Jump to content

Upcoming Movie Trailers


Bengals1181

Recommended Posts

 

 

correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Faora say that to Meloni or one of the other military guys?

 

No, she said it to Superman.  Just saw the movie.  I noticed that line as well and I also noticed the "messiah" angle the movie overtly played on.  It's actually a common theme....movies/films these days, a large majority of them, deal with the following themes:

1)  End of World/Times

2)  Post Apocalyptic life where essentially a 'class system' rules. 

3)  Anti-Christ/Messiah theme

4)  "Extra-terrestrial" or some sort of invasion

 

I swear, it seems every movie that comes out is one of these subject matters.  Even during the previews for Superman, most movies were the same....

 

I didn't like Man of Steel as much as I thought I was going to....maybe I allowed all the hype to influence my expectations but I was a little disappointed and too feel that there was more potential to the story, movie that was left untapped.   I did notice the LexCorp fuel trucks towards the end of this movie, essentially setting up a sequel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No, she said it to Superman.  Just saw the movie.  I noticed that line as well and I also noticed the "messiah" angle the movie overtly played on.  It's actually a common theme....movies/films these days, a large majority of them, deal with the following themes:

1)  End of World/Times

2)  Post Apocalyptic life where essentially a 'class system' rules. 

3)  Anti-Christ/Messiah theme

4)  "Extra-terrestrial" or some sort of invasion

 

I swear, it seems every movie that comes out is one of these subject matters.  Even during the previews for Superman, most movies were the same....

 

I didn't like Man of Steel as much as I thought I was going to....maybe I allowed all the hype to influence my expectations but I was a little disappointed and too feel that there was more potential to the story, movie that was left untapped.   I did notice the LexCorp fuel trucks towards the end of this movie, essentially setting up a sequel. 

 

 

thanks for the clarification.

 

 

 

 

I didn't really pick up on too many religious angles.  The one I did notice was when he was up in space in the ship talking to Jor-El, and he floated out into space in a crucifixion pose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man Of Steel is freaking awesome. Maybe I'm just a sucker for loads of CGI and lots of crumbling building porn, but I loved it. Just saw it with my sons. Best....Father's Day movie...EVER!

 

 

I'm holding out hope that I get these experiences.  My daughter likes star wars and superheros now, I just hope she still does when she's old enough to watch more than just parts of the movies (superhero ones that is, she's watch phantom menace and a new hope - yes, I made the mistake of not having her watch the Star Wars movies in the right order. :doh: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

you'd find this a good read/listen.

 

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/notyetamovie/news/?a=81728

 

 

they also get into the religious stuff at the very end.  Referencing him being 33yrs old, being turned over to the bad guys by humanity, moses being put in a basket and sent off to be saved, being the savior of humanity, etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

they also get into the religious stuff at the very end.  Referencing him being 33yrs old, being turned over to the bad guys by humanity, moses being put in a basket and sent off to be saved, being the savior of humanity, etc...

 

 

Got through the first 10 min and alot i agree with, will listen to rest later.

 

 

 

fascinating read.
 

Why the Superman of 'Man of Steel' is the Jesus we wish Jesus would be http://popwatch.ew.com/2013/06/17/man-of-steel-jesus/  via @EW

 

 

 

Dont agree with the title, havent read it yet, I dont want Jesus doing what Supe did.

 

Another take (with spoiliers) - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-sandlin/superman-vs-jesus_b_3444361.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not real interested in Superman, but I've never been a fan of the character. He's not a hero I identify with.

 

For what it's worth, this treatment of Superman makes him more conflicted and soul-searching.  He also does and says some regrettable things.  When I saw it, it didn't sit well with me because it is so alien to the iconic character; but the more I think about it, the more I like the departure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Got through the first 10 min and alot i agree with, will listen to rest later.

 

 

 

 

Dont agree with the title, havent read it yet, I dont want Jesus doing what Supe did.

 

Another take (with spoiliers) - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-sandlin/superman-vs-jesus_b_3444361.html

 

I'd just skip to the 50 minute mark when Snyder (director) shows up.  After Snyder leaves Goyer (writer) jumps on.  

