Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
×



Details

Submitted on
November 16, 2013
Image Size
72.6 KB
Resolution
480×360
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
4,315 (4 today)
Favourites
115 (who?)
Comments
307
Downloads
6
×
Message to Man of Steel haters: shut up hypocrites by ImdaBatman Message to Man of Steel haters: shut up hypocrites by ImdaBatman
I'm so fed up with all the complaints about what I consider the greatest Superman movie ever. And here's why:

"It's too dark for Superman"
No, it's to dark for Richard Donner-style Superman. First of all, it's not darker. It's more serious. And yes, there IS a difference! Second, I'd ask if any of you have ever even picked up a comic, but I already know that Supes is a classic cast of what tvtropes.org calls "Complaining about Shows You Don't Watch". In other words, I can think of dozens of stories off the top of my head that are just as dark: "The Death of Superman", "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow", "Kingdom Come", "Red Son", the list goes on!

"Too much destruction"
Yeah, because "The Avengers" and the Transformers movies were so mild-mannered. Or that last Star Trek movie, where a giant fucking starship crashed into San Francisco, about 2x the damage from MoS. If anything, the Avengers are even more responsible for any collateral damage: they were fighting a bunch of "go down in one hit" kind of mooks. Superman was fighting guys with the same powers, plus military training. Plus, HEL-LOOOOOOOOOOO! Ever wonder if 90% of the people evacuated when they saw a giant fucking alien laser drill hovering over them!?

(Spoiler alert) "Superman killed Zod"
I know, right? How he mercilessly crushed his hand, then throws him into a chasm and shares a moment with Lois (who also had just killed someone) like nothi-...Oh, wait, that's "Superman II", the time nobody ever gave him crap about. This is the time where he was...well, it already says so right up there. There's a difference between killing to save lives and cold-blooded murder. Not only did Bats kill Rā's al Ghūl, he also tied a gargoyle to the Joker's leg and made him fall about 800 feet or so, and then there's how he shoved Harvey Dent off a building - hell that last one was literally the exact same situation that Superman was in!
EDIT: Not to mention when Iron Man killed a whole room full of thugs just because one of them broke a motherfucking Dora the Explorer watch. He literally told him he would be the first to die.

I know nobody likes Superman anymore, but give him a freaking chance! At least it's not "Superman Returns" (the one movie I hate more than "Iron Man 3").

I don't own. Rights to characters & films belong to DC comics.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconmatthew-lane:
matthew-lane Featured By Owner 4 days ago  Hobbyist General Artist
"No, it's to dark for Richard Donner-style Superman."

no its to Dark for Superman.... Richard Donner has nothing to do with it.

"First of all, it's not darker. It's more serious. And yes, there IS a difference!"

No its darker, its also stupider. An yes there is a difference between more serious & darker, an this was clearly darker.

"Second, I'd ask if any of you have ever even picked up a comic, but I already know that Supes is a classic cast of what tvtropes.org calls "Complaining about Shows You Don't Watch"."

Not only am I comic collecting fan who has a graphic novel collection of about 250+ graphic novels, as I swap out my single issue collection for the TPBs, I also run DC Adventures, the M&M 3E roleplaying game.

"In other words, I can think of dozens of stories off the top of my head that are just as dark: "The Death of Superman", "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow", "Kingdom Come", "Red Son", the list goes on!"

An the fact that you can cite specific instances demonstrates that not only do YOU consider this movie to be dark, but you can also recognise the difference between the lighter tone of the comic stories, in that you can name the examples that are the exceptions to the rule. The fact that out of the 4 mentioned stories 3 of them are out of continuity stories & 2 of them are elseworld stories also says a lot about your points lack of validity.

"I know, right? How he mercilessly crushed his hand, then throws him into a chasm and shares a moment with Lois (who also had just killed someone) like nothi-...Oh, wait, that's "Superman II", the time nobody ever gave him crap about."

Doesn't matter since its not being compared to the Donner films, its being compared to the original source material. An peoples issue wasn't with the killing, but the fact that it was needless & contrived.

