I always accepted the "no kill" policy of superheroes as simply the way they had to operate as individuals fighting crime but without any legal authority to do so.
Spider-Man leaving criminals tied up in webbing for the police to apprehend is one thing. If he starts leaving a trail of dead Electros, Mysterios, etc, that's quite another.
Of course, a lot of it simply sprung from cooperating with the comics code, but it does make sense in terms of story, too.
I suppose killing monsters or aliens might fall outside of current laws, robots would just be property damage, and animals - that would vary based on situations. Killing an attacking dog is going to be different than murdering someone's pet.
I wonder which DC villain they'll be forced by dire circumstances to kill? And which team member will wind up doing it?
Hey, @Chuck_Melville was that last post sarcasm or or just a low blow directed at a movie that hasn't even been cast/written/shot yet?
It's a vote of 'No Confidence', based on past performance, specifically Man Of Steel. I could be pleasantly surprised, but at this stage I don't hold much hope. We'll see what happens.
I always accepted the "no kill" policy of superheroes as simply the way they had to operate as individuals fighting crime but without any legal authority to do so.
Spider-Man leaving criminals tied up in webbing for the police to apprehend is one thing. If he starts leaving a trail of dead Electros, Mysterios, etc, that's quite another.
Of course, a lot of it simply sprung from cooperating with the comics code, but it does make sense in terms of story, too.
A lot of that attitude sprung from years before the CCA (Comics Code Authority) was ever established. Several publishers, DC in particular, established their own codes of what was and what wasn't acceptable during their formative years.
I think the no killing rule is part of what establishes a hero's ethic, a sense that he is above simple 'street justice' and is attempting to be a source of inspiration, to reach for higher standards.
I wonder which DC villain they'll be forced by dire circumstances to kill? And which team member will wind up doing it?
Hey, @Chuck_Melville was that last post sarcasm or or just a low blow directed at a movie that hasn't even been cast/written/shot yet?
It's a vote of 'No Confidence', based on past performance, specifically Man Of Steel. I could be pleasantly surprised, but at this stage I don't hold much hope. We'll see what happens.
As the guy that declared MoS to be "okay" with a lot of problems (non-heroic Superman and Pa Kent NOT instilling the moral compass in Clark being chief among them), I think that making the sequel a shoe-horned JLA film is a bad idea.
(Please note, I'm not saying the film is destined to be bad before it is even finished, just that the concept is akin to setting off fireworks indoors - there is a possibility of amazing, but from the outset, disaster seems FAR more likely.)
Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Cyborg, rumors of others... and only one establishing film in this "universe." You remember in the older Batman series of films (pre-Nolan) how they kept adding more and more characters to the films (mostly villains) until it felt like Batman had less screen time than any of them? The idea of this movie feels more like that than it does The Avengers.
I think what bothers me most, though, is that I don't care about this Superman yet. After the first film, he's there, yeah... but they didn't really establish any sort of emotional rapport with me as an audience member for the character. I think I would have benefitted from another *Superman* film, instead of one that looks like it is going to divide its time among at least four heroes.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe all the other heroes will just be cameos (which, I'd imagine, would tick off an entire other section of the audience). I don't know, but with every additional character announced, my trepidation for this film's potential grows.
I liked Watchmen for the most part. 300 put me to sleep. If all the scenes had run in normal time with no slow motion, I think the movie would have clocked in under 30 minutes.
The ONLY film from Zack Snyder I really liked was "Dawn of the Dead". 300 was pretty cool looking, and I felt that Watchmen missed the mark. It was a lot of great spectacle, but the characters were under-developed to say the least. He's excellent at giving the audience arresting visuals, and you can tell he appreciates the language of comic-book storytelling by how often he puts living splash pages on the silver screen. But Zack Snyder has never been able to capture real emotions on that screen, at least not from where I sit. It's all surface and without depth. And why does he have to fetishize every female in every movie he makes?
Is DC going to use Snyder for EVERY comic book movie they're planning. Oh my, I hope not.
Is DC going to use Snyder for EVERY comic book movie they're planning. Oh my, I hope not.
That was my first reaction. I don't have much love or hate for Snyder, but I'd prefer to see different takes on the material.
He seems to be the equivalent of most of the "creators" ("regurgitators"?) working on DC comics currently as well. Just spit out a reasonably competent product without imparting any of your personal vision on it.
