"He brought it on himself" isn't exactly what Pa would promote, would it? If that's the case, why not let villains perish at the devices of their own making?!
First of all, Pa Kent in the 70's Superman films was pretty much a different character than the Pa Kent in Man Of Steel -- and I think I've already expressed elsewhere how 'off-character' I thought the MOS version was.
Secondly, allowing a bully to hurt his hand through his own mischief is not the same thing as allowing villains to perish. They might do so anyway as a result of their own machinations, but that's not the same as allowing them to.
If you go looking to pick a fight (which Kent was), you're expecting fists to fly. If you're heavily stacking the deck in your favor to win, you're expecting the other guy to get hurt.
Kent went to that truck stop with the clear motive to confront Rocky. In MoS, he didn't go to work at the truck stop that day with the intent of getting into a fight.
Kent went to that truck stop with the clear motive to confront Rocky. In MoS, he didn't go to work at the truck stop that day with the intent of getting into a fight.
You don't work in a bar and then get mad when someone spills a beer on you... :)
Clark's hurt pride is really something to behold in MoS, isn't it?
Kent went to that truck stop with the clear motive to confront Rocky. In MoS, he didn't go to work at the truck stop that day with the intent of getting into a fight.
You don't work in a bar and then get mad when someone spills a beer on you... :)
Clark's hurt pride is really something to behold in MoS, isn't it?
You wouldn't get mad at an unruly patron dumping beer on you? You'd just turn the other cheek?
Yup. Fortunately, in MoS he only damaged an object & not the person.
I find it amusing that even though Clark in Superman II goads Rocky into taking a punch at him, Rocky clearly could have walked away but he chose to harm Clark instead and he wound up injuring himself. 'Maybe' he broke his hand, maybe he didn't. People have punched solid walls and not crippled themselves. Google it.
Then the bar scene in MoS should have been a good example of humility for Clark to simply walk away from a bully, but he chose instead to punish him by destroying the man's $100K truck AND his livelihood in the dark of night. A mere foretelling of how he treats bullies I guess. The damage, however, was clearly obvious in this scene.
Look at that damage. You think sliding a man into a pinball machine is worse than picking up his expensive work vehicle and repeatedly smashing it to vent some Kryptonian frustrations or revenge? That is a very ugly scene. Wonder if they cut out the scene were he left the driver some cash "for the damages"?
Are both scenes acts of illegality? Making a fool out of a bully without throwing a punch? Or destroying a fool's $100,000.00 work vehicle out of spite? One of those is definitely felonious.
Not bad for a guy who also murders the bad guy at the end and even destroy a drone because he doesn’t want the government to know where he lives - easily $5 million+ in government property.
Whew. Murders the bad guy. How many people has tony stark killed at this point in the MCU? How many people did Hulk kill rampaging through the city? How many did Scarlett Witch actually murder before she joined SHIELD? How many people did the heroes kill in GoTG ( a lot)?
Ever second the fight went on, more people died. I suppose some would say that they should have written it so that Superman just over powers him and ends it peacefully. Obviously he was trying, and failing. It's not murder to stop someone who is responsible for thousands of deaths and is causing more every minute.
It's not. Stop saying it is. If you didn't like the movie, that's cool. I did, but I can say objectively I can see how some wouldn't. But this overwrought hyperbole isn't necessary. It wasn't necessary two years ago and surprise, it's not necessary now.
I find it amusing that even though Clark in Superman II goads Rocky into taking a punch at him, Rocky clearly could have walked away but he chose to harm Clark instead and he wound up injuring himself. 'Maybe' he broke his hand, maybe he didn't. People have punched solid walls and not crippled themselves. Google it.
Then the bar scene in MoS should have been a good example of humility for Clark to simply walk away from a bully, but he chose instead to punish him by destroying the man's $100K truck AND his livelihood in the dark of night. A mere foretelling of how he treats bullies I guess. The damage, however, was clearly obvious in this scene.
Look at that damage. You think sliding a man into a pinball machine is worse than picking up his expensive work vehicle and repeatedly smashing it to vent some Kryptonian frustrations or revenge? That is a very ugly scene. Wonder if they cut out the scene were he left the driver some cash "for the damages"?
Are both scenes acts of illegality? Making a fool out of a bully without throwing a punch? Or destroying a fool's $100,000.00 work vehicle out of spite? One of those is definitely felonious.