"If anything, the Avengers are even more responsible for any collateral damage: they were fighting a bunch of "go down in one hit" kind of mooks. Superman was fighting guys with the same powers, plus military training."

Actually no. See the difference being that the Avengers specifically set out to protect life, limb & liberty, this is a thing they specifically set out to do, all without destroying entire skyscrapers, where as Kal-El actively destroys them himself, with no regard for human life whatsoever. All of which wouldn't have happened had he have been smart and employed this movies mc guffin "Kryptonite" earlier, or instead of wandering the Earth & talking to random priests instead got some information from Jor-El Hologram.

"I know nobody likes Superman anymore, but give him a freaking chance!"

No, people LOVE Superman, which is why that hated Man of Steel: Being that it was a Superman movie without a Superman & worse yet, without a Clark Kent or Lois Lane.

"At least it's not "Superman Returns" (the one movie I hate more than "Iron Man 3")."

Actually arguably Superman Returns was better than Man of Steel, as Superman returns was just misguided, where as Man of Steel was actively bad, totally missing the point of Superman as a character.

Man of Steel was a terrible movie & a worse Superman Movie.
Reply
:iconnitish-loneshark:
Nitish-Loneshark Featured By Owner 4 days ago  Student Filmographer
Because Hating Superman is a Cool thing now, so everyone wants to jump on that bandwagon. 
Reply
:iconmatthew-lane:
matthew-lane Featured By Owner 4 days ago  Hobbyist General Artist
I disagree: People hated Man of Steel specifically because they DON'T hate Superman.
Reply
:iconbenkenobi95:
BenKenobi95 Featured By Owner Aug 14, 2014
FINALLY!!! Someone says something.
Reply
:iconkillb94:
killb94 Featured By Owner Aug 4, 2014
Excellent comebacks. I really think people hate on Zack Snyder and MoS because it some distorded way "it's cool" to do that.

And to some people MoS has "no cleverness"? ...Ok, fine, if for them "cleverness" means the hero contradicting his own moral ("all the powers I had I could't save Pa Kent's heart attack!"--->Prevents Lois' death with horseshit timetravel AND despite having a rule of not timetraveling), father figures being idiots (Jor-El sending Superman to protect the Earth--->Designs a crystal chamber in the Fortress that can destory his powers; says that Superman can't timetravel--->Nothing bad happens; Superman's mom telling that once he uses the chamber he can't get his powers back--->TURNS OUT HE CAN AND EASILY), TONS of slapstick humor, retarded jokes and dumb villains with no backstory or motivations, that's they dumb decision. But they need to stop denying the truth.
...The Richard Donner movies are the brainless shitbags with one-dimensional protagonists fighting against one-dimensional villains.

"Man of Steel" has a protagonist being multidimensional, developing, learning, NOT BEING A FUCKING GARY-STU, it has a menacing villain who has a backstory and surprisingly enough an understandable motivation, it has the female characters being proactive, it has a solid plot (with a few things to nitpick thoug, like all superhero films) ...And just because at the end there's a "big destruction" THAT'S NOT A GOOD REASON TO IGNORE EVERYTHING BEHIND IT.

And since we're talking about the final battle...
A) "Superman could've took it somewhere else!" IS BULLSHIT because Zod was terraforming the Earth (how the fuck can you "take that away somewhere else" you fucking retards?!) and Zod's intention was to not kill Superman after the kryptonian medic told him that Superman doesn't have to be still alive to get the codex out of his body, so do the math. But listen... Why couldn't the Avengers "take the battle somewhere else"? What is this, "all superhero films are equal but some are more equal than others" or some shit?
B) "In The Avengers the heroes CARED about civilians during the fight!" ...THE AVENGERS ARE FUCKING SIX, Superman is only ONE. Also, the terraforming drill was destructive, but it avanced SLOWLY, obviously most of that part of Metropolis was already evacuated (in this movie PEOPLE ARE SMART AND THEY GOT THE HELL OUT OF THERE, they did't waste time making slapstick humor during a fucking alien attack like in fucking "Superman II")
C) "Well... METROPOLIS GETTING PARTIALLY DESTOYED IS HORRIBLE!" ...Again, as ImdaBatman said, you have to read more fucking comics before you open your goddamn mouth. Metropolis gets destroyed and fucked up several times in the comics, the stuff in MoS is nothing new.