 

 

Snyder basically said the same thing I said above  [spoiler]Superman killing Zod is the basis for why he makes his "I won't kill" rule.  They couldn't just give him that rule and not explain how and why he came to that decision.  Superman has to now live with not only killing someone, but killing one of his own, and basically exterminating his race by not choosing to resurrect Krypton. So now, from a character standpoint they can develop him into a character that is more layered. [/spoiler]

Link to comment
Share on other sites


 

For what it's worth, this treatment of Superman makes him more conflicted and soul-searching.  He also does and says some regrettable things.  When I saw it, it didn't sit well with me because it is so alien to the iconic character; but the more I think about it, the more I like the departure

 

 

 

As for the controversial ending that Jamie and I have been discussing, I truly didn't even bat an eye at the time.  It wasn't until someone (else) online was complaining about it that I thought "oh yea, that's different for him."  

 

 

Man of Steel is definitely a Superman that fits today's world and society  That's one of the things that it does best.  Pretty much every other version of Superman has been generic, boring, bland and a black and white superhero.  This Superman is unsure of himself, emotional, and not black and white morally (its also very reminiscent of Batman Begins with a Batman who has yet to learn the impact of collateral damage).  It's very refreshing and doesn't insult the audience with an infallible character. If they had just cleaned up some of the editing with the flashbacks early on IMO, it would have been a truly outstanding movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

since I mentioned collateral damage, lol.

 

 

enhanced-buzz-21459-1371498261-20.jpg

 

[spoiler]All the more reason for Superman to kill off Zod when he had the chance. Imagine trying to imprison a near-invincible demigod who is hell-bent on genocidal revenge[/spoiler]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

thanks for the clarification.

 

 

 

 

I didn't really pick up on too many religious angles.  The one I did notice was when he was up in space in the ship talking to Jor-El, and he floated out into space in a crucifixion pose.

 

Welcome.  I'm a person who is fascinated with and tends to pick up quickly on symbolism and analyzes it to no end, seemingly.   It's good brain exercise I guess.  There were many things in Superman that played on the anti-christ/messiah theme IMO.   Would be cool to discuss I think......like the movie "Life of Pi".....I literally talked to my best (girl) friend about it for an hour or 2.  She's very creative herself and symbolism intrigues her as well and that movie was rich with it.  Symbolism told the story more so than the actual storyline did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Welcome.  I'm a person who is fascinated with and tends to pick up quickly on symbolism and analyzes it to no end, seemingly.   It's good brain exercise I guess.  There were many things in Superman that played on the anti-christ/messiah theme IMO.   Would be cool to discuss I think......like the movie "Life of Pi".....I literally talked to my best (girl) friend about it for an hour or 2.  She's very creative herself and symbolism intrigues her as well and that movie was rich with it.  Symbolism told the story more so than the actual storyline did. 

 

 

I tend to pick up on stuff like that when I go to watch dramas and such, but not so much when I go to see a superhero/action film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'd just skip to the 50 minute mark when Snyder (director) shows up.  After Snyder leaves Goyer (writer) jumps on.  

 

 

Snyder basically said the same thing I said above  [spoiler]Superman killing Zod is the basis for why he makes his "I won't kill" rule.  They couldn't just give him that rule and not explain how and why he came to that decision.  Superman has to now live with not only killing someone, but killing one of his own, and basically exterminating his race by not choosing to resurrect Krypton. So now, from a character standpoint they can develop him into a character that is more layered. [/spoiler]

 

 

[spoiler]The problem I have with it is it as I said it completely opens him up to the possibility of going down a dark path, if were going to make the Superman = Jesus comparison that the director said he wanted to make, you dont at all need to do that, Jesus never not once lifted a finger in violence and yet he intrinsically knew right from wrong with no need to justify it, now of course were talking about God in the flesh vs an alien life form, but even so you if your going to make the comparison and then allow Superman to do something that Jesus would never do, you are creating all sorts of problems.