Not bad for a guy who also murders the bad guy at the end and even destroy a drone because he doesn’t want the government to know where he lives - easily $5 million+ in government property.
You're still going to circle back to livelihoods? Again, Rocky's livelihood wasn't jeopardized at all? Even with an injured hand (at the minimum) & any injuries sustained when he was slid into that pinball machine, nothing about his livelihood was jeopardized?
What about the owner of the diner? Sure he's getting cash for the damages...but now he's opened to the lawsuit by Rocky & reduction of business from the reputation of fights. Their livelihood is clearly in jeopardy.
The bar scene in MoS could have easily been a moment of humility...but so was the one with Rocky. Kent didn't have to return to pick that fight, knowing a hothead like Rocky was clearly going to at least take a swing & ultimately injuring himself in some capacity.
And if you're going to reference Zod's death, at least reference it correctly. There was no premeditation, hence its not murder. Kent killed Zod. It's manslaughter, clearly a felony, but not murder.
And Superman killed Zod in Superman 2, & caused the deaths of the other two criminals. You can't quibble about Zod's death in MoS, then gloss over his crippling & death in Superman 2.
Whew. Murders the bad guy. How many people has tony stark killed at this point in the MCU? How many people did Hulk kill rampaging through the city? How many did Scarlett Witch actually murder before she joined SHIELD? How many people did the heroes kill in GoTG ( a lot)?
Ever second the fight went on, more people died. I suppose some would say that they should have written it so that Superman just over powers him and ends it peacefully. Obviously he was trying, and failing. It's not murder to stop someone who is responsible for thousands of deaths and is causing more every minute.
It's not. Stop saying it is. If you didn't like the movie, that's cool. I did, but I can say objectively I can see how some wouldn't. But this overwrought hyperbole isn't necessary. It wasn't necessary two years ago and surprise, it's not necessary now.
I even recall Cap killing a guy with a knife to the back in First Avenger. Plus, technically, since Zod is an alien, the Avengers killed a slew of the alien Chitari army. Why does that get a pass when Zod's death doesn't?
You're still going to circle back to livelihoods? Again, Rocky's livelihood wasn't jeopardized at all? Even with an injured hand (at the minimum) & any injuries sustained when he was slid into that pinball machine, nothing about his livelihood was jeopardized?
What about the owner of the diner? Sure he's getting cash for the damages...but now he's opened to the lawsuit by Rocky & reduction of business from the reputation of fights. Their livelihood is clearly in jeopardy.
The bar scene in MoS could have easily been a moment of humility...but so was the one with Rocky. Kent didn't have to return to pick that fight, knowing a hothead like Rocky was clearly going to at least take a swing & ultimately injuring himself in some capacity.
And if you're going to reference Zod's death, at least reference it correctly. There was no premeditation, hence its not murder. Kent killed Zod. It's manslaughter, clearly a felony, but not murder.
And Superman killed Zod in Superman 2, & caused the deaths of the other two criminals. You can't quibble about Zod's death in MoS, then gloss over his crippling & death in Superman 2.
Since I saw the cops take away Zod and cohorts in the televised cut of the movie, I can't concede those points. They did not die to me.
While this conversation has been going on, I've been hard at work on my giant fanfic that retells the entire Donner/Singer saga from Rocky's point of view.
And if you're going to reference Zod's death, at least reference it correctly. There was no premeditation, hence its not murder. Kent killed Zod. It's manslaughter, clearly a felony, but not murder.
And Superman killed Zod in Superman 2, & caused the deaths of the other two criminals. You can't quibble about Zod's death in MoS, then gloss over his crippling & death in Superman 2.
Since I saw the cops take away Zod and cohorts in the televised cut of the movie, I can't concede those points. They did not die to me.
Despite my reluctance to encourage this rather tedious debate, I'll point out that if you're really going to reference it correctly, you should call it voluntary manslaughter, although depending on which state's definition you go by, you could make a case for second degree murder. ;)
You're still going to circle back to livelihoods? Again, Rocky's livelihood wasn't jeopardized at all? Even with an injured hand (at the minimum) & any injuries sustained when he was slid into that pinball machine, nothing about his livelihood was jeopardized?
What about the owner of the diner? Sure he's getting cash for the damages...but now he's opened to the lawsuit by Rocky & reduction of business from the reputation of fights. Their livelihood is clearly in jeopardy.