...I really have no idea why MoS gets so much shit. The criticism it gets is truly ridiculos.
Reply
:iconmatthew-lane:
matthew-lane Featured By Owner 4 days ago  Hobbyist General Artist
"Excellent comebacks. I really think people hate on Zack Snyder and MoS because it some distorded way "it's cool" to do that."

No people hated that movie because it was a terrible movie: not only a terrible Superman movie, just a terrible movie in its own right.

"And to some people MoS has "no cleverness"? ...Ok, fine, if for them "cleverness" means the hero contradicting his own moral ("all the powers I had I could't save Pa Kent's heart attack!"--->Prevents Lois' death with horseshit timetravel AND despite having a rule of not timetraveling), father figures being idiots (Jor-El sending Superman to protect the Earth--->Designs a crystal chamber in the Fortress that can destory his powers; says that Superman can't timetravel--->Nothing bad happens; Superman's mom telling that once he uses the chamber he can't get his powers back--->TURNS OUT HE CAN AND EASILY), TONS of slapstick humor, retarded jokes and dumb villains with no backstory or motivations, that's they dumb decision. But they need to stop denying the truth.
...The Richard Donner movies are the brainless shitbags with one-dimensional protagonists fighting against one-dimensional villains."

Um you do know that pointing out that Richard Donners movies are shit doesn't make Man of Steel less shit, nor the observation that MOS contains No Cleverness any less of a factual observation.

"Man of Steel has a protagonist being multidimensional, developing, learning, NOT BEING A FUCKING GARY-STU,"

No it really doesn't. He is barely even 1 dimensional, let alone multidimensional, as for him learning & developing he doesn't do that either. The only time we've ever had a Superman who does that in a audio visual medium was when Dean Cain donned the blue tights.

"it has a menacing villain who has a backstory and surprisingly enough an understandable motivation, it has the female characters being proactive, it has a solid plot "

Nope. It has a likewise 1 note villain, with a 1 note background, it has no female protagonists whatsoever let alone one who is being proactive & its plot is muddled & jarring.

IT is a terrible movie & not just a terrible SUPERMAN movie, but just a terrible movie full-stop. If not for the Superman title on this movie, not only would this movie have flopped, it would be universally mocked for its lack of nuance, its 1 dimensional characters, it's music score, even it's cinematography.

And since you brought up the final battle...

A) "Superman could have addressed the issue in orbit so it never came to Earth, but instead of talking to Hologram Jor'El, he's off talking to random priests. Where as he was walking around with the Jor'El key, something that could have literally turned all the kryptonians back into humans aboard the ship & removed the ship to the phantom zone again. Had he been proactive against the treat it literally would have never reached the Earth.

An even if they did get to Earth, there was nothing stopping Kal'El from taking it to an uninhabited desert, after all they want him & if he's in the middle of the desert, then that's where they have to go to get him.

B) Doesn't change the fact that Superman didn't save a single person, nor showed any interest in protecting human life until the shoehorned in Zod death scene.... An no they didn't evacuate Metropolis, we see that in the actual movie. Billions would have died thanks to Kal'Els inaction.

C) The difference being that when its being destroyed its not usually being destroyed by Superman. Nor does Superman just let it happen due to his own inactivity. Not that it makes any difference since it was a pointless plot point that existed specifically so the producers could blow more shit up on set, since they were more interested in blowing shit up then telling a good story. Lazy movie making at is worst & at its dumbest.
Reply
:iconkillb94:
killb94 Featured By Owner 4 days ago
I never said MoS is flawless.
In fact, I've recently re-watched the film and aside from the fact I wish they came up with a better excuse for Lois to get into Zod's ship, I've noticed a plothole when Zod mentions how they would've starved in space while witnessing the destuction of Krypton, which made me wonder how could've they survive in space for 30 years if they need food?
At least in "Superman 2" I was okay with Zod's trio being alive after 30 years in the Phantom Zone because the movie doesn't esablish that they need food.
...But Richard Donner's Superman is still full of plotholes, much worse than the one from "Man of Steel". Like after Clark becomes "like any other human being" he returns to the Fortress of Solitue AFOOT. WHAT? In the first movie he did that because he had super strength, BUT HERE HE'S A MORTAL NOW! How could he walk his way from Metropolis to the fucking North Pole???

