Remove ads, unlock a dark mode theme, and get other perks by upgrading your account. Experience the website the way it's meant to be.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, March 25th, 2016) Movie • Page 11

Discussion in 'Entertainment Forum' started by Melody Bot, Jan 9, 2016.

  1. We're gonna get a really long post about how this failed and was really bad in like 3 hours from @Nathan.

    Hahaha. ;-p I'm just playing around! :heart:
     
    Colby Searcy and ChaseTx like this.
  2. ChaseTx

    Big hat enthusiast Prestigious

    I go alone all the time, or else I would barely ever see movies
     
  3. Tim

    grateful all the fucking time Supporter

    I've already vowed that my first post will be dedicated to only things I liked about the movie, and then this weekend I'll formulate what I didn't like. lol. Should be a good challenge. ;)

    :wonderwoman:
     
  4. ChaseTx

    Big hat enthusiast Prestigious

  5. Colby Searcy

    Is admired for his impeccable (food) tastes Prestigious

    When are you gonna see it?
     
  6. Liked this. Mainly because it backs up what I've been saying for like 4 years, but, hey, everyone else gets to do it.

    Why Superman Can Kill: In Defense Of 'Man Of Steel'
    I’ve debated this issue many times, including most recently with The Amazing Spider-Man comic book writer Dan Slott (for the record, it’s one of my favorite Spider-Man runs of the last 30 years), who frequently brings up the issue on social media. He asserts nobody who understands Superman would write a story in which Superman kills, and any such story is an invalid interpretation of Superman. Slott and others insist Superman should never kill under any circumstances, and that despite some exceptions the overwhelming majority of Superman’s history proves he has a strict code against taking any life. It is further claimed there is never a no-win situation for Superman, and no story should be written putting him in a situation without an alternate to killing.

    This absolutist position doesn’t just assert a preference for Superman refusing to kill, and doesn’t just argue it’s the best portrayal and the most consistent with the majority of stories — it insists stories violating this specific preference are invalid. That’s where I take exception, since it turns into nothing more than another fan preference stated as the only objectively right way to portray a character, imagining anyone disagreeing simply doesn’t properly understand the character.
     
  7. Tim

    grateful all the fucking time Supporter

    I mean, I didn't care when I first saw it, but in the years that followed, I've switched to #TeamSlott. If Superman kills, he's not Superman. If that sounds like a nerdy obsessive fan opinion, so be it. :shrug:
     
  8. Jason Tate Mar 24, 2016
    (Last edited: Mar 24, 2016)
    You should read the full article. Cause it pretty much destroys that argument on the illogical ground it rests upon. It doesn't sound like a nerdy obsessive fan opinion as much as it seems the opposite - a fan of Superman has to consider the moral questions asked in this article and can't ignore the historical evidence of Superman's willingness to kill and/or accept killing as an option. The nerdy obsessive fan opinion is that which debates the moral questions of sentinent AI (which Superman kills) and how and where Superman's morals come into play with Wonder Woman killing people next to him or when there is no other choice. The absolutist position is just (flawed) orthodoxy bullshit.
     
  9. Nathan

    Always do the right thing. Supporter

  10. Jason Tate Mar 24, 2016
    (Last edited: Mar 24, 2016)
    A really really bad one ... did you read this? It's a straw man from the start that literally misses the entire point being argued ... and it's horrifically written, yikes ... I'm curious ... did you Google in the theatre "counter to Forbes Superman article" and post the first link? It literally uses a screen shot of a guy (and I'm the one that just put one of his books in my top 10 in the comics thread even though I think his depiction of Bruce Wayne might be as bad as his Twitter fights) bulling someone on Twitter as a defense!

    And since apparently no one got to page three, the core of the entire Forbes piece is that the argument for not killing is very strong, and a core part of the character, it's the discussion of the nuance, and dissection of that moral code, that is important, and running away from those stories and the debates is not an answer:

    Anyone who prefers a Superman who doesn’t kill has a valid, great set of arguments for why it’s better that way and why they prefer it, and I’d never consider telling them they’re wrong or suggesting something as myopic and shallow as “you just don’t understand Superman.” Likewise, anyone who prefers a Superman who has killed within certain circumstances, based on a rational interpretation of ethical boundaries for killing and for what constitutes “life,” “sentience,” and “sapience,” has a strong argument for their preference as well. And while I’m clearly more in the latter camp, I also want to offer this word of caution to fans who agree with me: we shouldn’t insist that a non-killing Superman is somehow unrealistic or irrelevant, nor that he’s too idealized or boring — idealism, and strict moral codes for champions and role models, are not irrelevant in a world where increasing disrespect for life and rule of law has become far too commonplace, to the point our would-be leaders posture and spout off about who will be the most ruthless in dealing with our enemies and who is most willing to wage warfare in the broadest application of force, with the least regard for innocent lives at risk.

    Superman shouldn't kill, but he does (no one can deny the AI/Monster portion), he's had to, and his action (and inactions) have led to the deaths of many in 75 years. Stifling the debate with "that's not Superman" does a gross disservice to the actual moral argument and character himself. That's one of the beauties of fiction and having a huge history to pour over and talk about the changes and growth (or at times digression) of fictional characters. But to speak in such absolutes and ignore anything that doesn't fit a cherry picked narrative sounds like the comic equivalent to the religious right. (And the "No true Scotsman" argument is not only fallacious, I think it's intellectually dishonest.)
     