The bar scene in MoS could have easily been a moment of humility...but so was the one with Rocky. Kent didn't have to return to pick that fight, knowing a hothead like Rocky was clearly going to at least take a swing & ultimately injuring himself in some capacity.
And if you're going to reference Zod's death, at least reference it correctly. There was no premeditation, hence its not murder. Kent killed Zod. It's manslaughter, clearly a felony, but not murder.
And Superman killed Zod in Superman 2, & caused the deaths of the other two criminals. You can't quibble about Zod's death in MoS, then gloss over his crippling & death in Superman 2.
Since I saw the cops take away Zod and cohorts in the televised cut of the movie, I can't concede those points. They did not die to me.
There's no proof in MoS the trucker's livelihood was in jeopardy.
IF you want to buy that the trio continued to fall until "somehow" they were apprehended (also making the Fortress of Solitude no longer secret), Kent still crippled Zod's hand. There was bending, there was cracking sounds, there was clear indication of him crippling a bad guy...I wonder when Pa got around to stating that was okay?
M
And I saw Moira be addressed by Charles' voice as a post credit scene in X3, hence his explained return in the post-credit scene of The Wolverine.
While this conversation has been going on, I've been hard at work on my giant fanfic that retells the entire Donner/Singer saga from Rocky's point of view.
Is this going to be the next Marvels? If you find a publisher, I can't wait to see Alex Ross make truck driving look epic.
My objection to the truck-destroying scene is different than those raised (and raised and raised) above.
It is a lazily-written, passive-aggressive, petty act which serves to make Clark/Superman appear cowardly, weak and unadmirable.
A microcosm of the film's flaws, in other words.
Possibly. Could also be a way to illustrate that the Kents taught him to use his abilities in secret. Was it admirable to let his pride suffer & want "paybacks"? Nope.
Though, as I've mentioned before: Kent is biologically an alien, but he was raised human. He's susceptible to the same character foibles as the rest of us.
I've never been a fan of the "that's passive aggressive, not heroic, not admirable" fan. How many times has Parker used his abilities or webbing to be "passive aggressive" against bully Flash Thompson? Or JJJ?
Are these admirable qualities for heroes? Nope. Is it uncommon for superheroes to misuse their abilities for selfish reason? Yup. It's a human quality...even for those only raised human.
My objection to the truck-destroying scene is different than those raised (and raised and raised) above.
It is a lazily-written, passive-aggressive, petty act which serves to make Clark/Superman appear cowardly, weak and unadmirable.
A microcosm of the film's flaws, in other words.
Possibly. Could also be a way to illustrate that the Kents taught him to use his abilities in secret. Was it admirable to let his pride suffer & want "paybacks"? Nope.
Though, as I've mentioned before: Kent is biologically an alien, but he was raised human. He's susceptible to the same character foibles as the rest of us.
I've never been a fan of the "that's passive aggressive, not heroic, not admirable" fan. How many times has Parker used his abilities or webbing to be "passive aggressive" against bully Flash Thompson? Or JJJ?
Are these admirable qualities for heroes? Nope. Is it uncommon for superheroes to misuse their abilities for selfish reason? Yup. It's a human quality...even for those only raised human.
M
Still makes him look petty, weak and un-admirable.
I will contend to my grave that diminishing Superman in order to make him "more relatable" takes away the essence of what makes him Superman.
My objection to the truck-destroying scene is different than those raised (and raised and raised) above.
It is a lazily-written, passive-aggressive, petty act which serves to make Clark/Superman appear cowardly, weak and unadmirable.
A microcosm of the film's flaws, in other words.
Possibly. Could also be a way to illustrate that the Kents taught him to use his abilities in secret. Was it admirable to let his pride suffer & want "paybacks"? Nope.
Though, as I've mentioned before: Kent is biologically an alien, but he was raised human. He's susceptible to the same character foibles as the rest of us.
I've never been a fan of the "that's passive aggressive, not heroic, not admirable" fan. How many times has Parker used his abilities or webbing to be "passive aggressive" against bully Flash Thompson? Or JJJ?
Are these admirable qualities for heroes? Nope. Is it uncommon for superheroes to misuse their abilities for selfish reason? Yup. It's a human quality...even for those only raised human.
M
Still makes him look petty, weak and un-admirable.
I will contend to my grave that diminishing Superman in order to make him "more relatable" takes away the essence of what makes him Superman.
That's groovy. I'll continue to contest that Kent isn't interesting until he's relatable.
