Excuse me but it isn't just Metropolis and Smallville that were threatened. Did you forget that there were two world engines? I seem to recall Supes fighting a world engine in the Indian Ocean. Also, did you forget that Zod was broadcasting his message across the whole world in different languages? At this point you sound like a troll.
Last point is that he does make the world a better place as prior to zod showing up he has been saving lives up and down America.
I think your own ignorance is what ruined the movie for you. It may not be perfect but you fault it in a way that clearly skates over what happened throughout the movie.
A wish is never free.
Please don't call me a troll because you disagree with my opinion.
I addressed those points in that the beginning of the movie shows him saving people, but after that it pretty much stops. And he saved fewer than the millions that died in Zod's attack. (I did like the beginning where he saves the people and the early scenes on Krypton though.) I just didn't get to elaborate fully because of the word limit.
And also, as I said, Zod broadcasting his message around the world happened in a fairly short scene, and the rest of the movie just had the viewer see Metropolis and Smallville, with no people shown in the Indian Ocean because it's the freaking Indian Ocean.
And also, as I said, the relentless action got boring and trite for me. I was pretty much waiting for the movie to end because of how long it dragged on.
"Oh great! Let's pile up all the useless cats and hope a tree falls on them!"
He saved the entire human race by destroying the World Engine, and again when he killed Zod. Sure, he didn't save everyone due to Zod's forces being multiple people all with Superman's powers, but to say that more people died than Superman saved is utter nonsense. I don't think your a troll, just mistaken.
If Superman hadn't been sent to Earth, Zod wouldn't have gone there. (He explicitly says such.)
Therefore, even though Zod's arrival wasn't Superman's fault, Superman really wasn't making the world a better place, despite what the movie says.
"Oh great! Let's pile up all the useless cats and hope a tree falls on them!"
^ The movie doesn't say that he does, it says that he eventually will.
Show Dont Tell. Yes, he may make Earth a better place in some future time, but my point is that the movie tries to portray Superman being on Earth as positive, but all the problems of the movie happened because Superman was on Earth. So Superman saved a bunch of offscreen people that we don't care about because we only see them in a short montage when Zod announces his presence, while millions of people in Metropolis die because Superman was on Earth.
I'm judging the movie as one that stands alone on its own merits, and it doesn't succeed.
Really, as I said before, they should have used another villain for the beginning, or at least changed up Zod's reason for being on Earth. If Zod found Earth because of the ship that crashed there 20000 years ago, without knowing about Kal-el being there, then decided to terraform it only for Superman to reveal himself and stop it, that would mean that Superman was saving the Earth from something that would have otherwise destroyed it. If someone like Darkseid decided to attack the Earth for some reason and Superman stopped him, Superman would be saving the Earth from something that would otherwise destroy it. But instead, he goes to Earth, gets followed, and millions end up dead. Sure, he prevented the deaths of billions by punching aliens and their technology, but we don't see him physically saving those people, which makes for a much less satisfying movie.
You know, they could alternatively have chosen to have a smaller scale as well, which would have been beneficial probably.
But anyway, the big things that caused me to dislike the movie were:
- Even though the movie says that the Earth is better because of Superman's presence, the Earth is only in danger because of Superman's presence. "Proving himself" feels kind of hollow when he caused the problem in the first place. - The second half of the movie was mostly mindless and repetitive action sequences that all look exactly the same and drag on for far too long. - The writers decided to focus on Superman punching stuff to save the day, without having scenes of him saving people from the danger. This makes the movie fail at a personal level because Superman feels more like a weapon pointed at the bad guys and less like a hero who wants to save people. - There was little character development for Superman after he put on the suit. The biggest bit of character growth in the movie (Superman being so traumatized after killing Zod that he comes up with his code against killing) was cheesy and not subtle in the least.
"Oh great! Let's pile up all the useless cats and hope a tree falls on them!"
Superman has no culpability for bringing Zod to Earth, man. What you're arguing is like blaming a person with an infectious disease for spreading that disease when they don't even know they have it. It doesn't make sense. It simply does not matter that Superman is part of why Zod comes to earth.
Author of The Second Coming (NGE) and The Coin (Haruhi).
Yes it does matter, and no I'm not blaming Superman.
I'm saying that the movie tries to say that the Earth is better off because Jor-el sent Superman there. However, Zod only came to Earth because Superman was there, and Zod caused the deaths of millions.
Therefore, even though Superman is blameless in bringing Zod, his presence on Earth caused the deaths of millions of people, meaning that the Earth isn't better off with Superman there. That directly contradicts the movie, and is a flaw.
"Oh great! Let's pile up all the useless cats and hope a tree falls on them!"
