By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Superman would never be as reckless as in MoS?

I've seen this argument a lot from what I suppose are the Superman fans used to more of the comic book character. Personally, I'd never been much of a fan, Superman always seemed too flawless for my liking. 

I loved MoS, but people keep saying it sucked because of all the destruction and all the lives he put in danger, etc. The real Superman would never do this you say.

Bullshit he wouldn't.

Curious as I am, I started looking up some YouTube videos on Superman as he's represented in animated shows, which I assume are very much like the comics. Superman is just as "reckless" as in MoS. Just have a look at the Superman vs Doomsday fight for instance. Superman makes absolutely no effort whatsoever to take the fight out of Metropolis, and the two just tear apart the city without regard. Sure, the whole thing looks less dramatic, because it's animated, but the destruction is there nevertheless. At one point, Superman tosses Doomsday into a skyscraper, totally levelling it.In the end, Superman grabs Doomsday, flies him out into space, and then crashes him back to earth, but instead of crashing him into some remote area where he will do no damage, he crashes him straight back into the centre of Metropolis, creating a huge crater and massive destruction. 

 

That's the valiant Superman you guys are defending? He would never let the destruction in MoS happen? Really?

 

I mean in MoS most of the destruction at least came from the world machine, not his actual fighting Zod. In the animated show he seems to be down with destroying shit all on his own. 

 



Around the Network
spurgeonryan said:
This is his first time being Superman. He just learned to fly, he is battling beings who are just as strong as him, despite Earths Atmosphere. I think he totally would do this. Especially since he literally had no choice.

Hardcore fans never can enjoy super hero movies for what they are.


Yes, there's that, and I completely agree.

I'm just saying, it looks to me like even the experienced, "ideal" comic superman deals in a fair bit of reckless chaos



Now The Incredible's premise of citizens not liking super heroes because of the collateral damage they make seems more understandable.

And now I'm impressed in how Goku and his gang are able to find wastelands to fight their enemies, although the enemies also enjoy fighting strong enemies with the least things in their way.



Gotta make that box office monies. Teenagers today want things to go boom.



Angelus said:

 In the end, Superman grabs Doomsday, flies him out into space, and then crashes him back to earth, but instead of crashing him into some remote area where he will do no damage, he crashes him straight back into the centre of Metropolis, creating a huge crater and massive destruction.

Surely that's worse than anything he did in the film? I've seen it already and thought he was a bit reckless but then I read what Spurge said... Good point. Sucks to be him. It's life long power puberty!



Around the Network
Soundwave said:
Gotta make that box office monies. Teenagers today want things to go boom.


Missing the point of the thread



Pity that's only one of the minor issues in this film.



The point is that he can't always take the fight to where he wants. The situations where he causes collateral damage during fights is when he battles opponents as strong as he is. In MoS, he fight two kryptonians almost as strong as he is and in the end fights Zod (that even manages to use the full power set). It's a situation where he can die and an loss would mean the end ofthe human race, so he can't simply keep trying to take the fight to a desert place.

In the Doomsday battle, the monster already had defeated the entire Justice League, so Superman knew he was the last stand. He tries to take the monster to a empty locations, but Doomsday was able to beat Superman down to the ground at any flying attempt, using his brute force and quick reflexes, so he didn't had much choice.

Another situations always involved battles with enemies similar in power, like the damage during the final battle with Darkseid with amplified powers in the end of the last season of the Justice League cartoon.



Angelus said:
Soundwave said:
Gotta make that box office monies. Teenagers today want things to go boom.


Missing the point of the thread


That's the reason why these type of scenes exist in the film though.

WB got that kids didn't want to see a Superman with ho-hum action, gotta blow things up real good, Transformers (ugh) style. Doesn't matter what Superman's character motivations are.



Angelus said:

I've seen this argument a lot from what I suppose are the Superman fans used to more of the comic book character. Personally, I'd never been much of a fan, Superman always seemed too flawless for my liking. 

I loved MoS, but people keep saying it sucked because of all the destruction and all the lives he put in danger, etc. The real Superman would never do this you say.

The movie was created for the people who don't like the character, so it makes sense that you liked it.

The destruction of the city is just a part of the problem and not the biggest one, the Superman from MoS is not a very good Superman, the actor does a good job but the script is just not there for him to work on. Here is a good review that summarizes many of the problems of the movie and he does a better job of explaining them.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/7521-Man-of-Steel