|
I like MoS and vehemently disagree with the whole "Clark did 911" thing, but I do like the take that Zod fight is an endorsement of a "necessary collateral damage" mentality. Superman could limit the immediate damage to Metropolis by simply letting Zod kill him, but the movie presents a scenario in which this is impossible. Sort of like the setup in Pacific Rim where fascism is unambiguously the best defence against the obliteration of humanity. We just have to have a big, smashy fight to save the world. The fact that Superman takes down a literal drone (the modern embodiment of collateral damage) later on adds another layer of irony to this.
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:nothing like a good old fashioned "sure we killed a lot of civilians, but it was for the greater good" argument in tyool 2017 You seem to be drawing some kind of parallel to real-world situations where people claim that the greater good justified killing, but where they did not literally, unquestionably save the entire population of humans from certain death. I'm not really sure how that parallel is working.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:You have neither demonstrated when or how Clark killed civilians. I don't need to, i assume we all saw the last half hour of Man of Steel. Martman posted:In the movie, Superman unquestionably saves the Earth (or at least, all its human inhabitants). Right, all of them except the ones he squishes. Like I keep saying though, this is a feature, not a bug. A movie about a Superman who gets warped by his two lovely dads and becomes a towering symbol of American violence is much more interesting than whatever you guys seem to want it to be IMO.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
Man of Steel, I love you. I love you you magical movie. Nothing else has inspired quite this level of bullshit and fuckery- and then you gave us the gift of even more fuckery and bullshit that is Batman V Superman. Can Man of Steel become the mascot of this thread?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Right, all of them except the ones he squishes. When does he squish someone?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
Shanty posted:Sort of like the setup in Pacific Rim where fascism is unambiguously the best defence against the obliteration of humanity. We just have to have a big, smashy fight to save the world. Pure ideology is impossible. Pacific Rim's fascism forecloses the actual solution, which is solidarity with the enslaved kaijus. Man Of Steel is different - opposite. It says that the notion of a conflict without violence is an ideological fantasy. A retreat into fantasy is not a valid solution.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I don't need to, i assume we all saw the last half hour of Man of Steel. Lame.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:Lame. I'm sorry but if you want me to comb the battle of metropolis for screenshots I'm not gonna do that, can't I just assume you did in fact watch the movie?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I'm sorry but if you want me to comb the battle of metropolis for screenshots I'm not gonna do that, can't I just assume you did in fact watch the movie? It would literally take you 3 minutes to find an example if it's as prevalent and obvious as you say. You won't, because you're full of poo poo. You could: Get a screengrab Watch it on youtube, quickly fast forward, and give us the video and a timecode Literally just describe a single scene in which it happens I normally frown on people saying "you're trolling" at the slightest hint of a contrarian take, but you're very obviously trolling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Did Superman fly in the opposite direction around the earth really loving fast because I swear we've gone back in time AGAIN to have this conversation AGAIN HEY SUPERMAN, KISS ME AND WIPE MY MEMORY PLZ
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:It would literally take you 3 minutes to find an example if it's as prevalent and obvious as you say. You won't, because you're full of poo poo. I'm not gonna do the first two, but for the third, how about all the times he rams Zod through buildings, or the time he blows up the gas station for no reason. I still dunno why people are getting so defensive about something that actually makes the movie interesting though. It really does seem like people want the movie to be worse than it is. Again, you can look at the scenes where Superman makes out with Lois in a cloud of corpsedust or BvS where he acts like a complete psychopath the whole movie and assume Snyder did that by accident because he's a crappy director, OR you can think he's actually trying to say something. Uncle Boogeyman fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Feb 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:the time he blows up the gas station for no reason. Thank you for being specific. You're wrong because it's not for no reason: he is pounding Zod in a red rage after he threatened (and was seconds from