 

Plus its just not something that Superman would do, he isnt a dark and troubled charcter and its a big rewrite to make him such. It's a liberty with the story I have a real problem with, and nothing is going to justify it for me.[/spoiler]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

For what it's worth, this treatment of Superman makes him more conflicted and soul-searching.  He also does and says some regrettable things.  When I saw it, it didn't sit well with me because it is so alien to the iconic character; but the more I think about it, the more I like the departure

 

 

And that's exactly why I dont like the departure. At least with Star Trek they wrote it in a way using an alternate timeline that makes it ok, this not so much. I really dont care for conflicted superman, that just isnt superman to me. Batman, as the Dark Knight that makes much more sense (but even Batman despite being a conflicted archetype didnt do what Superman did), Superman is not that guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

[spoiler]The problem I have with it is it as I said it completely opens him up to the possibility of going down a dark path, if were going to make the Superman = Jesus comparison that the director said he wanted to make, you dont at all need to do that, Jesus never not once lifted a finger in violence and yet he intrinsically knew right from wrong with no need to justify it, now of course were talking about God in the flesh vs an alien life form, but even so you if your going to make the comparison and then allow Superman to do something that Jesus would never do, you are creating all sorts of problems.

 

Plus its just not something that Superman would do, he isnt a dark and troubled charcter and its a big rewrite to make him such. It's a liberty with the story I have a real problem with, and nothing is going to justify it for me.[/spoiler]

 

 

[spoiler]what would be so wrong with a Superman that could potentially go down a dark path and turn bad?  I think that would be a fascinating thing for them to explore, and very realistic.  It's why the humans in the film were so afraid of him initially in the movie. 

 

As for killing Zod, aside from the fact that it was totally justifiable and downright necessary given the circumstances, it also adds so much to the character of Superman.  1) it gives him a reason to create his "no killing rule" 2) you get to develop a character who has to wrestles with the fact he basically killed off his entire race (choosing humanity over a reborn Kryptonian race), and 3) as Snyder talks about in the interview about, for future films it sets a bar for what lengths Superman COULD go if pushed that far.  As an audience, you'll never know 100% what he'll do, even though he may now have that rule.  Snyder "how far will a villain really be able to push him?  What if he sees Lois get hurt? Or his mother killed? You just made a really mad Superman that we now know is capable of that. He has these powers, but from an emotion standpoint he's human.  You don't want to get him mad because you don't know what he could do."

 

It goes back to the death of Jonathan Kent.  Is he going to let him die or reveal his secret?  Was he going to kill zod or let the innocent human family die?

 

 

Jamie, this isn't directed solely at you, but I think many people have to let go of the old version of Superman.  He just doesn't work in today's world.  He's not realistic.  He was generic, boring, and not a believable character.  You even kind of see that with Marvel's handling of Captain America.  40's era Captain America doesn't work in today's world, and his struggle internally with that is a point of emphasis in The Avengers (particularly if you watch some of the deleted scenes.).  As a result, you see Captain America in the Avengers not quite act the same as he did in his solo film.  

 

It's a different world than the one the Superman character was originally created in.  There aren't just completely good and completely bad people in the world, and I don't think movies should try to portray them that way. [/spoiler]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also the idea that you can create a god like charcter but not a way to hold him doesnt sit with me either, I've seen Loki in cells.

 

 

that's not equitable.  Loki, in film, has been held either in 1) a cell on a different planet, or 2) in a cell that was already created for a different purpose (Hulk).

 

 

neither of those are plausible options in MOS.  There was no other planet to use, and timeline wise humanity had known of the existence of Kryptonians for (as Goyer said in the link above), "maybe a month."  It's not realistic to expect there to be a cell created that would work in that timeframe.  Besides, Superman had only been Superman for a few weeks, it's not like he realistically would have had a contingency plan in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

[spoiler]what would be so wrong with a Superman that could potentially go down a dark path and turn bad?  I think that would be a fascinating thing for them to explore, and very realistic.  It's why the humans in the film were so afraid of him initially in the movie. 

