Post by wildknight on Jun 16, 2014 14:06:36 GMT -5
Man of Steel was alright. I really enjoyed it in the theater but the further I get from it the more giant holes I see. The death of Johnathon Kent was utterly contrived and stupid. There were several ways he could have saved his Father without everyone immediately realizing he had powers. The big ending was also clearly unnecessary, as Superman had many ways to deal with the situation that didn't involve killing. To say nothing of the fact that his "dead" Father plays a tremendous role as an interactive hologram, thus totally undercutting the entire underlying theme of Superman being an "orphan" twice over. Then there's the fact that Zod for some reason would rather alter Earth so that he has no powers, rather than live as a virtual god, because he doesn't want to suffer through years of adjustment... but then is easily able to go toe-to-toe with Superman anyway, meaning that the adjustment obviously wouldn't have been that big of a deal for him.
Putting all of that aside for a moment, have you ever really thought about what went on in that movie? The supposed theme/backstory is that the Kryptonians destroyed themselves because they had removed choice from their culture. Whatever you were born, you were stuck being that for life. Somehow (totally unexplained by the way), this led to the destruction of their entire planet. Okay, great. So Jor-El wants his son to have the freedom of choice, which is why he violates their cultural taboo and has a live birth instead of a test tube baby and all of that. Because, it's apparently SO rigid that there is no other way to decide what you become.
... except, BS, because Jor-El was born a "scientist" and Zod was born a "soldier", yet Jor-El beats Zod like a red headed step child, punking him out in every possible way. At some point, obviously, Jor-El CHOSE to learn how to fight... or else we're supposed to believe that being better combatants than the leader of the soldier caste is a logical part of scientist school on Krypton. Even if we somehow swallow that giant load of uncreative bunk, we're left with the fact that Jor-El sends his son, to whom, remember, he wants to give the gift of choice... to a planet with clear instructions for what his purpose there is to be. He never once says "hey, son, if you want a quiet life, go, get married, sell insurance, live in Toledo..." He simply tells his son that the purpose of all of this "choice" is for him to become the messianic figure of a race that will never fully accept him. I guess the "choice" was really for Jor-El to make, since Kal-El just got told all along what he was going to become.
In short, every theme of the narrative is completely undermined by the events of the story. That's just stupid writing right there. Why? Because; Christopher Nolan.
... none of that has to do with why making Superman a "dark" and "gritty" character is stupid though. Superman is an immigrant story. As Clark Kent, he assimilates perfectly, blending in so well with the natives that his presence is unremarkable. As Superman, despite knowing he is not one of them, humanity embraces him, loves him, and treats him as a hero and leader. Superman is about hope (which apparently was too subtle for the movies producers, who actually included a $#@!ing line of dialogue to remind the audience of this fact, despite completely obliterating the theme of hope through their craptastic narrative). Not hope that you can be alone in your superiority, as the movie presents us, but hope that we are never alone unless we choose to be. Hope that being "other" doesn't doom us to a life of loneliness and despair. There is nothing "dark" or "gritty" about the Superman story at it's base, and injecting that goes a long way toward obscuring the real heart and spirit of the character itself.
Superman is not an iconic character in American folklore because he can beat up bad guys. Superman is an iconic character in American folklore because of what he stands for. Without that, he's just another guy in tights. And that's exactly what Man of Steel made him.
Putting all of that aside for a moment, have you ever really thought about what went on in that movie? The supposed theme/backstory is that the Kryptonians destroyed themselves because they had removed choice from their culture. Whatever you were born, you were stuck being that for life. Somehow (totally unexplained by the way), this led to the destruction of their entire planet. Okay, great. So Jor-El wants his son to have the freedom of choice, which is why he violates their cultural taboo and has a live birth instead of a test tube baby and all of that. Because, it's apparently SO rigid that there is no other way to decide what you become.
... except, BS, because Jor-El was born a "scientist" and Zod was born a "soldier", yet Jor-El beats Zod like a red headed step child, punking him out in every possible way. At some point, obviously, Jor-El CHOSE to learn how to fight... or else we're supposed to believe that being better combatants than the leader of the soldier caste is a logical part of scientist school on Krypton. Even if we somehow swallow that giant load of uncreative bunk, we're left with the fact that Jor-El sends his son, to whom, remember, he wants to give the gift of choice... to a planet with clear instructions for what his purpose there is to be. He never once says "hey, son, if you want a quiet life, go, get married, sell insurance, live in Toledo..." He simply tells his son that the purpose of all of this "choice" is for him to become the messianic figure of a race that will never fully accept him. I guess the "choice" was really for Jor-El to make, since Kal-El just got told all along what he was going to become.
In short, every theme of the narrative is completely undermined by the events of the story. That's just stupid writing right there. Why? Because; Christopher Nolan.
... none of that has to do with why making Superman a "dark" and "gritty" character is stupid though. Superman is an immigrant story. As Clark Kent, he assimilates perfectly, blending in so well with the natives that his presence is unremarkable. As Superman, despite knowing he is not one of them, humanity embraces him, loves him, and treats him as a hero and leader. Superman is about hope (which apparently was too subtle for the movies producers, who actually included a $#@!ing line of dialogue to remind the audience of this fact, despite completely obliterating the theme of hope through their craptastic narrative). Not hope that you can be alone in your superiority, as the movie presents us, but hope that we are never alone unless we choose to be. Hope that being "other" doesn't doom us to a life of loneliness and despair. There is nothing "dark" or "gritty" about the Superman story at it's base, and injecting that goes a long way toward obscuring the real heart and spirit of the character itself.
Superman is not an iconic character in American folklore because he can beat up bad guys. Superman is an iconic character in American folklore because of what he stands for. Without that, he's just another guy in tights. And that's exactly what Man of Steel made him.