murdering) his mother, and flies into the gas station because he's not aware of where he's going. When the gas station explodes there is a specific establishing shot that shows no one is harmed (only an empty car is destroyed - Marvel style) He also flies through an empty silo on the way there. Anyway, I do agree it is interesting that Superman gets so angry he makes mistakes with bad consequences. You are saying he deliberately kills civilians, though - which is not the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Thank you for being specific. You're wrong because it's not for no reason: he is pounding Zod in a red rage after he threatened (and was seconds from murdering) his mother, and flies into the gas station because he's not aware of where he's going. Exactly, he's a crazy person. Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Anyway, I do agree it is interesting that Superman gets so angry he makes mistakes with bad consequences. You are saying he deliberately kills civilians, though - which is not the same thing. I wouldn't say it's deliberate, I'd say he just doesn't care (although by BvS this has sort of shifted, in that movie he genuinely seems to have developed a taste for extreme violence)
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Exactly, he's a crazy person. Trolling. "No reason" -> a good reason is given -> "he's crazy". You'll just flip and slide around like this because you have no desire to discuss. You'll spend 20 minutes writing posts but claim that 3 minutes to get a screenshot is just too much. A guy who tries to hold back and talk to Batman rationally in BvS is described as a guy with a taste for extreme violence. No thanks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
quote:Thank you for being specific. I figured he meant when the two of them crash through the train station from orbit, tbh. Megaman's Jockstrap posted:When the gas station explodes there is a specific establishing shot that shows no one is harmed (only an empty car is destroyed - Marvel style) When cars go from self-driving to self-aware they're going to be really pissed off at the 2010s decade in cinema. quote:A guy who tries to hold back and talk to Batman rationally in BvS is described as a guy with a taste for extreme violence. No thanks. He was pretty emotional really, especially considering he's impervious to everything he thinks Batman can do. RBA Starblade fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Feb 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Trolling. "No reason" -> a good reason is given -> "he's crazy". You'll just flip and slide around like this because you have no desire to discuss. You'll spend 20 minutes writing posts but claim that 3 minutes to get a screenshot is just too much. A guy who tries to hold back and talk to Batman rationally in BvS is described as a guy with a taste for extreme violence. No thanks. He holds back and talks to Batman rationally for like ten seconds so he can distract him and then he suckerpunches him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:When cars go from self-driving to self-aware they're going to be really pissed off at the 2010s decade in cinema. The Blues Brothers is going to be for them what Schindler's List is to us.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
So, in a nutshell, is the movie saying "Superman is excused from from the damage his struggle causes, because his struggle is just" or is it satirizing this same thing by using heavily loaded imagery of violence? Is it brave for showing the consequences of a justified violent struggle, or cowardly for shying away from a nonviolent alternative? I feel like that's the dichotomy we're struggling with here. OR: Boogeyman is trolling, in which case curses, tricked into having an opinion again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Shanty posted:So, in a nutshell, is the movie saying "Superman is excused from from the damage his struggle causes, because his struggle is just" or is it satirizing this same thing by using heavily loaded imagery of violence? The latter, if we're meeting Snyder halfway. quote:Is it brave for showing the consequences of a justified violent struggle, or cowardly for shying away from a nonviolent alternative? Neither.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Neither. If I amend that to "dope" instead of "brave" and "poo poo" instead of "cowardly" is that closer or is that whole violent/nonviolent approach just dead on arrival?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
Man of Steel is saying that there is no non-violent alternative to a guy like Zod. In a week where America has rediscovered the efficacy of punching Nazis, that's important.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
I just think the end result of the road Uncle Boogeyman is going down is basically that old Tactical Realism thing. You don't seem to be claiming Superman is shown to be enjoying the violence or whatever, so more and more it turns into "well here's what I would have done if I had superpowers and was fighting a genocidal maniac."
