Explain to me why nerds are so assblasted about the neck snap again

Explain to me why nerds are so assblasted about the neck snap again

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ou0ozvnJumE
comicbook.com/blog/2013/06/17/man-of-steel-christopher-nolan-opposed-the-ending-dc-comics-advised-on-it/
youtube.com/watch?v=HiGZXhs9V9s&t=200
twitter.com/AnonBabble

It wasn't justified. Fit with the narrative of the movie and Zod died similarly in the comics.

superman that most people know doesnt kill people

this movie is so fucked

zzzzzzzzzzzz

most people don't know that this is literally an origin story.

Superman shouldn't make hard choices!

I don't know, why are you so assblasted people didn't like it?

People wanting another rehash of the Donner films and claiming that the jokes and smirking that accompanied Superman killing Zod, and Lois killing Ursa, some how make Superman 2 the superior film about killing Zod.

they were supposed to be shown being picked up by the police, but was cut for some reason, presumably because the movie was long enough already

Because

I'll never understand how Snyder has so many fanboys here. Where did they come from?

I wasn't, I was with the Snyder going, "oh thousands died colliding with Superman"

This.
I'm fine with Superman killing zod. That faggot Max Landis had it right with saying something along the lines of "Superman killing zod is like an adult killing another adult to protect children" it does not mean that superman kills humans because that would be like superman killing a child. I'm fine with superman killing provided it has WEIGHT TO THE DECISION. Provided it MAKES SENSE within the context of the story.
Note: the above isn't actually in the movie. They never go into "krypton is your responsibility" or how that gets in clarks head and how he can't refuse that call and shit. He just kind of walks around asking everyone else "what should I do maybe?"
I'm even fine with Batman killing provided it has fucking WEIGHT TO IT. Batman picking up a gun and aiming it at fucking Darkseid the personification of evil in DC made fucking sense as the dude who had his parents gunned down by evil is now facing evil itself with a gun. And it was still fucking hard. Flipping a car on some bozo because he wants to get paid and doesnt know any better isn't facing down evil it's just being a cunt.
You could justify this as "He's at the end of his rope and Jason just died so he's already on edge then he saw a literal vision of the apocalypse and the way out of the apocalypse is to kill freely"
BUT GUESS FUCKING WHAT, THAT'S ALSO JUST GLOSSED OVER IN THE GODDAMN MOVIE

Snyder can't into subtext, emotions, or gravity of choices - just shallow metaphors. It's hamfisted "wouldn't it be cool if" extrapolations and nothing more.

Zod was literally about to kill a kid after Supes told him multiple times to stop. Getting butthurt about that is like getting butthurt about Bin Laden getting killed.

I'll never understand how people think Snyder has fanboys here. The most unironic defense he gets is people saying "it wasn't really that bad".

>superman that most people know doesnt kill people

Which goes to show that most people don't actually know superman.

other than the much maligned killing of zod with kryptonite, I dont think he ever had a history of killing, at one point choosing suicide over killing someone else

But what did Bin Laden do?

murdered thousands of people in a terrorist attack?

>He thinks Bin Laden was a real person

>other than the much maligned killing of zod with kryptonite

It's still something he's done. He not only killed he killed Zod and not even to prevent a tragedy, he killed Zod as punishment for one. That's far less defensible honestly.

>>He thinks Bin Laden was a real person

Jesus, I prefer the Sup Forums leaks to the /x/ ones. At least your average racist will admit that the world is round.

The final fight between Neo and Super-Smith in Matrix Revolutions remains the ultimate Superman/Zod fight.

As for this scene, who was wispering in their ears, "Superman must sometimes kill...Superman must sometimes kill..."?

Gosh, Miss Lane. Mr. White should fire these motherfuckers.

Because Zod was the best character in the movie.
If you want me to feel good about the hero's "victory" you have to make him likable instead of (at best) pitiful.

Zach Snyder worships Ayn Rand and Objectivism.

The instrument he chose to relay the values of Objectivism... was Superman.

So he has to take a character that was founded on hope, doing the right thing, responsible use of power, and that doing the right thing ultimately works out because crime doesn't pay, and turn that story into a cautionary tale about the stupidity and fruitlessness of helping others, charity, and self sacrifice.