I still think you're putting forth a weak argument, in part because you're phrasing the movie's theme in a way that artificially opens up that loophole. Would the characters ask Superman to leave once the battle with Zod is over? Absolutely not. They have seen the good he can do. There is no God-given one-sentence statement of what the film is about, and only your very, very narrow condensing of its themes to one particular sentence enables the criticism you're making. You're saying after the movie Earth hasn't been better off due to Superman's mere presence, and that may be true, but it is better off for his actions. Are you really trying to tell me you think his mere presence more important for the impact of the movie than his actions?
It also seems very short-sighted to me to judge the state of the world based on how the world is after Zod. Remember Jor-El's words: Mankind will stumble and fall, but in time, humanity will accomplish wonders, thanks in part to Superman's influence and efforts. You cannot seriously doubt that he will have a substantial positive effect on the world when all is said and done. Here, he's just beginning.
And is this "really" what the movie intends to impart in the first place? Much stronger are the themes of choosing one's heritage and legacy. While Clark rejects Jonathan's pessimism, he also chooses humanity as being primary over his Kryptonian heritage. Human lives matter more than the mere possibility of being able to spawn new Kryptonian ones. To me, the prospect of what Superman will do for humanity is a very secondary consideration (in terms of focus in the movie) compared to what he chooses to make of himself as a person, as a man. It is very Batman Begins-esque (not a surprise with Nolan involved). In that way, yes, it isn't exactly what you might expect from a Superman movie.
Author of The Second Coming (NGE) and The Coin (Haruhi).
Plus, the whole "the supervillain exists because of the hero" is not just in Mo S.
In The Dark Knight, Batman is the reason the mob was desperate enough to give the Joker the resources needed for Joker to cause all thise problems.
In The Dark Knight Rises, Batman "killing" Ras Al Ghul is the reason why Bane and Talia want to destroy Gotham (both to fulfill what Ras Al Ghul wanted and for revenge).
In Iron Man, Iron Man's designs is the reason Obediah Stane gets his Iron Monger suit.
In The Incredible Hulk, the Hulk is where Blonsky gets the formula to transform into the Abomination.
In Thor, Thor's existence is the reason why Loki was jealous and wanted to do all those evil acts.
In Iron Man 2, Iron Man's suits are the reason why Hammer Industries took in Vanko which gave him the ability to make those drones and his suit.
In The Avengers, SHIELD is the reason why the Tesseract is on Earth, and the events of the Avengers are caused by Loki wanting the Tesseract.
Hell, even in the original Superman movies, this aspect exists.
In Superman II, Superman throwing a nuke (either from Lex Luthor or from terrorists depending on the cut) into space is what frees General Zod to wreck havoc on Earth.
In all these movies, if the hero didn't exist (or simply stopped existing after the first movie in the case of Batman), the villains wouldn't exist either. Criticizing Mo S for this and not others is hypocritical.
Leave a Comment:
Too much super, not enough hero (Spoilers)
People go to superhero movies because they want to watch people with great power accept the responsibility of saving and inspiring others. I was excited for this movie because the trailer promised that we would see Clark Kent grow from outcast to Superman. However, instead of seeing his character develop once he gets the suit and decides to be a hero, he has to immediately fight Zod and his cronies. It's like skipping the lessons and starting with the tests, and rather predictably it causes Superman and his new movie to fail spectacularly.
If Zod wins, then the entire human race is wiped out. However, it's pretty much impossible for us humans to actually comprehend the scope of our world, so audience members need to be shown what's at stake before they care about it. You can have Doctor Doom explain that he just wiped out Australia, but it will only elicit a shrug if Australia never appeared onscreen because it's still there in real life. That's one of the reasons this movie fails: other than a quick montage when Zod reveals to everyone that aliens exist, the only places we see threatened are Metropolis and Smallville. And while Superman is off punching evil alien technology so that he can save all the people we don't see, the people we do see are dying horribly.
A building falls onto people because Superman isn't there to catch it. Rubble crushes people Superman isn't there to stop it. People are stuck in the wreckage because Superman isn't there to help them. Essentially, all the saving was done away with after the first half hour. Instead, we are bogged down with repetitive action sequences that greatly outlive their welcome. Realism be damned, I go to movies to enjoy myself, and action without relent gets incredibly tiresome. The writers chose to make so much action, when they could have instead used the time to expand the character development.
The movie also fails in showing us that Superman makes the world a better place. Zod says that he's only on Earth because that's where Superman was sent. If he had come because of the crashed ship and stumbled upon Superman, or if some other villain had come, it would mean that Superman was stopping a threat that would otherwise destroy the world. But instead, it just makes everything indirectly his fault.
So I found the movie pretty bad, but you can go see it if you want to.