The ONLY film from Zack Snyder I really liked was "Dawn of the Dead". 300 was pretty cool looking, and I felt that Watchmen missed the mark. It was a lot of great spectacle, but the characters were under-developed to say the least. He's excellent at giving the audience arresting visuals, and you can tell he appreciates the language of comic-book storytelling by how often he puts living splash pages on the silver screen. But Zack Snyder has never been able to capture real emotions on that screen, at least not from where I sit. It's all surface and without depth. And why does he have to fetishize every female in every movie he makes?
Is DC going to use Snyder for EVERY comic book movie they're planning. Oh my, I hope not.
I am on the fence about your character development in Watchmen. Having read the book, I can see there's more. On the other hand, I know people (including my wife) who've never read the book & could it very entertaining. In fact, its one of my wife's comic book movies.
The filmic Watchmen tries to deconstruct notions of the sexualized woman by being overt about this kind of sexual construction, changing Laurie's costume from a short black skirt and yellow gauze material in the graphic novel to a seemingly intertextual gloss of Comic Bad Girl dominatrix garb through her latex and thigh-high boots. However, though it seeks to hybridize the two, Snyder's Watchmen loses a clear sense of where postmodern irony is intended and where simple objectification comes into play.
Furthermore, for me, Watchmen suffered in the areas of character development, acting, and pacing, but more disappointingly, the combination of music, imagery and dialogue felt lazy and uninspired. The action scenes were unoriginal, slowed-down sped-up Matrix-esque shots that are no longer considered edgy and that sex scene set to "Hallelujah" was awkward and cringe-worthy. I'm not saying the film didn't have its merits, but I don't rate it very highly.
I have NOT seen the "ultimate cut" version of the movie, which I hear clocks in around 3.5 hours, so maybe the pacing and character development that I found wanting in the theatrical release shows up there, but I'm not willing to invest that much time trying to see if Snyder improved it any after the fact.
Way late on this one. Just saw it on BR and didn't like most of the film. Didn't care about any of the characters and the actor who played Superman can't act. Also, he's juiced up on steroids. Most of the women I know hate that look. Amy Adams was a terrible choice. The whole film was a "I'm sorry we didn't include a lot of fighting in Superman Returns so here's what you asked for. Fighting, fighting and more fighting." Disappointing as Zack Snyder's take on Watchmen was amazing. I'll take Superman Returns any day for it's character development and humanity. Then again I prefer the first Hulk movie by Ang Lee over the second one where we got more fighting, fighting and more fighting. I hope Singer's next X-Men flick retains the character development found in Superman Returns but I doubt it. The studio, and viewing audience, want fighting over any semblance of a coherent story and in order to get more work, Singer will have to deliver what they want.
I normally accuse every actor of juicing. But not this time. They have him lots of extra time to get ready and made sure his trainer was clean because it's superman
I wonder which DC villain they'll be forced by dire circumstances to kill? And which team member will wind up doing it?
Hey, @Chuck_Melville was that last post sarcasm or or just a low blow directed at a movie that hasn't even been cast/written/shot yet?
It's a vote of 'No Confidence', based on past performance, specifically Man Of Steel. I could be pleasantly surprised, but at this stage I don't hold much hope. We'll see what happens.
Have you changed your opinion on this movie? Didn't you rate it four stars out of five when it first came out, after saying before it's release that it was starting with a negative 1 star because of the costume?
I wonder which DC villain they'll be forced by dire circumstances to kill? And which team member will wind up doing it?
Hey, @Chuck_Melville was that last post sarcasm or or just a low blow directed at a movie that hasn't even been cast/written/shot yet?
It's a vote of 'No Confidence', based on past performance, specifically Man Of Steel. I could be pleasantly surprised, but at this stage I don't hold much hope. We'll see what happens.
Have you changed your opinion on this movie? Didn't you rate it four stars out of five when it first came out, after saying before it's release that it was starting with a negative 1 star because of the costume?
I think I deducted a star after further deliberation and debate. There was a good deal I liked, and a good deal I didn't like. The killing of Zod was the tipping point for me; I think the scene was contrived and unconvincing - during the whole battle, I kept seeing things that Superman should have done -- could have done -- and would have done under a better writer. It was there only to convince newer fans that Superman wasn't a boy scout and that he would, in fact, kill.
And that's what worries me most about future films, that they will pander to this new mentality, that they will lower the heroic standard in order to garner as many ticket buyers as possible. Look at the reaction of fans who feel that Captain America should have participated in more killing during the Winter Soldier film. The heroes will be less inspirational as the studios tinker with them in order to grab the biggest audiences.
I wonder which DC villain they'll be forced by dire circumstances to kill? And which team member will wind up doing it?