Zach Snyder's Barney the Dinosaur movie would be about a dinosaur that has the ability to sing educational songs about friendship and learning to kids better than anyone, but Barney knows he is conflicted about his terrible urges to murder and eat all the kids in the neighborhood. Not that he's ever done it, or wants to, he just can't stand the idea of taking away the hope he hasn't even given children yet. He has to stay away from kids and not sing, or the kids will come and play and risk being eaten. Brooding the whole movie, Barney finally comes to his test. The test is not "Barney must save the day by singing the perfect song to teach kids that learning is fun", it is "Barney discovers that the only way he can save the day is by murdering and eating a kid, but later he will sing some songs because he accepts that he has the burden of eating kids and needs them close just in case".

>you have to make him likable

DC completely fucked this up. They have Superman wandering around looking like his fucking dog just died and now they're making a Batman movie where he's running around cracking smile and jokes like he's set at 23% Clooney.

It's because they did nothing with it. Zod's death is given this big gravitas but the movie does nothing with it and it isn't touched on in BvS. It felt like it was put in there to be edgy.

>It felt like it was put in there to be edgy.

When comics fans say the word edgy we all know they mean "something I don't like". It's meaningless and overused. It's usually used about superman too if you'll notice.

Wrong. It was justified.

What a shortsighted pleb.

Eitehr that or shitty pasta.

>Wrong. It was justified.

I know right? Dudes act like you can't do whatever it takes to stop some douchenozzle from setting a family on fucking fire.

I just didn't care anymore, after 20 minutes of destruction I was just waiting for the ending. Glad he finally decide to save at least that family.

Also making out over the ruins could have been avoided.

"justified" has nothing to do with it. The asinine writers set up the situation where Superman has to kill. Superman is supposed to figure out a way to *not* have to do that, perhaps alone among all superheroes.

For that matter, when I saw it in the theater, I deliberately looked for the family fleeing afterwards, and did not see them. This suggested Superman did kill Zod, but too late.

In other words, he learned his lesson the hard way.

What made that family special?

It was completely anticlimactic end to a fight scene with no weight. I wanted to see a Superman movie with a superpowered fight as much as the next guy when MoS came out - just not at the expense of every other aspect.

They had a special kind of retardation, to be hanging around a museum when the whole world was falling apart around them.

The mother's name was Martha

>Superman is supposed to figure out a way to *not* have to do that

We all know that you want to read about supergod. We've heard it from you guys a *lot*.

>Superman should have benn able to save everyone in Metropolis and if he failed to save any single one he should have gone back in time and saved them anyway.

The movies you guys are looking for were made 40 some odd years ago.

>What made that family special?

Wut? Superman doesn't have to check to see if a family is special before he does whatever it takes to save them. What superman do you guys think of when you think superman?

>hanging around a museum when the whole world was falling apart around them.

Yeah, dumb guys running into a solid stone building when the outside world is blowing up. They should have run around in the middle of the street instead... what?

>Still shilling this hard for this piece of garbage movie.

youtube.com/watch?v=ou0ozvnJumE

>Wut? Superman doesn't have to check to see if a family is special before he does whatever it takes to save them. What superman do you guys think of when you think superman?
According to Snyder, at least 5000 people died during Zod's attack all told.
Why were the first 4996 not enough to have Clark try to put Zod down? Why was that last contrived random four the final straw?

Hell, if he doesn't have to check and just acts to save people, why didn't he save his dad, damn the consequences?

>>Still shilling this hard for this piece of garbage movie.

I know you guys didn't like it, but when I point out that you're retarded, it isn't because someone's paying me, it's because you're fucking retarded.

>Hurf durf, dumbo family shouldn't be inside a building when there's shit blowing up outside. They should be, uhh... Well they're dumb.

>Superman should never ever let anyone die. he should kick the shit out of all the bad guys with one arm tied behind his back and be able to save kittens from trees in the middle of his complete curb stomping of the bad guys.

