Originally posted by Silent Master
There is no reason to try and invent reasons. just say that you didn't like it because it wasn't a very good movie.
This is the correct answer.
I didn't like it because it was retarded. You have Superman (who hasent fought a day in his life) beating up the head of the kryptonian military. Brilliant. If that wasn't enough, Supes scientist dad gets in on the action. The kryptonian military must not have struck fear into too many people.
Speaking of Clarks Dad, if you died, please don't hang around for the rest of the movie. Dumb.
I loved Pa Kents suicide moment. Hey, I have a son with super powers standing right next to me that can move quicker then the human eye, but i'll tell him to stay still and i'll walk into the tornado. Genius.
The destruction shown throughout the movie is the least of the films problems.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Man of Steel vs Age of Ultron
Originally posted by Newjak
I don't hear you denying it 🙄I will give you a chance though tell me why you created this thread though. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
What you have failed to understand and missed in most of my posting's is I don't care about the destruction in any movie. Its a comic blockbuster.
I'm just laughing at the people who cried about the destruction for 2 years after MOS came out, then giving a pass to the avengers, while saying they showed empathy and remorse at the end of avengers, when clearly they did not. I just call out the bullshit like I see it.
Originally posted by tkitna
Hey, I have a son with super powers standing right next to me that can move quicker then the human eye, but i'll tell him to stay still and i'll walk into the tornado. Genius.
Can he though? The only time Kal displayed superhuman foot speed he was a very visible blur. Everyone beneath the overpass would have seen a blur run over to that old man and bring him back.
Criticism invalid.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Man of Steel vs Age of Ultron
Originally posted by Time ImmemorialFair enough
What you have failed to understand and missed in most of my posting's is I don't care about the destruction in any movie. Its a comic blockbuster.I'm just laughing at the people who cried about the destruction for 2 years after MOS came out, then giving a pass to the avengers, while saying they showed empathy and remorse at the end of avengers, when clearly they did not. I just call out the bullshit like I see it.
It does come off as hate filled. Even in this post it still seems to. If it's not though cool.
I also did not really care about the destruction in either movie, but I don't think they are same thing in context. So I don't think people are hypocrites if they decide to give a pass on AoU vs MoS.
Marvel movies have always kind of placed an emphasis on the heroes worrying about civilians in a fight so I don't think the same gripes carry over from one movie to the other.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Clark could have easily made it to the car, saved the dog and gotten back without displaying above human speed or strength, the entire scene was retarded.
Yes he could have. One of the few issues I had with the movie was in that scene. I have zero problem with Johnathan dying in a tornado saving the family dog and telling Kal not to save him. It would have been much better, however, if Kal didn't realize his dad went back for the dog. As it is, he tried to go back for the dog initially but his dad forced a small girl upon him to protect.
Originally posted by TheGrat1
Can he though? The only time Kal displayed superhuman foot speed he was a very visible blur. Everyone beneath the overpass would have seen a blur run over to that old man and bring him back.Criticism invalid.
Ok, lets say it was a blur. Do you think daddy Kent walking out into the tornado was the best course of action? If you had Supermans powers would you have let your dad walk out into that?
It was still stupid so criticism valid.
Originally posted by tkitna
Ok, lets say it was a blur. Do you think daddy Kent walking out into the tornado was the best course of action? If you had Supermans powers would you have let your dad walk out into that?It was still stupid so criticism valid.
Of course we'll say it was a blur, because it was.
He didn't walk out into the tornado like he wanted to commit suicide, his ankle was injured and he couldn't escape.
Were I in Kal's position at the beginning, I would have ignored him when he told me not to get the dog and done it myself.
Were I in Kal's position under the overpass and my father told me not to save him I would have respected his wishes.
This situation is difficult to analyze because we don't know exactly how old Kal is in that scene. A video I saw raised an interesting question: Would it have been ok for John to send his son out to get the dog or come save him if it had been the 13 year old actor that played Clark? It really changes how one perceives the scene if you think Clark is still just a kid.
Edit: Your opinion is valid. Your earlier criticism was based on the assumption that Kal can move invisibly fast. So no, it is still invalid.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Clark could have easily made it to the car, saved the dog and gotten back without displaying above human speed or strength, the entire scene was retarded.
😂
Look he had just gotten in an argument with his dad about wanting to get off the farm. The tornado presented an amazing opportunity.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Man of Steel vs Age of Ultron
Originally posted by Newjak
Fair enoughIt does come off as hate filled. Even in this post it still seems to. If it's not though cool.
I also did not really care about the destruction in either movie, but I don't think they are same thing in context. So I don't think people are hypocrites if they decide to give a pass on AoU vs MoS.
Marvel movies have always kind of placed an emphasis on the heroes worrying about civilians in a fight so I don't think the same gripes carry over from one movie to the other.
Ok can you explain how you see it different?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Man of Steel vs Age of Ultron
Originally posted by Time ImmemorialSure for one thing some people's complaints about MoS was that Superman did not try hard enough or did not seem focused on keeping collateral damage to a minimum.
Ok can you explain how you see it different?
Besides the family at the end this seems pretty true. He never made an effort to get Zod out of the city and kept hitting him into possibly occupied buildings.
Now you can come up with reasons why he couldn't or didn't think to. For instance he was new, and Zod was too dangerous to try and take those things into consideration. Like I said I have no problem with this being the case.
In contrast in AoU there was a conscious decision to constantly showcase that they cared about civilians. And tried to minimize casualties.
Now I have heard it said that the reason AoU is like this is because of complaints about MoS. I could pssibly agree with this if it hasn't been a mainstain of the MCU for awhile. In IM Tony tries to help civilians from being destroyed by his weapons. In IM2 Tony tries to lead the crazy kill bots away from the Expo to avoid casualties. In Thor 1 Thor tries to help get civilians out of the small town because he knows the Destroyer is coming. He even creates a tornado to keep his fighting with the Destroyer contained. In Cap 1 Cap literally almost lets himself get shot to save a child's life. In the first Avengers they were constantly showing the heroes attempting to save innocents. Hawkeye getting people out of vehicles while Black Widow covered him. Cap running around to keep civilians safe. Heck they even set up a plan to keep the threat contained as much as possible so that the damage wouldn't spread.
I could keep going into the phase 2 movies but I think the point has been made.
I've also seen a comment along the lines that since Tony created Ultron all of this is his fault therefore even if he was trying to save civilians during the fighting all of the civilians deaths are still his fault. Which is somewhat true. But this would be in the same vein as MoS being all Kal's fault because he was on Earth or because he did not turn himself in. It is also akin to saying that vehicle manufactures are at fault for all accidents that have happened in their vehicles.
Tony wasn't trying to create a murdering robot yes he should have known to not rush things with something he did not truly understand but hopefully he has learned from that mistake.
Originally posted by InhumanThat scene was massively returned. Man of steel was just bad. I won't watch it all the way through over again. It sucked. Chris Reeve >>Henry C.
Also the bystanders would be too busy worying about...i dont know....maybe a fuqing tornado coming their way than to see what happens to an old man and his dog.