Hey, @Chuck_Melville was that last post sarcasm or or just a low blow directed at a movie that hasn't even been cast/written/shot yet?
It's a vote of 'No Confidence', based on past performance, specifically Man Of Steel. I could be pleasantly surprised, but at this stage I don't hold much hope. We'll see what happens.
Have you changed your opinion on this movie? Didn't you rate it four stars out of five when it first came out, after saying before it's release that it was starting with a negative 1 star because of the costume?
I think I deducted a star after further deliberation and debate. There was a good deal I liked, and a good deal I didn't like. The killing of Zod was the tipping point for me; I think the scene was contrived and unconvincing - during the whole battle, I kept seeing things that Superman should have done -- could have done -- and would have done under a better writer. It was there only to convince newer fans that Superman wasn't a boy scout and that he would, in fact, kill.
And that's what worries me most about future films, that they will pander to this new mentality, that they will lower the heroic standard in order to garner as many ticket buyers as possible. Look at the reaction of fans who feel that Captain America should have participated in more killing during the Winter Soldier film. The heroes will be less inspirational as the studios tinker with them in order to grab the biggest audiences.
I still disagree with the notion Kent that would've 'found' another way because he's Superman. I rank that falicy up there with 'because I said so' as a reason. If this was Man of Steel 3, then maybe, but he's never been in a fight before. And by Superman II, Kent killed Zod & set up the other 2 for their deaths (until I see the scene of where they landed, they died) & even smirked afterward.
This is actually the first I've heard any mention of complaints Rogers didn't kill in Winter Soldier.
I wonder which DC villain they'll be forced by dire circumstances to kill? And which team member will wind up doing it?
Hey, @Chuck_Melville was that last post sarcasm or or just a low blow directed at a movie that hasn't even been cast/written/shot yet?
It's a vote of 'No Confidence', based on past performance, specifically Man Of Steel. I could be pleasantly surprised, but at this stage I don't hold much hope. We'll see what happens.
Have you changed your opinion on this movie? Didn't you rate it four stars out of five when it first came out, after saying before it's release that it was starting with a negative 1 star because of the costume?
I think I deducted a star after further deliberation and debate. There was a good deal I liked, and a good deal I didn't like. The killing of Zod was the tipping point for me; I think the scene was contrived and unconvincing - during the whole battle, I kept seeing things that Superman should have done -- could have done -- and would have done under a better writer. It was there only to convince newer fans that Superman wasn't a boy scout and that he would, in fact, kill.
And that's what worries me most about future films, that they will pander to this new mentality, that they will lower the heroic standard in order to garner as many ticket buyers as possible. Look at the reaction of fans who feel that Captain America should have participated in more killing during the Winter Soldier film. The heroes will be less inspirational as the studios tinker with them in order to grab the biggest audiences.
Well. That's pretty favorable to me. I am worried they are giving Snyder sooooo much leverage. I like him. I do. I've liked all of his movies, even Sucker Punch, I liked Man of Steel and am not at all worried about the sequal and the heroes they are introducing as I think most of them will be cameos.
But, I don't understand why they are already giving him the job of Justice League already. Either WBs stable of directors is low or the powers that be L-O-V-E him
On a somewhat related note, Robert Ingersoll published a column that was originally written for the Comic Buyers' Guide at the time Sacrifice was running in the Superman titles (during Infinite Crisis), but which never saw print until now owing to the CBG's change of format. It's a critique of the legal issues (as well as of the writing itself) surrounding Wonder Woman's actions... and, as he notes, he had to bite down hard not to work Man Of Steel into his brief.
On a somewhat related note, Robert Ingersoll published a column that was originally written for the Comic Buyers' Guide at the time Sacrifice was running in the Superman titles (during Infinite Crisis), but which never saw print until now owing to the CBG's change of format. It's a critique of the legal issues (as well as of the writing itself) surrounding Wonder Woman's actions... and, as he notes, he had to bite down hard not to work Man Of Steel into his brief.
Saying "he's Superman, he'd find a way" is a cop out. So, the author is not happy that a jury would find Wonder Woman committing manslaughter self defense. That is just the way society is. Not everything legal is moral and not everything moral is legal. And, by extension, not happy that Superman was in a suicide by cop situation.
It is always easy to Monday morning quarterback situations. There are probably a dozen ways police officers could handle suspects charging at them with a gun, but sometimes he/she has to make the difficult decision to shoot the suspect. Will there be consequences? Absolutely. If the suspect shot an innocent bystander, then the criticism would be the police officer did not have control of the situation.