1= So... You think that MoS Zod is NOT multidimensional (he wants to kill humans which is bad, but at the same time he's doing it to save his people so he's actually kind of sympathetic and justified) but Richard Donner's Zod is, despite the fact he's just evil for the sake of being evil and wants to take over the world for no reason (other than "DUUUUH, I'M THE VILLAIN SO FUCK IT") and what would've Zod done AFTER everyone "kneels" before him? Mh? He's just gonna sit on his ass and do nothing? ...At least MoS' Zod had plans, that's why I don't consider him a one-dimensional villain who's evil for the sake of it. And he does have a backstory, he's a genetically manipulated soldier who's extremely found for his planet... Donner's Zod, was banished just because "HE IS EEEVIL" and no other fucking reason, he has NO backstory or motivation WHATSOEVER. Same thing with Lex Luthor. No, at least in the first movie Luthor had a plan and that made him a threat (an idiot and a completely unmenacing dumbass alongside Otis, but still a dangerous threat), but in the second movie Luthor is a complete dumbass who makes Bulk and Skull look like two professional serial killers.

2= Whether you like it or not, Clark DOES develop. He starts off as a confused misfit who wants to be as normal as possible to fit in and has no clear idea how to use his powers, let alone make hard decisions: he wanted to save Pa Kent's life from the tornado, but he didn't because he made the jesture of not letting him die (hate MoS' Pa Kent all you want, he at least was a flashed out character who cared for his son and died by standing for what he believed in, unlike Donner's who has ZERO depth and was just there to say the line "You came here for a reason" and then just DIE immediatly) He finally learns his real origins, finds out why he was sent on Earth, and begins to train and fully develop his powers (unlike Reeve's Superman who just IMMEDIATLY has the powers and knows 100% how to use them like the upgrade of a videogame character) but he's not that experienced (he crashes things down during his fights) but at least when he's put again in a difficult situation, he finally makes the big choice by killing Zod, now he's fully grown up as a strong character who can make decisions and doesn't want to hide anymore like he was as a kid. That's IS character development, a character who CHANGES by the end of the film, whether you hate this movie or not.
That's the main theme of the movie, having the freedom of choice no matter what you are. "Your mother and I believed Krypton lost something precious: the element of choice, of chance... What if a child dreamed of becoming something other than what society had intended for him or her? What if a child aspired to something greater?"

3= That's a good point, after all the ologram DID know how to stop Zod and explained to Lois the Phantom Zone thing which she later said it to Clark... HOWEVER even if Superman did found out the Phatom Zone energy thing and launched his pod to hit Zod's ship in space to imprison him and his army into the Phantom Zone "avoiding" the battle in Metropolis, Zod's ship WAS PROTECTED BY A SHIELD and don't you think Zod and the others would've REACTED (since Zod knows that the pod has the Phantom Zone energy) and prevented the pod from crashing into their ship..?
Yeah, how about that: Superman tries to launch the pod into Zod's ship while it's still in space, but Zod and the others respond the attack, capture Superman when he starts feeling weak because of the atmosphere inside Zod's ship and they get rid of the pod by either destroying it in orbit or launching it into the depths of outer space... Result: No more pod which contained the chance to imprison Zod and the others into the Phantom Zone again... NOW EARTH AND SUPERMAN ARE DOOMED, CONGRATULATIONS.
Also, Superman knew that the General Zod wasn't a nice guy, but he wanted at first to try the peaceful way and accepted to be taken away for the sake of not fighting. Also the ologram NEVER told Superman that he has the codex in his body, so how could Clark guess that Zod called him for the codex?