Your opinions are dumb. I stated quite clearly that the movie had real problems cause they're stupid enough to think dour superman should be followed up by chipper Batman, but you two are just frigging dumb.

Dumber than MoS.

>Why were the first 4996 not enough to have Clark try to put Zod down?

user, did you even watch the movie? Clark was trying his best to not only stop Zod but to get him out of town.

>Why was that last contrived random four the final straw?

Because that's the only time Clark had the upper hand and Zod still forced the issue. It was obviously suicide by Superman at that point.

He shouldn't have killed the guy holy shit

If it was ACTUALLY Superman, he would have asked Zod nicely to leave, and then saved a plane from falling out of the sky or something

Instead, we got THE PUNISHER

Because it comes right after the destruction of Metropolis, where Superman only gave a damn about saving Lois. It's why Batman trying to kill Superman because he believed he's a threat to humanity, while recklessly killing civilians and criminals made no sense in Batman v Superman.

Not to mention, the death of Zod and the DCEU equivalent of 9/11 was forgotten by the end of Man of Steel. It was only "addressed" in BvS because of the huge outcry (and negative reviews) that followed the film.

Make the movie for your audience. Who the fuck were they doing this for?

For people who loved Gosh, Lois! type Superman?

For kids going to see a Superman movie for the first time?

For Batman lovers who need some grittier stuff, even though Batman doesn't kill nowadays, either, even saving Joker as usual? Reality had to stop that Joker from returning to kill again.


That last group ain't too large. And a lot realized they were really in the first group after all.

>Clark puts Zod in phantom zone
>Zod screams for mercy/in anger, about how its horrible to be stuck there
>Clark tears up a little and says something like "sorry" or "I have to"
>scene is emotional af
>no one assblasted
Not so hard, huh?

It's almost as if most people think it's a shitty one.

First off, stop, not kill.
Second, the choreography and the fact that neither combatant took damage or injury beyond temporary hit stun makes it come off like Clark ISN'T pushed to his limits.
It's hard to believe the guy's trying his best when his hair isn't even mussed up.

I thought that what looked like Superman killing the three Kryptonians in Superman 2 was really out of character and upsetting when I first saw Superman 2 , too (as a child, on VHS, less than seven years after its theatre release). It's part of why I never really felt as strong a connection to the movies as the comics.

That was the original ending, but Goyer and Snyder were against it.

>"Killing Zod was a big thing and Chris Nolan, originally, said there's no way you can do this," Goyer told the magazine. "That was a change--originally Zod got sucked into the Phantom Zone along with the others and I just felt it was unsatisfying and so did Zack. We started questioning--we talked to some of the people at DC Comics and said, 'Do you think there is ever a way that Superman would kill someone?' And at first they said 'No way, no way,' and we said, 'but what if he didn't have a choice?' Originally Chris didn't even want to let us try to write it and Zack and I said, 'We think we can figure out a way that you'll buy it.'"

comicbook.com/blog/2013/06/17/man-of-steel-christopher-nolan-opposed-the-ending-dc-comics-advised-on-it/

I found that this movie tried to do too many things which is par for the course with DCEU movies. Superman killing someone is a concept that could be the basis of an entire movie. Just like his origin story, an Alien Invasion and an attempt to revive krypton. So they jammed this in at the end to try and give the movie more weight. Same as how they killed Superman at the end of BVS.

It's just too early to be doing this with Superman. Establish his morals and then challenge them. I hate the scene. It reeks of someone who dislikes Superman writing Superman. The entire movie does, making Superman so fucking bleak and hopeless. God I fucking hate Snyder Superman.

F-F-F-F-F-F-F-UCKING RETARDS.
God, I hope Goyer will never write anything to DC again and Zack will be fired after JL's flop.

>'We think we can figure out a way that you'll buy it.'
Similarly, shake the virtual camera so violently you literally cannot track anything with your eyes to hide the crappy unbelievable CGI that you won't buy, either.

>at DC Comics and said, 'Do you think there is ever a way that Superman would kill someone?' And at first they said 'No way, no way,'

Those people clearly don't know Superman

saved.

>Make the movie for your audience. Who the fuck were they doing this for?

