alone land on it without dying? How can he get stabbed in the heart with Kryptonite and survive that? Why does Lois appear to forget having sex with Superman? Did Superman slip the proverbial mickey in her drink or did he use some sort of Kryptonian memory eraser? Why is The Fortress of Solitude so damned easy to get into?