|
Pointless wasted time spent in a movie that had precious time to spare. Cramming this movie to 2 hours and we spend 5 minutes of them with a pointless family? Flash had already saved people in the movie, and Superman had done it in prior movies. If the heroes were so bent on saving people, they should have done that before rushing the base. The didn't even consider people until midway through the fight.
I don't mind having them stop to save people. The 2 hours limit was a thing Warner enforced, so we can't blame any director. Snyder went way too long with BvS, so I guess the executives were pissed off. JL would benefit of an extra 15 minutes, maybe 20.
Superman didn't throw Zod through buildings. He got thrown through buildings. The most he did to Zod was ram his head next to the buildings exterior. The only time superman did major damage himself to a building was the parking lot, and you can see him stare up at the damaging ramp like oh shit, letting Zod get a cheap shot in.
I recon you may be right, I will have to rewatch the MoS fighting scene.
You mean a vigilante that in your own words is murdering people left and right. Branding people that are dying. And other "evidence" that Luthor is sending Clark. I hardly call say going out and telling the Punisher for instance to quit doing what he is doing a bully. Superman has been doing 100% good since he showed up, minus if you call killing Zod to save the world bad. By breaking the Batmobile and giving someone a warning give Batman the perfect right to go and kill him?
Good lord, I don't even want to talk about that "brand of the bat" thing. It made him look like a freaking psycho. So yes, I guess that, for Super, it was like going after someone like the Punisher (and that should NEVER be the Batman in any film).
When I say Superman acted like a bully is because of his powers. He is basically a god and he is conscious of that. That's why he is always calm on the comics, because he knows that if he loses the patient he will be absolutely terrifying. Batman is a regular human being. The real Superman would try to talk some sense to him before even being aggressive and threatening the Bat.
A better representation of a Batman/Superman conflict is on Byrne's Superman Year 1. Another comic that shows his view on acting like that is "What's so funny about truth, justice and the american way?". In that one, Superman is facing a new group of vigilantes that kill the villains and have a rising popularity due to that. He tries to talk some sense into them and fail to do so. He then challenges them to a fight (int the moon, to not risk lives) and gets his ass kicked while acting like a boy scout. He then returns pissed off and aggressive, seemingly killing each member of the group (the Elite). The last remaining is Manchester Black, their leader, that confronts Superman saying that he is as bad as him now. But in reality, Superman just put everyone in a prison with his super-speed. He was just proving his point that, if he acted like them, he would not be a hero, but a big bully and a vigilante. So he has a clear opinion against acting like that and BvS basically shows him acting exactly like people he despises in the source material.
There is zero evidence that he would kill batman. As you said he tried to tell him many times. He even tried again when he threw batman on the roof, just before he was weakened and then became Batmans punching bag until defeat. It was clear from the whole fight that Batman was not going to listen to him, so Superman went into incapacitate mode to make him finally listen.
So why he was fighting the Batman? He could have just stood there and explain everything calmly, until Batman used the Kryptonite it's not like anything he was using was doing more than itching. He just started punching Batman in the face when he was not posing any threat. Until the Kryptonite part, it was just like Mike Tyson punching a 4 year old.
Since punching the Batman and toying with him (come on, he could have ripped the armor in seconds and ended the fight) would not accomplish anything regarding saving his mother, what the hell we intended to do? Teach the guy a lesso with a timer on his mother life?
Wasn't just the romance, it was everything else in it as well that went to the cliché sex jokes for females.
I have to give it to you, the sex jokes were repetitive at best, offending at worst. It's a kind of cheap humor they put on mainstream films these days. Looking at Thor, it seems to sell well, unfortunately.
BTW, pay attention to the goons in the chase scene and those very same goons in the wharehouse. Many are the same guys. So he didn't kill them all that are thought. But regardless, this is a different Batman. This is a batman that is broken that had become bad. BvS was about him needing to find redemption. By the end he realizes that he was the evil he was trying to fight.
They are the same goons? Anyway, a bunch died on the chase scene, he explodes a car with goons inside. Those guys are dead.
I still don't buy the Bat going bad thing. The current change in tone and his redemption is probably more linked to the poor reception it got on BvS than to any kind of plot master plan.