I guess we can just ignore the people who have been going to grim comic book movies for the last twenty years now because that's obviously not the answer you're looking for.

>Clark ISN'T pushed to his limits.

So all those times he tried to move the fight out of the city he was just holding back. Sure thing. We'll just imagine that Clark was just faking the struggle until the very end if it'll make you think worse about him.

Cracked stole that from us.

Yes but what percentage of those people were clamoring for this kind of thing? Who sighed and sat back and said, "Finally! I feel satisfied with the ethical dilemma Superman faced and was tired of him happily saving the day."

Is that cohort really large?

>city gets obliterated?
Time to make out with Lois!
>killing the man that tried to genocide everyone you ever knew?
WAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!

Superman didn't act human at all in this movie

The movie is disjointed emotionally because they come up with moments and do not organically build to them.

...

You can't make this shit up

>Yes but what percentage of those people were clamoring for this kind of thing?

668 million dollars worth. I don't know how to put that into a percent of these groups that you're trying to pretend don't go see superman movies.

>"Finally! I feel satisfied with the ethical dilemma Superman faced and was tired of him happily saving the day."

I've stated quite clearly that, and I'll repeat for the third time for the dudes in the cheap seats, that dour superman is only slightly less retarded than some of the posters in this thread.

>Time to make out with Lois!

What's catharsis precious?

>Superman didn't act human at all in this movie

You aren't very good at making that call obviously since you don't think people who go through a transformative experience will latch on to each other for comfort nor that people might get very upset for having to kill someone even if it's completely justified.

And it could have been a lot more, maybe, if it wasn't the only game in town with Superman slapped on it?
youtube.com/watch?v=HiGZXhs9V9s&t=200


This will never happen: "Member when Superman learned to kill?" "I member!"

Personally Im fine with the scene and it provided a situation in which Clark had to cut all ties with Krypton and further strengthen his belief never killing (again). HOWEVER what really kills this is the fucking drone comedy shit that immediately followed

>668 million dollars worth. I don't know how to put that into a percent of these groups that you're trying to pretend don't go see superman movies.

Are you stupid? It was a blockbuster summer movie. The gross majority of people seeing these movies are casuals who only know the bare minimum about Superman and will gleefully stuff their faces because they don't know any better. This doesn't help your argument in the slightest

>I will strengthen my firm belief of not killing by snapping the neck of this man before me

That doesn't add up, fampai

Warner Brothers reacts to criticism and success, but always misses the reasons behind the criticism and success.

The Dark Knight was Grimdark and successful, so let's make Superman grimdark, too!

Oh no, people don't like how dark Man of Steel was, let's make lighter, quip-filled movies kind of like Marvel does, with our biggest star: Batman.

Batman's defining character trait is that he dresses like a bat to fight crime and is super serial about it. Nolanverse Batman was. Adam West Batman was. Lego Batman was. DCU Batman was. Brave and the Bold, every incarnation of Batman that's acheived any level of success, Batman took himself really seriously.

If you want to make funny scenes with Batman, he's the ultimate straight man because he's so serious all the time. But Marvel characters quip, and Marvel movies make money, so now Batman quips because all Warner Brothers can do is copy. They have no love or even understanding of the characters or why anyone would like them.

>The gross majority of people seeing these movies are casuals

The goal posts, they're a moving.

>Who wants to see this movie, blah blah blah.

...

>Oh and casuals don't count.

Actually user, they do count. Apparently they count up to over a half billion dollars.

Some people just flat out don't want Superman to kill. That's their picture of Superman. It's not mine, but I get why they have it. In the situation he was in in the film, I get why he did it.

Some people feel like the film itself didn't earn that scene. They felt it was forced. Again, disagree, but I can see why.

Yeah. All Superman had to do was slap some cuffs on Zod. Easy. R-right?

Because people didn't read comics and don't know that Superman killed zod and that led to him forming his no-kill policy. But then you explain that and they think that a personal tragedy is never allowed in a superhero movie. People would prefer a dance off.

