Veknoid_Outcast said:
Mandalore76 said:
I couldn't stand that portrayal of Clark's Earth father. Cinematic Pa Kent went from:
 "Son, you are here for a reason... and it is not to score touchdowns..."
To Man of Steel's:
Clark: Should I have let them die?
Jonathan Kent: Yes.
I know he followed it with "maybe... I don't know." I still think it's a terrible version of Pa Kent. Not to mention the fact that he willingly commits suicide to save the family dog, which widows his wife and orphans his son. This was portrayed as some gripping dramatic scene, but for me it came off as forced drama. Costner's character goes to save the dog, because if Clark goes, it will reveal his super powers? If Jonathan Kent believed he had any chance to get to the car and back in human speed, he could have just let Clark do it while asking Clark to make sure he didn't fly or run at super human speed. The way they chose to play it out instead was just the Dad willfully committing suicide because he didn't trust his son to not look inhuman. The original cinematic death of Pa Kent by heartattack after having a playful race to the house with Clark was far more moving and impactful to me than the forced drama of Costner's suicidal act. The set-up was so forced they may as well have had the words "Oscar Clip" flashing at the bottom of the screen.
  https://youtu.be/et0bdMeSvjE
|
Doc755 said:
Please don’t get me started on the awful death of Jonathan Kent in Man of Steel. Especially considering Clark had alread revealed his powers at a younger age. In any case, the point was these vastly different upbringings leave Superman in the exact same place: a superhero that protects humanity. Add to the fact that the Superman in Man of Steel is not the same man as in Batman v Superman and Justice League and it’s a tiny example of how poor planned out the DCEU (or the DEUCE as it prefers to be called) is
|
I agree and disagree. I think the characterization of Jonathan Kent was interesting. He doesn't have to be a saint to be a good character. I think there's a lot of dramatic potential there, with a character who cares so deeply about his adopted son that he's willing to sacrifice countless innocent lives to safeguard his superhuman identity.
Where I agree is the execution. It was handled poorly, and then retconned in BvS. And the tornado sequence is just a disaster (no pun intended) of a scene.
|
That, in and of itself, seemed to be the problem. They wanted something different but had not idea how to use it. The dynamic in 1978 is so powerful in that Superman’s birth father mandates he cannot “interfere in human history” while his adoptive father advocates that Clark is “there for a reason”. Superman ultimately had to decide what to do on his own and it comes down to his perceived “failure” at saving his adoptive father. Man of Steel’s interpretation (while possibly having potential dramatic impact) just has no idea what to do with itself. Clark just does what his father says and he’s not an agent on his own change. And then BvS has him saying he only helps people because it’s what his adoptive father wanted! My brain hurts