  11. Tim

    grateful all the fucking time Supporter

    Skimmed it. If we're talking semantics, sure, strictly speaking, stories have been written where he killed. But, I maintain that having Superman snap Zod's neck at the end of MoS runs counter to what has predominately defined the character for his nearly 80-year history. (There's no way to have a character around that long with that many stories without exceptions, but they're outliers that are very few and far between.)

    If people want to argue that the climax of MoS is good for the character, that's fine. I used to do so, too, so I understand the mindset. As I've come to appreciate the character more and more, though, I've come to oppose it thoroughly, and at this point I'm at peace with that.
     
  12. ChaseTx

    Big hat enthusiast Prestigious

    Personally I don't think it says anything about the character if he had to kill Zod to stop him from killing civilians
     
  13. You should read the full article then. IMO: Skimming it does a disservice to any discussion to be had from it, or any argument you make that through willful ignorance skips the basis of the argument laid out, and if you're going to make a comment coming down against it — it's at least expected it's been read and thoughtfully considered and not just skimmed. Cause what's the point? Like why even say anything then if it's just: read a blurb, make a passing comment that ignores thousands of words and a considered question and debate of the morals of killing? It's not a discussion, it's a Tweet. There's a website for that already.
     
  14. Tim

    grateful all the fucking time Supporter

    I'll read it when I have more time out of fairness. But I've been part of these conversations on both sides enough times that I highly doubt there'll be some radical new revelation for me, tbh.
     
  15. It's this kind of close mindedness that makes me not even want to talk about things with people online anymore, where they're so certain and no one is even willing to take the time to read someone else's thoughts before declaring them wrong. Where there's never any discussion of the actual issue or nuance of the debate, instead it's hash tags and picking sides and skimming articles and it's just more noise. That sucks. I've done that. I'm not doing that anymore. I've loved talking with Nathan and Dom about movies/comics the past few days because there's an actual discussion about ideas and disagreements and a back and forth that goes deeper than absolutes and that's my opinion oh well shrugs.
     
  16. Dominick

    Prestigious Prestigious

    Superman stands for the American way. In one form or another, he participates in the deaths of both bad and good people. As such, his morality is always-already a compromise. This idea of Superman as a non-lethal hero presupposes either there are no ramifications for his actions; in other words, it isolates him from the world and reifies his principles and makes him a bad hero, insofar as he is incapable of addressing the issues as they shift and change.Story-wise, it makes every story require a deus ex machina.
     
    Jason Tate likes this.
  17. Can we please have more than this at this forum? I'm begging. Please. I am fearful that this will become just like AP.net with one sentence reactions and over the top hot takes. And I can't do that again. I can't handle that kind of forum. I am begging that we strive for more than this here. I simple can't do it again if it's going to be like AP.net.
     
  18. Meerkat

    human junk drawer Prestigious

    I think it was Jason the other day who was saying Superman's black and white morality is outdated, and I agree. I'm more interested at this point in seeing superheroes confronted with decisions where the only thing worse than any of the possible choices is not choosing anything at all. I'm interested in seeing the psychological effects and potential PTSD aspect for these people.

    I almost think Supergirl is telling the Superman story I want to see most. We see Kara express her grief over a world she lived in that no longer exists. We see her grapple with technically being an immigrant and constantly having to "fit in". We see her try and work through the realization that she can't save everyone. That's the stuff I'd love to see from Superman.
     
  19. Henry

    Moderator Moderator

    I'll elaborate so as not to seem like there are no merits to my opinion.

    - The trailers gave away most all of the good stuff. Everything else was basically spoiled by the internet. lol
    - That scene with Lois in the bathtub. Really? What reason was there for this?
    - The gun/pearls. The most Snyder part of the film.
    - Batman killed A LOT of people. Like a lot.
    - NOTHING happens for the first 2 hours of this film.
    - The differences in ideology are very blurred. See: Batman killing a bunch of people.
    - I hoped for a lot more Gal. We basically saw everything she did in the trailer.
    - Where did the White Portuguese name come from? I would think if Bats could get the info, the gov't would too. A giant ship with the name would be very very easy to spot.
    - Ending it with Supes dying was so anti-climactic. I'm not sure how they could have done it better, but when we all know Justice League is next, it takes everything out of the stinger.

    I'll post more as I think of it. All of those things really stuck out though.
     
    Dominick likes this.
  20. Henry

    Moderator Moderator

    That was my venting post. Haha. I know it was a poor formulation of my opinion. Basically typed it out in pure anger until I got to my pc.
     
  21. Meerkat

    human junk drawer Prestigious

    @Henry I don't think Jason was saying your opinion had no merit. I think we're all just trying to avoid the "this is garbage" or even the "this is good" and then leaving and never posting again nature of AP.
     
  22. Henry

    Moderator Moderator

    The second I posted that other post, I went into ramble mode in my next post. Deleted the old one. I'm seriously upset with how much I disliked this film. It's totally irrational.
     
  23. Meerkat

    human junk drawer Prestigious

    Sorry, your post quoting Jason directly hadn't popped up yet when I mentioned you.
     
  24. Dominick

    Prestigious Prestigious

    A friend of mine said "it makes one yearn for Dean Cain's Superman and Val Kilmer's Batman."
     
    Jason Tate likes this.