Man of Steel is the only Superman film I saw, feel that one gets too much hate too. I thought it was a good movie *shrugs* I forgot about Sin City, I like both films. The sequel got shredded but I liked that one too, even though the first is better. I wish they would do more Sin City films after hearing about all the different stories but after the sequel bombed so badly I'm not expecting it. If that wasn't the case I wouldn't want to wait another ten years for a third one smh.

Then you really should see the original Richard Donner Superman from 1977 with Christopher Reeve. :nod: It's a classic for a reason, and it still holds up to this day. The storytelling is much more nuanced and has a better rhythm and story structure. :nod: In other words, it makes sense. Zack Snyder's direction and David Goyer's script for Man of Steel was just too all over the place, like the film really didn't know what it wanted to be.

Gonna sound sacrilegious to say but I kind of found the Reeve films kind of dated and a bit cheesy in some parts. I liked Man of Steel because finally we got a Superman who wasn't afraid to throw a punch. I never understood the hate of Zod being killed when he died in Superman II and Superman killed him in that one. And a hardcore comic fan would know he has killed in the comis before when left with no other option.

Superman did throw a punch in the Reeve films, you just never saw it until "Superman II: The Donner Cut" came out ten years ago. You have to remember that Richard Donner was fired by producers Elia and Alexander Salkind halfway through production of Superman II, so that changed a lot of how the film was made. Donner directed both movies simultaneously, but had to finish Superman I in time for Christmas release, and they got back to work on Superman II, 50% of which had been completed. Superman was a huge hit, but the Salkinds wanted to play El-cheapo and cut back costs, which is not what you do when you have a huge hit. They wanted Donner to cut out all of Marlon Brando's completed scenes as Jor-El in Superman II and replace them with alternate scenes so they wouldn't have to pay Brando what he asked for. Donner refused because Brando was integral to the story, so the Salkinds fired him and replaced him with British director Richard Lester, who was more used to doing comedies. Donner didn't get to film all the fight scenes that he wanted to do in Superman II as a result, although there is a deleted scene that was restored in the "Donner Cut" version of Superman II that shows Superman punching Non. :punch: And Superman did end up killing Zod at the end of Superman II after he threw him across the Fortress of Solitude and he fell into that pit. Zod had lost his powers at that point, so he couldn't have survived it. :nod: Also, there wasn't much reason for Superman to punch anyone in the first movie, since there was no one for him to fight in that one. He had to stop two nuclear missiles and an earthquake instead.

I think the problem people had with Superman killing Zod in Man of Steel is that it wasn't set up properly. That scene was added at the last minute by screenwriter David Goyer because he wanted a more dramatic ending. Originally, Zod was supposed to get sucked into the Phantom Zone with the other Kryptonians at the end. But when Goyer changed the ending and had Superman kill Zod, the rest of the script wasn't touched up to address that. You really don't have any idea what Clark's morals are earlier in the film, and there's really no reason given as to why he would feel so terrible after snapping Zod's neck. If they had better shown Clark's moral code early on, and showed how killing someone would be against everything he believes in(like they did with Bruce Wayne in Batman Begins) then that would make more sense leading into Clark's moral code being challenged at the end. But again, Clark doesn't seem to think of the safety of all the innocent bystanders during his fight with Zod and the others, and acts quite recklessly most of the time. So why does he feel so bad about killing Zod? And if he has some moral code, where was that code when all those people were avoiding all that falling debris during the battle? Wouldn't Superman be more cautious knowing how much damage their fight could cause? So basically it's not so much the depiction of what Superman does, so much as why he does or does not do certain things. Basically, the writing was the biggest problem with Man of Steel, as well as the haphazard directing of Zack Snyder, who doesn't seem to understand subtlety and storytelling rhythm.

:cool:

Hey guys!:wave: We're over 300 posts, so am closing this thread & starting a new 1.:D