4= I agree that there was a bit too destruction and while Superman did destroyed some stuff (accidentally but still) he did said to the citizens of Smallville to stay in their homes while he fights the three Kryptonians. In fact, they fight and crash IN THE STREETS and if Superman crashed down something during that battle, it's ONLY because he's been pushed and thrown away by the villains, who do most of the damage and Superman can't handle all of them because, again, he's not an indestructible and perfect gary stu who has everthing under control.
And if he wasted time saving people in Metropolis from the terraforming machine, he would've just made things worse and MUCH MORE would've been destroyed. In any case, the people were getting out of there when they saw the danger instead of making retarded slapstick jokes or attempting to punch Zod in the face ignoring that he can fucking punch through a wall without a scratch. And as I said, in the comics Metroplis gets fucked up and destroyed several times. And come on, I've seen more destruction in a fucking "Power Puff Girls" episode! And how about in "Pacific Rim"? They destroy and blow shit up alot because just like in MoS, it's a fight between two superhuman and powerful titans. I'm cool if you prefer Power Puff Girls or Pacific Rim over MoS, but just don't be an hypocrite about the destruction thing... Or if you hate them both then it just means you just don't like to see too much distruction and I can 100% respect that because I understand why someone would dislike too much destruction.
I was okay with the destruction (for the most part) because... Hey, it's Superman against a massive alien invasion.

5= No, no, and NO. There was no way Superman could bring the battle somewhere else. Again, Zod's ship and the terraforming machine were protected by a shield and they wouldn't move an inch, Zod didn't need Superman to be alive in order to extract the codex from his body (so they don't need to fight him), and when Zod's army was destroyed and he was left all alone Zod said, and I quote on quote: "Now I have no people. My soul... That is what you have taken from me! I am going to make them suffer, Kal! These humans you've adopted, I will take them all from you, one by one!"
See? Zod doesn't care anymore. He's 100% batshit crazy now, he has no more connections or friends, now all he wants is killing every single human being in the world. If Superman told him "hey Zod, come with me! Follow me!" or even pushed him away in orbit (like in the movie), Zod would've still returned to kill people, that was his intention and he wouldn't have let be taken away.
Only Donner's Zod would've been dumb enough to fall for Superman words... I must say, I would love to see Reeve's Superman attempting to stop someone like MoS's Zod or Faora, he would've been killed in a millisecond. XD
...And while I re-wacthed the film, I also noticed how there were unharmed people in the streets of Metropolis WATCHING Superman and Zod fighting after the terraforming machine was destroyed, so it's not true that "millions of people have died" like everyone says. But even if someone died during the battle in Smallville or in that destroyed part of Metrololis, SUPERMAN SAVED THE ENTIRE EARTH AND ALL THE OTHER 2,469,501 CITIES IN THE WORLD.
Reply
:iconmatthew-lane:
matthew-lane Featured By Owner 4 days ago  Hobbyist General Artist
"In fact, I've recently re-watched the film and aside from the fact I wish they came up with a better excuse for Lois to get into Zod's ship, I've noticed a plothole when Zod mentions how they would've starved in space while witnessing the destuction of Krypton, which made me wonder how could've they survive in space for 30 years if they need food?"

Really? That was the plot hole that got you? What about the fact that Kal'El was running around the ship with a master key that could have changed back the atmosphere in the ship to kryptonian standard & he had two rebreathers with earth atmosphere for himself & lois.... Plot would have played out much differently had the writers thought about the plot they were writing.

An those aren't even the major ones like why would they suspect he was on Earth, where did they get the advance technology, the weapons, & how is the older technology compatible with technology thousands of years more advance when we can't even get gaming consoles to be reverse compatible.

1. No not at all: Kill humans to save krypton doesn't make him anything but genocidal. Humans and kryptonians can co-exist quite easily, he only kills the humans because he's a genocidal arsehole, with a rage-boner for some ideological "chosen people." Heck even the evil kryptonians from the mid 90's tv show Lois & Clark understood that as a plot point. Why destroy the entire planet & kill its populace when you can just as easily rule it?

Lik I said: This plot is just the dumbest plot its possible to make with the given parts.