I appreciate that. Not that he killed, but that he "had" to kill. It's the same reason I am not against Superman killing Zod in Man of Steel. Too many movies when a hero gets to a position where they are stuck between a rock and hard place, some duex ex machine comes in and saves them from having to make the hard choice. You know, someone else say kills Zod for Superman, or someone comes in to quickly save the family, ect. It's a cop-out. I'd like to think a seasoned Superman would not have gotten himself into that position, but he was a day 1 rookie on the job fighting a being as strong as Zod. And as we saw in this movie, kryptonians are F*ing strong, so its perfectly reasonable to
I can kind of accept the Zod thing. Not my liking, but acceptable. Specially because Superman does not know any way to stop a Kryptonian at that point since he still didn't knew about kryptonite or red sun. The only thing that depowered him was the kryptonian ship but that was destroyed.
The flamethrower guy Batman killed was also acceptable.
Just pointing out hypocrisies. People cry that Supes kills Zod, yet in Superman 2 her throws a powerless Zod down a bottomless pit for all we know in the Antarctic. People bitch about Superman being petty and wrecking that guys Semi, yet in Superman 2, he goes back to a dinner to beat up and embarrass a guy. Same with batman. He kills and its a jolly old time in Keatonverse. In Nolan, he also kills people. Sometimes inadvertently by doing nothing. Apparantly letting someone die you can save is good. Or times when in vehicle chases he clearly kills the drive of other vehicles.
These old movies were not at all trying to be faithful to the comics. Wikipedia at least says that the 3 Kryptonias were just trapped in a red sun light chamber, so I guess they weren't killed. I don't mind the Semi scene, I actually thought it was pretty funny. No problems with that.
Keatonverse is hardly trying to be faithful to comics. I'm not 100% sure he indeed killed anyone in the Nolan films, specially because the second one was mostly about him NOT killing the Joker. You could however blame some incidental deaths on him (the ninjas on the 1st, Thalia on the 3rd, not his fault), some dubious situations (the Tumbler chase on the 2nd should have killed some dudes) and he refused to save people that would die (Ra's).
Not gonna go into versions of characters cause there are so many. Point is, this is just another version of the beloved characters. I think they are completely faithful to the current versions, just not as the current version you want YET. They are growing. Superman has become the superman people love. Batman was at a different stage, but through superman has been redeemed. Flash/Cyborg/Aquaman are just starting.
My point is that Superman has become the one people love but due to Whedon's edit. It's pretty clear that Snyder did the same Super from other films, basically Whedon edited or re-filmed all Superman scenes.
I do like Batman's redemption on JL. The other characters got to a good starting point too.
I never found MoS to be dark. Go rewatch it. Maybe it felt dark when it first came out comparing it to Superman 1-4, or Returns. But it wasn't as dark as Nolan's trilogy and compare it to BvS and its insanely light.
I did liked MoS. Not great, but a solid 7. Superman was not that relatable, but it was OK. On BvS he changed completely to a threatening overpowered kryptonian. That's when it got really lost.
Snyder's BvS is dark as an edgy teen. The whole movie looks like it's trying to be so edgy that most of the times it ends up being cringy and childish (these adjectives also sum up Lex on that film). The Nolan ones were dark because they were really going for mature themes that were indeed really dark, like Batman invading everyone's privacy to find the Joker, the debate about killing the enemy, Dent's fall from grace. Nolan was trying to be edgy.
BvS was dark. That was because it was supposed to be. One hero is lost and broken throughout the movie. The other is trying to find his place in this world that is scared of him. And in the end one hero dies. It's your typical dark middle movie in the trilogy. And besides, Batman will inherently darken any movie, unless they change his character.
It was a childish movie that was trying to hard to be dark and edgy. Luthor was a clown. Half of the film is cringeworthy, That Martha scene sums up the movie, it was totally ridiculous and out of place ("oh, he has a mother? So I can't kill him! I thought he came from a space egg"). The entire plot doens't make any sense. It's just a poor interpretation of Miller's Dark Knight mashed up with Superman while trying to set up the Justice League and also close it up with a terrible version of Death of Superman.
|
