Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyC
This is the way I viewed it as well. Maybe people expected Superman to just start out as a righteous always doing the right thing type of guy, but is that realisitc? Especially growing up on Earth? I think him killing Zod (and maybe the destruction of Metropolis) was important to show Clark who/what he had to be in order to inspire the Earth the way he is meant to.
This what (at least if Snyder has some intelligence) I think will be the main focus of BvS. Batman is unimpressed by Supermans disregard for destruction and death and is going to show Superman the type sacrifice that is necessary to be a hero (including having a normal alter-ego life).
I think MoS was striving to avoid the trap that Green Lantern fell into where they tried to make a character who was by all accounts an ahole into full-fledged a hero in under a week, in one film. It just doesn't work like that and there has to be a reason for a character change beyond "I have superpowers and a girl to fight for!"
I'm hoping that once the series is flushed out a bit more, Superman will end up being more like what diehards describe and MoS will be looked upon more favorably as a piece of a larger story.
|
He doesn't just meet Lex Luthor and develop a code. His whole origin, and the reason Kevin Costner got 45 minutes of screen time, is based on him landing with these two genuinely good people who raise him up to be a good honorable man. That's why he's Superman. Because the Kents took him and gave him the best humanity had to offer.
Jonathan Kent was not some puss who extolled the virtues of never ever using your gifts to help people. Certainly he'd never allow himself to die in a tornado for no reason. His death in the 77 film had meaning. Clark couldn't stop a heart attack. Clark could've saved Jonathan Kent in Man of Steel. He chose not to. I guess that's Superman in the 21st century.
Also, Batman's never been shy about destruction. I believe he calls it 'Damn good television'.