2. No he really doesn't develop: he starts the movie as a disconnected emo kid, he ends the movie as a disconnected emo kid, nothing changes, no evolution, no development: Development requires change of character & in this movie no character is developed. What you are calling change was nothing more than a whole heap of "lake-houses in the rain" montages, where it gives us a whole heap of heart jerker scenes that are meant to show us how selfless he is, but actually just reinforces the fact that he's not human..... Of course that shouldn't be taken for much in this film since the only characters who act less human than the kyptonians in this movie are the humans themselves.

As for the Donner movies, as I've already stated so what? You can point out where the Donner movies were shit all you like, but that's not a defence of the shittyness of MoS.

3. ", Zod's ship WAS PROTECTED BY A SHIELD and don't you think Zod and the others would've REACTED (since Zod knows that the pod has the Phantom Zone energy) and prevented the pod from crashing into their ship..?"

If only Kal'El had access to some kind of escape pod or Kryptonian Battleship.... You know like the one in the start of the movie, or the one that the Kryptonians sent for Kal'El: Do the old Independence Day gambit. Anything was better than waiting for them to come blow up part of the Earth for no apparent reason.

"Also the ologram NEVER told Superman that he has the codex in his body, so how could Clark guess that Zod called him for the codex?"

He doesn't need to know WHY Zods coming for him, but Zod announces world wide on every signal on the planet that he is coming for him.

4. Doesn't matter which way you cut it, it was a poor writing choice by the writers.

"And come on, I've seen more destruction in a fucking Power Puff Girls episode! And how about in Pacific Rim?"

No you really haven't, at least not in Pacific Rim & that included giant robots fighting Kaiju.... Not that it would matter if Pacific Rim did have more destruction because just as we are not comparing MoS to the Donner movies, we are also NOT comparing MoS to Pacific Rim: We are comparing it to the actual published source material & it is found to be lacking. Not only was there to much destruction given the property, there was also way to much screen time wasted on it & it forced the cinematography to constantly shoot from wide shot, which depersonalises the action... Even Pacific Rim didn't do that & it arguably would have had more reason to do so.

Like most aspects of this film it was actively a poor choice.

5. Yes, yes & yes. At dozens of different times during the movie Kal'El could have taken an active hand in his own story & that would have avoided that terrible plot point. But frankly the execution of that plot point was just a piss poor execution of a simpering dull plot point that we deserved better than. 

"And while I re-wacthed the film, I also noticed how there were unharmed people in the streets of Metropolis WATCHING Superman and Zod fighting after the terraforming machine was destroyed, so it's not true that "millions of people have died" like everyone says."

Those people are right, millions of people would have died. In fact some people crunched the numbers just on the scenes you actually see, and not the implied stuff & calculated that it would have resulted in  roughly 129,000 known killed, over 250,000 missing (most of whom would have also died), and nearly a million injured.... An that's just from the scenes of the destruction, that doesn't include the time destruction was happening that we didn't see directly.

End of the day it was just a poorly written screen play that we deserved better from.
Reply
:iconkillb94:
killb94 Featured By Owner 4 days ago
No, that's NOT a plothole, Kal didn't know that his dad's hologram could do that!!! And even if he could, he was being WATCHED by Zod and the others, so I'm not QUITE sure they would have let him put random keys in the ship. So no, that's not a plothole.

1= Zod explained that it would be easier to take over a planet and turn it into a new krypton instead of making the kryptonians adapt to Earth's atmosphere and the powers of the yellow sun. He's not being an genocidal arsehole, he's just being smart: why the FUCK should you make your people suffer for decades when YOU HAVE THE DEVICES THAT CAN MAKE STUFF EASIER? If I was Zod, I would have used the terraforming machine just like he does in the film.
Zod managed to adapt because he's a soldier and he was born to adapt to different enviroments, but take to account that not all the kryptonians with him are soldiers and to make a new krypton with a new society he needs kryptonians who can do politics, medics, scientists, he can't just have soliders.
As for "Lois and Clark" there a kryptonian gets his powers and adapts to the yellow sun without much efforts much like in the Donner films. In MoS it's different and I thought it was more believeable.

