JimPunchfist

July 3, 2013 6:01 pm Yesss. I was so surprised by just how frenetic the panels were without losing the art in the process. Those little snatches of dialogue just added to much to the story, which would be a platitude, except their excessive use transmuted them into a sort of piece of the setting. Fantastic choice.

June 15, 2013 11:21 pm I like that. I like the idea that he's killed before and it tore him to pieces. That would be a good reason, or a better reason, for this version of Superman to take on that particular character aspect. No matter how righteous, it should be something that haunts him.

June 15, 2013 9:50 pm Agreed. Not a prolonged mopey Clark, but maybe a resignation to be better. The death wasn't as important as the handling of the before and after.

June 15, 2013 9:49 pm Agreed. There's a lot of nuance going in on that causes the polarized response and I think that where the movie had put the watcher by these particular scenes reflects what we took away from it. Jor-El, at the beginning of the film, wants to end this particular time period of his race. He truly doesn't believe that his generation of Kryptonians should really survive their own ignorance and we can only assume that as well. The scene that jgraff refers to also ends with Zod ending the conversation with a threat that affects Jor-El's consciousness visibly. Jor-El seems to go out with doubt in his heart. If the lines had been switched and the pace different, it would have been a nice Hollywood "My son is ring to kick your ass, like I did" moment. Which, by the way, I actually very much enjoyed Jor-El's boxing skills and the scientist beat down he lays upon the General. That was my happy blood lust moment.

June 15, 2013 8:02 pm @InvasionForce: They are saying that because it seems that Supes had no real regard for the denizens of Metropolis, much like his mustache-twirling Kryptonian brethren. At least in the sense that there was no conscious efforts on his part to save bystanders that weren't Lois, or folks that happened to be in the way of someone he was punching. By the time Supes finally faces off against Zod, a section of Metropolis has been almost completely leveled and not only because of Zod's terraforming machine.

June 15, 2013 7:55 pm Wonderfully stated. My theater cheered as well as I sat stunned among them. It should have been a sobering moment, and if anything the theater should have somehow become quieter. People should have felt his pain as he screamed afterwards. It should have churned stomachs, like it did mine, as you realize how far he was pushed and just how much he must have been through to put him in that particular position. But it didn't. I would totally support it if the film had made that action something to almost be reviled, but understood. But at the same time, the audience was desensitized to godlike men smashing through building and murdering thousands int he process half-way through the flick. It stopped being some awesome display of power and became a display of ultra-violence that would have Anthony Burgess's Droogs screaming with glee. The train station scene was the only thing that could shake the audience out of that apocalyptic stupor. It did, but not in the way I wish it had.

June 15, 2013 7:37 pm I see your point and agree. Pa Kent is selfless, but I again, his last act is one of fear and one that teaches fear. He's telling Clark that he doesn't trust us and that Clark shouldn't either. There's lots of ideas being tossed around in this film: Fathers resentful of their species failings being at the top of that list with the theme of trust topping that. Moments such as this contradicted the theme of trust. Why should Clark trust us when the greatest man he has ever known rather die than allow Clark to save him? It's a noble death, but a needless one.

June 15, 2013 12:31 am Again, my mistake. If it needs to be moved, edited, or deleted I understand.

June 14, 2013 11:14 pm Ah! Sorry. I could have sworn I had already read certain spoilerific comments. I do apologize.

June 14, 2013 10:40 pm I think we've come to a point with Superman where the public at large sort of resents him as an ideal. In the shop I manage, most folks seem to run off with the generalized platitudes of his innate overpowered nature and his lack of flaws. Superman, from what I can tell those folks perceive, not only doesn't have the feet of clay so desperately needed these days so we can feel kinship with our characters, but he throws it back in your face. He taunts us and pushes back, saying "No, no -- You CAN be better. You have to be." I think people don't like that. So we venture out to bring Superman down to our flawed level instead of rising to his. And that's the point where he's made to snap Zod's neck. He has the strength to to snap his neck, why not shift his gaze, or cover his eyes, or just punch him and finally get some innocents to safety? I was sad for the character when it happened. Not because I think there isn't a situation where Superman might have to solemnly execute someone, but that this just wasn't that moment. Like others have stated, if he has spent the better part of that disaster porn mess of a fight trying to save people and being physically punished for doing so -- maybe it would have been earned. But it wasn't. I'm also surprised by the reactions to the portrayal of Jonathan Kent, even by Mr. Mark Waid. Here is a man who raised Clark to BELIEVE in the human race. To act on their behalf and to protect them. I love his moment of human frailty and fear when he says that Clark should have let the kids on the bus die, but it also should have been followed by urgings and lessons to not succumb to those things. To be better and more than those dark things; something wonderful that we want to follow and aspire to. Pa Kent's final action in the movie is to basically say "Fear these people. They do not understand you. They will not accept you." Jonathan seems like a man unable to overcome his fear long enough to show Clark the true beauty and capability of human will. I try to enter most comic flicks with the understanding that things will not be the same as the comic -- that characters should evolve to fit the medium in which they are delivered. As long as the spirit of the character survives the cosmetic, origin, and character changes -- I'm usually happy if it also happens to be a well-made film. This did not serve either purpose, speaking for only myself of course. We've had the movies where Superman's primary concern is saving people and after years of hope we've finally got the movie that demonstrates the heroes fighting prowess. Now we just need the movie that has both and the heart to go along with it.