 

As for killing Zod, aside from the fact that it was totally justifiable and downright necessary given the circumstances, it also adds so much to the character of Superman.  1) it gives him a reason to create his "no killing rule" 2) you get to develop a character who has to wrestles with the fact he basically killed off his entire race, and 3) as Snyder talks about in the interview about, for future films it sets a bar for what lengths Superman COULD go if pushed that far.  As an audience, you'll never know 100% what he'll do, even though he may now have that rule.  Snyder "how far will a villain really be able to push him?  What if he sees Lois get hurt? Or his mother killed? You just made a really mad Superman that we now know is capable of that. He has these powers, but from an emotion standpoint he's human.  You don't want to get him mad because you don't know what he could do."

 

It goes back to the death of Jonathan Kent.  Is he going to let him die or reveal his secret?  Was he going to kill zod or let the innocent human family die?

 

 

Jamie, this isn't directed solely at you, but I think many people have to let go of the old version of Superman.  He just doesn't work in today's world.  He's not realistic.  He was generic, boring, and not a believable character.  You even kind of see that with Marvel's handling of Captain America.  40's era Captain America doesn't work in today's world, and his struggle internally with that is a point of emphasis in The Avengers (particularly if you watch some of the deleted scenes.).  As a result, you see Captain America in the Avengers not quite act the same as he did in his solo film.  

 

It's a different world than the one the Superman character was originally created in.  There aren't just completely good and completely bad people in the world, and I don't think movies should try to portray them that way. [/spoiler]

[spoiler]

Because it's Superman, if you let the Hero go down a dark path, who stops the Hero, espessally when the hero has powers no human could stop?

 

To your points

1.) And what's to stop him from breaking this arbitrary rule again? You've already established he is willing to do just that if the circumstance provides for it, which makes the rule something that isnt a line in the sand. It doesnt make him Jesus, it makes him more Jack Bauer. Superman is not a "might makes right" charcter and there is no "generation gap" or "todays world" that should make him one, and you espessally dont do it when you are wanting to make comparisons to Jesus, that REALLY strikes me a completely wrong. When you attempt to make an extra-human charcter have those kind of human traits, espesally one that is a hero, you cause problems. He is extra-human in abilities your telling me he cant be extra-human in his moral compass? It was a big part of past storylines that he would take those extra steps need to not kill people. Superman isnt the Dark Knight, dont make him into one. (hell Batman didnt even kill)

 

2.) Another re-write I didnt care for, his race was already dead outside of Zod and the other two.

 

3.) That's exactly right, and exactly why I dont like it.

 

40s Captin America isnt extra-human. Completely different comparison.

 

There is nothing new under the sun, people werent completely good or bad in the 40s either, but the iconic charcter written gave people something to strive to regarding his moral compas. Frankly this Superman seems to be more the wet dream of a neoconservitive. 

 

Your actually talking me out of what I thought was a movie that had flaws but was still entertaining into not caring for it at all.

[/spoiler]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

that's not equitable.  Loki, in film, has been held either in 1) a cell on a different planet, or 2) in a cell that was already created for a different purpose (Hulk).

 

 

neither of those are plausible options in MOS.  There was no other planet to use, and timeline wise humanity had known of the existence of Kryptonians for (as Goyer said in the link above), "maybe a month."  It's not realistic to expect there to be a cell created that would work in that timeframe.  Besides, Superman had only been Superman for a few weeks, it's not like he realistically would have had a contingency plan in place.

 

 

So then Zod could have gone the way the rest of the Kryptonians did.


btw, I love how they did the Fortress of Solitude.  Curious to see how that evolves in the 2nd film given what transpires in this film with it.

 

 

This I do agree with, thought it made a lot of sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll make a few small points and leave it at that.

 

1) you're holding on to what Superman was 40+ years ago. That Superman just isn't realistic in today's times.

 

2) no they weren't.  The race was still very much salvageable

 

3) yes, 40's era Cap was superhuman.  Not Superman level, but Superhuman.

 

 

 

People don't view the world as black and white as they did during the times Superman was created.  The world is bathed in shades of gray, and for characters to be realistic, they have to have shades of gray too.


 

 

So then Zod could have gone the way the rest of the Kryptonians did.


 

 

 

[spoiler]he could have, but it would have been a cheap copout by the writers and an unfulfilling ending. There were important moments that happened after the phantom zone act that would have been left out.[/spoiler]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...