The trailers for batman V. Superman look like they were written and directed by Lex Luthor. (Superman should be feared and destroyed because his godlike powers threaten the dominance of humanity in this planet. Kill him and reassert human control, under the natural alpha male leadership of President Luthor, naturally). I hate to see Snyder take out his God Issues or Daddy issues or whatever the hell it is on superman. Supes needs to be a big blue boyscout because if he isn't that character get real dark real quick.
Yup. Not one single person I've seen on various sites has liked it. It's terrible. Look at supermans arms. One is three inches shorter than the other and one hand is all effed up. Who OK'd this?
Comments
Kent went to that truck stop with the clear motive to confront Rocky. In MoS, he didn't go to work at the truck stop that day with the intent of getting into a fight.
M
Clark's hurt pride is really something to behold in MoS, isn't it?
Yup. Fortunately, in MoS he only damaged an object & not the person.
M
Then the bar scene in MoS should have been a good example of humility for Clark to simply walk away from a bully, but he chose instead to punish him by destroying the man's $100K truck AND his livelihood in the dark of night. A mere foretelling of how he treats bullies I guess. The damage, however, was clearly obvious in this scene.
Look at that damage. You think sliding a man into a pinball machine is worse than picking up his expensive work vehicle and repeatedly smashing it to vent some Kryptonian frustrations or revenge? That is a very ugly scene. Wonder if they cut out the scene were he left the driver some cash "for the damages"?
Are both scenes acts of illegality? Making a fool out of a bully without throwing a punch? Or destroying a fool's $100,000.00 work vehicle out of spite? One of those is definitely felonious.
Not bad for a guy who also murders the bad guy at the end and even destroy a drone because he doesn’t want the government to know where he lives - easily $5 million+ in government property.
Ever second the fight went on, more people died. I suppose some would say that they should have written it so that Superman just over powers him and ends it peacefully. Obviously he was trying, and failing. It's not murder to stop someone who is responsible for thousands of deaths and is causing more every minute.
It's not. Stop saying it is. If you didn't like the movie, that's cool. I did, but I can say objectively I can see how some wouldn't. But this overwrought hyperbole isn't necessary. It wasn't necessary two years ago and surprise, it's not necessary now.
@Matt and I are having fun! And we're keeping it in the right thread.
What about the owner of the diner? Sure he's getting cash for the damages...but now he's opened to the lawsuit by Rocky & reduction of business from the reputation of fights. Their livelihood is clearly in jeopardy.
The bar scene in MoS could have easily been a moment of humility...but so was the one with Rocky. Kent didn't have to return to pick that fight, knowing a hothead like Rocky was clearly going to at least take a swing & ultimately injuring himself in some capacity.
And if you're going to reference Zod's death, at least reference it correctly. There was no premeditation, hence its not murder. Kent killed Zod. It's manslaughter, clearly a felony, but not murder.
And Superman killed Zod in Superman 2, & caused the deaths of the other two criminals. You can't quibble about Zod's death in MoS, then gloss over his crippling & death in Superman 2.
M
M
IF you want to buy that the trio continued to fall until "somehow" they were apprehended (also making the Fortress of Solitude no longer secret), Kent still crippled Zod's hand. There was bending, there was cracking sounds, there was clear indication of him crippling a bad guy...I wonder when Pa got around to stating that was okay?
M
And I saw Moira be addressed by Charles' voice as a post credit scene in X3, hence his explained return in the post-credit scene of The Wolverine.
M
It is a lazily-written, passive-aggressive, petty act which serves to make Clark/Superman appear cowardly, weak and unadmirable.
A microcosm of the film's flaws, in other words.
Though, as I've mentioned before: Kent is biologically an alien, but he was raised human. He's susceptible to the same character foibles as the rest of us.
I've never been a fan of the "that's passive aggressive, not heroic, not admirable" fan. How many times has Parker used his abilities or webbing to be "passive aggressive" against bully Flash Thompson? Or JJJ?
Are these admirable qualities for heroes? Nope. Is it uncommon for superheroes to misuse their abilities for selfish reason? Yup. It's a human quality...even for those only raised human.
M
I will contend to my grave that diminishing Superman in order to make him "more relatable" takes away the essence of what makes him Superman.
HA!
i'm assuming no one in the Snyder-verse will be calling Superman by his nickname ... BOY SCOUT
M
M
Why is Batman so wide? Why does he have no neck? Why is his shoulder bigger than Superman's head? It looks tuuuurible