Wow! Way to cut and prune my post to take it out of context. But yeah the dialog between characters is kind of not what it should be. I understand it's a comic book movie. But by this point in time I would hope that the actual lines written for the characters take more from modern writing than from the Golden Age. The script does the job. It communicates the needed information. But that's about it. It's nowhere near Transformers or Star Wars Prequels levels of bad. But nobody is gonna win any awards for these words. And I don't care if you are telling a serrious story or not. Stories are told through character moments. Warmth and Charm and interplay. Even in darker or revisionist comic book movies. Things like the interplay between Batman and Alfred. Things that humanize the characters. For the most part they forgot this here. Let me put it this way. The two warmest most charming characters in this movie. The two that the audience is most able to interrelate to are Russel Crowe and Kevin Costner. This is not necesarily a really bad thing, as the two turn in great performances, but still think about that for a minute. Crowe and Costner.RolandOfGilead said:
As far as the not knowing Superman, and that he has been re-invented too many times. Sorry but yeah I do know Supes. I also know that outside of a few Elseworlds stories (and the recent Injustice video game) there are a few character traits that stretch accross every single interpretation. One big one is one that he shares with Batman.
MAJOR SPOILER
Yeah, before you mention it, I have read Superman #22 from back in the 80's. I understand that this is basically the same scene. I understand the action taken. But that should NOT have been part of the characters re-introduction. That entire conflict of morals vs necessities of reality only works if you have taken the time to fully establish that the character by their nature will not take a life, even normally to protect others. They will always find another way. That old Zod story was the one time where Superman could not find another way and felt he had to take a life. But that story had deeper impact. The fallout from it carried through Superman stories for several years. Whereas tonight I was sitting in a theater. I happened to be seated next to two small children, around 7 and 9 or so. The looks on their faces when Superman allowed someone to die, His own father, were shocked. The looks when he pulled a Wolverine move on Zod kind of said it all. The scene itself was fine. It would have been a powerful scene and a truly shocking moment... in the second or third movie. Once the character was established. But it felt completely and utterly wrong in this one. So much so that it changed the core nature of the character. That's my opinion on it. Yours may vary.
But really what is the core motivation of Supes in this one? "Save the people you like?" "Don't kill unless it is collateral damage?" "Don't worry insurance will take care of that?" I mean really, in this movie he saved A. a bus full of school kids. and B. Lois Lane. Everyone else either fended for themselves or died in assorted horrible ways.
I understand that they were looking for some new and interesting character dynamics. They did bring some decent elements to the story. Much of the origin stuff was just perfection. The Krypton scenes were the best we have ever seen. Comic or Movie. They seemed to blend all the various backstories together. The distrustfulness of humanity over Supermans alien nature was an interesting take on it and worked well for the most part, except the whole "Let people die to keep hidden" just felt wrong for Superman and Pa Kent. The sacrificing himself to protect the sons identity was one thing, but the "Maybe you should have let a busful of kids die" just seemed a bit awkward. Not horrible. I could see the conflict that Costner was bringing to it. Just not quite hitting the right note is all.
But really what is the core motivation of Supes in this one? "Save the people you like?" "Don't kill unless it is collateral damage?" "Don't worry insurance will take care of that?" I mean really, in this movie he saved A. a bus full of school kids. and B. Lois Lane. Everyone else either fended for themselves or died in assorted horrible ways.
I understand that they were looking for some new and interesting character dynamics. They did bring some decent elements to the story. Much of the origin stuff was just perfection. The Krypton scenes were the best we have ever seen. Comic or Movie. They seemed to blend all the various backstories together. The distrustfulness of humanity over Supermans alien nature was an interesting take on it and worked well for the most part, except the whole "Let people die to keep hidden" just felt wrong for Superman and Pa Kent. The sacrificing himself to protect the sons identity was one thing, but the "Maybe you should have let a busful of kids die" just seemed a bit awkward. Not horrible. I could see the conflict that Costner was bringing to it. Just not quite hitting the right note is all.
While it looked cool, it really took away any impact.