I am not fond of either WW or Kent having to take a life, but I understand why it was done.
I think the author was far more unhappy that the story went in that direction at all. As he points out in his summation, the main reason Wonder Woman killed Max Lord at all (and this is the same thing I've said about Man Of Steel) is because the writers and editors wanted her to kill. They wanted a major hero/heroine who would kill.
Comments
Then again, Byrne's Superman was seasoned when he killed those Kryptonian criminals. Same in Superman II...and he smirked afterward.
M
Spider-Man leaving criminals tied up in webbing for the police to apprehend is one thing. If he starts leaving a trail of dead Electros, Mysterios, etc, that's quite another.
Of course, a lot of it simply sprung from cooperating with the comics code, but it does make sense in terms of story, too.
I suppose killing monsters or aliens might fall outside of current laws, robots would just be property damage, and animals - that would vary based on situations. Killing an attacking dog is going to be different than murdering someone's pet.
I think the no killing rule is part of what establishes a hero's ethic, a sense that he is above simple 'street justice' and is attempting to be a source of inspiration, to reach for higher standards.
M
I have no faith in the source material he's gonna be given to follow on this project.
(Please note, I'm not saying the film is destined to be bad before it is even finished, just that the concept is akin to setting off fireworks indoors - there is a possibility of amazing, but from the outset, disaster seems FAR more likely.)
Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Cyborg, rumors of others... and only one establishing film in this "universe." You remember in the older Batman series of films (pre-Nolan) how they kept adding more and more characters to the films (mostly villains) until it felt like Batman had less screen time than any of them? The idea of this movie feels more like that than it does The Avengers.
I think what bothers me most, though, is that I don't care about this Superman yet. After the first film, he's there, yeah... but they didn't really establish any sort of emotional rapport with me as an audience member for the character. I think I would have benefitted from another *Superman* film, instead of one that looks like it is going to divide its time among at least four heroes.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe all the other heroes will just be cameos (which, I'd imagine, would tick off an entire other section of the audience). I don't know, but with every additional character announced, my trepidation for this film's potential grows.
I never saw 300.
M
M
It was a complete hodge-podge.
Is DC going to use Snyder for EVERY comic book movie they're planning. Oh my, I hope not.
Bland. James Bland.
And wasn't Silk Spectre drawn that way?
M
Fetishization was an essential aspect to both Silk Spectres.
The faithful (and technically-impressive) aping of Miller's Black, White & Red palette makes 300 hard for me to watch. It makes my eyes tired.
You could certainly make that argument, however there's something more going on and this is Snyder's "style". excerpt from The Culturally Constituted Gaze: Fetishizing the Feminine from Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons's Watchmen to Zack Snyder's Watchmen
Said it much better than I did.
Furthermore, for me, Watchmen suffered in the areas of character development, acting, and pacing, but more disappointingly, the combination of music, imagery and dialogue felt lazy and uninspired. The action scenes were unoriginal, slowed-down sped-up Matrix-esque shots that are no longer considered edgy and that sex scene set to "Hallelujah" was awkward and cringe-worthy. I'm not saying the film didn't have its merits, but I don't rate it very highly.
I have NOT seen the "ultimate cut" version of the movie, which I hear clocks in around 3.5 hours, so maybe the pacing and character development that I found wanting in the theatrical release shows up there, but I'm not willing to invest that much time trying to see if Snyder improved it any after the fact.
I normally accuse every actor of juicing. But not this time. They have him lots of extra time to get ready and made sure his trainer was clean because it's superman
And that's what worries me most about future films, that they will pander to this new mentality, that they will lower the heroic standard in order to garner as many ticket buyers as possible. Look at the reaction of fans who feel that Captain America should have participated in more killing during the Winter Soldier film. The heroes will be less inspirational as the studios tinker with them in order to grab the biggest audiences.
This is actually the first I've heard any mention of complaints Rogers didn't kill in Winter Soldier.
M
But, I don't understand why they are already giving him the job of Justice League already. Either WBs stable of directors is low or the powers that be L-O-V-E him
comicmix.com/columns/2014/05/16/law-ass-301-wonder-woman-lookers-kill/
It is always easy to Monday morning quarterback situations. There are probably a dozen ways police officers could handle suspects charging at them with a gun, but sometimes he/she has to make the difficult decision to shoot the suspect. Will there be consequences? Absolutely. If the suspect shot an innocent bystander, then the criticism would be the police officer did not have control of the situation.
I am not fond of either WW or Kent having to take a life, but I understand why it was done.
M