2= I liked Superman in MoS, I identified alot with him because I'm also a person who comes from a different contry and I always felt alienated from the others. He wasn't selfless, he's just trying to learn things and understand his purpose, and he does by the end of the film. If you didn't feel the same, then I can respect that, I'm just telling you how I see it. In this movie I felt like Superman was just a stranger who wanted to find his place in the world, and I feel alot like him all the time. I sure liked this Superman better than the one who disobeys his father's orders for my needs (spinning the Earth) and prefers to brainwash his love interest to dodge responsability instead of sitting down and trying to talk with her.

3= Shield or not, Zod could use cannons and other weapons he had to blow up the pod when he sees Superman approaching.

4= I still disagree because I didn't feel the same, but thanks for elaborating your opinion on the destruction.

5= Superman can't take the fight somewhere else because the villains don't want to fight him: in the Smallville fight Zod and the others learned that fighting against Superman is a pain in the ass and so they decided to terrafrom the planet knowing that Kal can't stand Krypton's atmosphere and they don't need him to be alive to get the codex. When the terraforming machine was destroyed, I already explained why Superman can't take Zod away.
....Wow, gotta love how you keep ignoring the fact that he still saved the entire planet...

Do you dislike the Richard Donner movies too?
Reply
:iconmatthew-lane:
matthew-lane Featured By Owner 3 days ago  Hobbyist General Artist
"No, that's NOT a plothole, Kal didn't know that his dad's hologram could do that"

Actually he did know that, its literally one of the first things that happen in the movie.

"And even if he could, he was being WATCHED by Zod and the others, so I'm not QUITE sure they would have let him put random keys in the ship"

An yet it didn't stop the hologram from controlling the ship in one of the scenes anyway.

"Zod explained that it would be easier to take over a planet and turn it into a new krypton instead of making the kryptonians adapt to Earth's atmosphere and the powers of the yellow sun."

Which is also stupid as a plot point goes.

"He's not being an genocidal arsehole, he's just being smart: why the FUCK should you make your people suffer for decades when YOU HAVE THE DEVICES THAT CAN MAKE STUFF EASIER? If I was Zod, I would have used the terraforming machine just like he does in the film."

If only there were some kind of way one could get unassailable superpowers and a native population to use as slave labour.... On wait, that's exactly what would have happened... Hence silly plot point is silly.

"but take to account that not all the kryptonians with him are soldiers"

Yes they were, they were EXACTLY all soldiers. If you recall they are the Soldiers from the Soldier genetic caste who specifically went up against the ruling councel. Not only are they soldiers they are genetically pure soldiers.

"As for "Lois and Clark" there a kryptonian gets his powers and adapts to the yellow sun without much efforts much like in the Donner films. "

Exactly like in MoS except swap sun light for atmosphere.... Oh sure you can say that its hard in the dialogue, but when after seconds your powers are coming in & within minutes you can focus them then it can't be all that hard.

"I liked Superman in MoS, I identified alot with him because I'm also a person who comes from a different contry and I always felt alienated from the others."

That's still no reason to ruin Superman for the rest of us.

"He wasn't selfless, he's just trying to learn things and understand his purpose, and he does by the end of the film."

No he doesn't. Literally nothing changes from the start of the movie until the end of it.

"If you didn't feel the same, then I can respect that, I'm just telling you how I see it."

No you are telling me what you WANTED to be in it & I'm telling you that its objectively not there.

"3= Shield or not, Zod could use cannons and other weapons he had to blow up the pod when he sees Superman approaching."

Which would have atomised the body & removed any chance of getting the magical Mc Guffin that was there primary goal. See, any way you cut this plot it just stays a dumb plot.

"Superman can't take the fight somewhere else because the villains don't want to fight him"

Of course they do.... In fact they go to great lengths to do EXACTLY that.

"I already explained why Superman can't take Zod away."

Except you were wrong. There was nothing stopping Kal'El from punting Zod right back in to the Phantom Zone half way through the movie, had Kal'El had half a brain & wasn't just sulking for most of the movie.

"Wow, gotta love how you keep ignoring the fact that he still saved the entire planet..."

No he saved himself, saving the rest of the planet was purely incidental to saving himself.

"Do you dislike the Richard Donner movies too?"

Lets just sabe that I've NEVER seen a good Superman movie.
Reply
Add a Comment: