Finally saw Man of Steel....

I don't get the hate. It was extremely well done. Good story, awesome visuals, no time reversal....super powered people being super.....

Solid 8/10 Phone Post

I've still got issues with parts of it but I enjoyed it more on my 2nd viewing. Maybe it was because the anticipation/expectation wasn't there the 2nd time. Phone Post 3.0

I also saw it last weekend for the first time.  I didn't really like it, primarily because Pa Kent didn't ring true to me and neither did Clark.

It was an interesting take on Krypton, and I thought Michael Shannon did a great job as Zod.

There were a lot of weiners in it.

paw -


I also saw it last weekend for the first time.  I didn't really like it, primarily because Pa Kent didn't ring true to me and neither did Clark.



It was an interesting take on Krypton, and I thought Michael Shannon did a great job as Zod.

Pa kent was good man trying to.protect his son....what's not to get? Phone Post

The Elastic Assassin - 
paw -


I also saw it last weekend for the first time.  I didn't really like it, primarily because Pa Kent didn't ring true to me and neither did Clark.



It was an interesting take on Krypton, and I thought Michael Shannon did a great job as Zod.

Pa kent was good man trying to.protect his son....what's not to get? Phone Post


I see Pa Kent as much more nuturing and encouraging than he was portrayed.  The way he raised Clark basically made him very fearful.  I certainly don't see Pa Kent as ever suggesting that Clark should let people die as he did in the film.



 

"Extremely well done" would definitely an overstatement IMO.

The writer and director couldn't even agree on what was supposed to be conveyed after the film had reached the masses.

I see it as a movie that had some awesome action and wasn't terrible.

A solid 6 pushing towards a 7 but only because I like imagining it's really just supposed to be about Platos The Republic am not the superman I grew up with. Phone Post 3.0

The passive aggressive go outside and destroy your diesel truck because you were an asshole Clark Kent is a far cry from the idealistically moral superman that's been written for (at least) the last 40 years. Phone Post 3.0

He was young and trying to get a handle on his emotions, trying to figure out what kind of man he was going to be. They actually tried to give Superman some depth an some internal conflict. I thought it was excellent.

MarkRobinson - The passive aggressive go outside and destroy your diesel truck Clark Kent because you were an asshole is a far cry from the idealistically moral superman that's been written for (at least) the last 40 years. Phone Post 3.0


Fair point.  I had trouble with that scene in general.  IIRC, the first shot clearly established US soldiers were in the bar/restaurant.  Not having anyone intervene when Clark was....attacked? assaulted? (not sure what the right word would be) doesn't look good.



I would have changed the scene to that when Clark is pushed (and didn't move at all - nice touch!), the soldiers would have suggested the jerk finish his drink and leave.  That way Clark still doesn't get involved and the soldiers don't look like douche bags.

MarkRobinson - The passive aggressive go outside and destroy your diesel truck Clark Kent because you were an asshole is a far cry from the idealistically moral superman that's been written for (at least) the last 40 years. Phone Post 3.0
He should've sat the guy on a dinner tray and propelled him into a pinball machine instead is what he should've done. Phone Post 3.0

Zenoplata - There were a lot of weiners in it.
Phone Post 3.0

Sleazy Martinez -
Zenoplata - There were a lot of weiners in it.
Phone Post 3.0
Yes the wife and i also noticed the.dildonic cages being sentenced to.the.triangle of desolation Phone Post

BigWilliam - He was young and trying to get a handle on his emotions, trying to figure out what kind of man he was going to be. They actually tried to give Superman some depth an some internal conflict. I thought it was excellent.
I think this new added depth squandered some of what superman represents.

Now he was a presupposed god figure for mankind that was going to be the savior by virtue of being more powerful.

Jor-el left him with no altruistic or moral values. That shit has always been due to the Kent's instilling those values to him.

instead we get Jonathan kent teaching Clark the lesson to not trust humans at any cost because they won't understand and will fear him. The final lesson? "Clark, let me die trying to save the dog because a few people will see it."

I understand how and why people enjoyed the film but I just thought it was weak on a lot of levels.

For instance, xray vision having child doesn't see the space ship under the barn he's spent everyday of his life on.

Meh. Punching bad guys at super speed is cool though. Totally had a geek boner for that. Phone Post 3.0

And I thought thought the dildo ships were a nice touch. Phone Post 3.0

MarkRobinson - 
BigWilliam - He was young and trying to get a handle on his emotions, trying to figure out what kind of man he was going to be. They actually tried to give Superman some depth an some internal conflict. I thought it was excellent.
I think this new added depth squandered some of what superman represents.

Now he was a presupposed god figure for mankind that was going to be the savior by virtue of being more powerful.

Jor-el left him with no altruistic or moral values. That shit has always been due to the Kent's instilling those values to him.

instead we get Jonathan kent teaching Clark the lesson to not trust humans at any cost because they won't understand and will fear him. The final lesson? "Clark, let me die trying to save the dog because a few people will see it."

I understand how and why people enjoyed the film but I just thought it was weak on a lot of levels.

For instance, xray vision having child doesn't see the space ship under the barn he's spent everyday of his life on.

Meh. Punching bad guys at super speed is cool though. Totally had a geek boner for that. Phone Post 3.0


Nicely said.

I think you are misreading his relationship and lessons from pa Kent. He taught him to be a good men by example, but as a father he worried about him being an outcast and hunted for his special abilities. Ultimately Pa Kent trusted Clark to make the right decision on his own, but like any father wanted him to be careful.

So Pa Kent's good man by example code of morals were instilled but as a grown man he still didn't realize that it's not proper to destroy a mans truck?

there's not much of an excuse for that. I think it also reflects poorly on the final fight scenes were Clark did little to nothing to save people in harms way outside of fighting the bad guys. It adds to him being much less of the superman we all have been reading for decades.

Perhaps if he already didn't show poor moral character, or if the script has been shaped in a manner that actually showed Clark having more compassion and a greater moral code, then I would have accepted the fact that he wasn't saving people during the final fight.

People say, "oh it was his first fight and he was trying his best to save everyone not just a few people". I don't buy that and the plot didn't do a good job even suggesting that.

he was never really at risk or in any serious danger. he barely tried to save the people around him (iirc the one guy falling out of a helicopter and the others die). He even directly caused much of the damage.

He seemed like a regular, dumb, passive aggressive dude that just happened to have powers. He might become the superman we grew up with but he certainly wasn't in this film.

I thought the film was kind of a mess. Phone Post 3.0

Sorry for the grammar errors./ Phone Post 3.0

He cannot be perfect out of the gate or there is no arc, no struggle. And of course he was in danger. He was fighting people his physical equal and a lot of them. How is that not in danger?