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
Shanty posted:If I amend that to "dope" instead of "brave" and "poo poo" instead of "cowardly" is that closer or is that whole violent/nonviolent approach just dead on arrival? I mean I don't think it does a terribly good job at either, but it definitely comes closer to the mark on the former than the latter. Basically, what my whole argument boils down to is this: if it's supposed to be a morally uncomplicated movie about a good guy beating up a bad guy because gosh darnit someone has to do it, I simply don't think it does a very good job at being that kind of movie. If it's trying to be a movie about a somewhat antisocial weirdo with mommy issues who causes a catastrophe that really means very little to him because, apart from his mom and the girl he has a crush on, people are as ants to him, well, I still don't think it's a great movie, but it's at least an interesting take on something we see a lot less frequently. Nobody's gonna hold a flamethrower to your mom's head and make you agree with me. If you want me to just be trolling, that's fine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
So there are literally only two people in the whole world that mean anything more to Clark than ants, but when he responds with anger over one of them being threatened it's because he has mommy issues? Interesting take.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
ungulateman posted:I suspect he's not being serious You're history's greatest monster.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Martman posted:So there are literally only two people in the whole world that mean anything more to Clark than ants, but when he responds with anger over one of them being threatened it's because he has mommy issues? Interesting take. I would say that one's mommy being basically his entire world qualifies as mommy issues, yes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Anyone wanna talk about how bad "Justice League: Dark" was?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I mean I don't think it does a terribly good job at either, but it definitely comes closer to the mark on the former than the latter. You realize you're pushing the movie into 2 crazy extremes. Either it's completely uncomplicated and Clark is a total saint, or it is dripping with uncomfortable pathos and this guy is basically a sociopathic murderer by proxy. Nobody in the thread is arguing the former.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:You realize you're pushing the movie into 2 crazy extremes. Either it's completely uncomplicated and Clark is a total saint, or it is dripping with uncomfortable pathos and this guy is basically a sociopathic murderer by proxy. Nobody in the thread is arguing the former. I wouldn't call the former a crazy extreme. I'd call it boring, which is the exact opposite of a crazy extreme. The latter might be extreme, but again, that makes it interesting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I would say that one's mommy being basically his entire world qualifies as mommy issues, yes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I'm sorry but if you want me to comb the battle of metropolis for screenshots I'm not gonna do that, can't I just assume you did in fact watch the movie? Remember a few days ago in the SW thread where I had to post multiple videos of AotC to establish the chronology of the Jedi attitude towards Dooku? You get no sympathy from me, rewatch a scene and tell us where to look at least 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
The "extreme" is that it's at the polar opposite end of your interpretation (Clark is Norman Bates with super powers except his mommy is alive) and it's "crazy" because nobody in their right mind would put forth either argument.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I would say that one's mommy being basically his entire world qualifies as mommy issues, yes. Sorry your mom hated you and you wouldn't do anything to defend her in a time of danger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Remember a few days ago in the SW thread where I had to post multiple videos of AotC to establish the chronology of the Jedi attitude towards Dooku? I do not, thank god. Vintersorg posted:Sorry your mom hated you and you wouldn't do anything to defend her in a time of danger. ...
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I mean I don't think it does a terribly good job at either, but it definitely comes closer to the mark on the former than the latter. Are these the only two options?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I do not, thank god. tlrd; the Jedi praise and defend him initially and don't realize he has fallen to the dark side until the end of the film, their conflict with him is political rather than spiritual. Oh boy aren't you glad we cleared that up?!
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Sorry your mom hated you and you wouldn't do anything to defend her in a time of danger. Counter-trolling is not the answer, my friend.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:Are these the only two options? If you have another one, you're welcome to present it. They're the two takes I came away with but I'm not going to insist they're the only ones. Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Counter-trolling is not the answer, my friend. I'm just glad he leapt forward to assure everyone that I'm not, in fact, the biggest weirdo in the thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
Like, Batman in BvS has mommy issues. He dreams about visiting her grave and seeing a giant bat monster pop out and attack him. He's plagued by visions of her face. Superman..... loves his mom and gets mad when someone threatens to kill her.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
I'm also pretty sure it's canon that Man of Steel Superman calls Lois "Mother" a la Mike Pence, I assume we'll have confirmation on this by the time Justice League rolls around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 18:37
|
|