If Superman, who is the last embodiment of what's good and pure (at least for DC comics), suddenly kills someone, there's going to be a lot of "Why didn't he fly them away, or use any one of a dozen ways out of that." And even though Supes snaps Zod's neck, what does he say about it? Nothing, just inarticulate yelling. We needed more information. Did Superman figure out what to do only afterwards? How would critics reacted if he'd said "Oh god I've gotten so powerful that _other_ kryptonians_ are snapping and breaking in my arms like so many potato chips!" or "I was trying to point his head in another direction and... and (sob)!" We needed to know _why_ Zod's neck broke.

Did Superman killed Zod in any GOOD modern comic?

>Did Superman killed Zod in any GOOD modern comic?

Does it matter? I think comics movies shouldn't be shackled with only doing things that they do in comics. It's a different medium and should tell different stories.

Why should they named heroes after sourse matherial ones then? If they're completely different and shitty? Name him Edgeman and let him do whatever you want. If you want to adapt Superman, take good stories of him then.

the extended cut shows that they were picked up by the police, showing that even when loved by the public at large, you still need the full edition

Holy shit

I never said casuals don't count. In the context of , they don't help your argument

>Why should they named heroes after sourse matherial ones then?

Calm down lad. Because it's a Superman story, but those movies don't have to be a pointless retread of something that happened in a comic book.

>If they're completely different and shitty?

With a certain kind of nerd different *is* shitty. But those nerds are impossible to please and it's never been worth the effort to even try.

>Name him Edgeman

The universal sign for the Sup Forums guys who have bad opinions about superman stuff? The word "Edge." Look for it, you'll see that you guys leave that word scattered all over the very worst Superman opinions everywhere you go.

>they don't help your argument

The guy asked where all these people were that wanted this movie. Well that money didn't fall out of the heavens.

LIke I siad, I don't have an imaginary poll to check from but enough people wanted this movie. Enough people went to the theater and watched it. You guys are saying there's no audience but the box office proves that's a lie.

Didn't we make an entire animated movie about how Superman is too nice to kill?

If you're going to fuck up Superman's character and have him kill people, couldn't you at least have him do it BEFORE he destroys a whole city? Y'know, actually save more people than he lets die?

>pointless retread of something that happened in a comic book.
That's what MoS was. Bad mix of few questionable stories of Superman, which is poorly compatible together.
>nerds are impossible to please
Marlel fans don't cry about MCU much. Most of them happy. I haven't seen people bitching much about Nolanverse either.

Casuals would settle for any kind of Superman movie, because it's Superman. Whether they liked it once the movie was over is irrelevant, but you're both underestimating and overestimating their presence in this situation

I'm not even saying there's no audience. There's a small minority who wanted exactly this, and they were gleeful from beginning to end. But to think that casuals went into this movie with those exact same expectations, rather than a mindless summer blockbuster in the same vein as Transformers, you're off your gourd

>couldn't you at least have him do it BEFORE he destroys a whole city?

So you think Superman should kill first and not as a last resort. Wow.

If he's gonna do it anyway, do it the smart way.

>That's what MoS was.

And that's not the subject. The guy asked if something had been done in comics and I said that I don't think it matters.

Those numbers? They help you follow the conversation. They're not just for getting crazy doubles.

>Casuals would settle for any kind of Superman movie

And comics fans don't count because there's a: very few of you and b: you guys steal shit instead of buying it.

Casuals set the trends. Casuals matter. Nerds do not. Nerds did this to themselves by the way.

>I'm not even saying there's no audience.

Well, that's not what the conversation said. Paraphrasing:

>no one wants this movie, not Donner fans, and not Batman fans and there are no other movie goers somehow.

Well?

>Y'know, actually save more people than he lets die?
It's Snyderverse, mate. Superman is curse to the planet here. He caused thousands deaths and billions dollars of damage. He is literally responsible for every bad thing we've seen on the screen.

>If he's gonna do it anyway

So you guys think Superman woke up that morning and said, I'm going to kill someone today. lol

In the movie on the other hand, as opposed to the things you imagined happened, he was as cornered as the family he saved. He killed Zod as a last resort.

>Casuals set the trends. Casuals matter.

Casuals want to be entertained. The money difference between TDK and TDKR is due to the fact that the movie wasn't as entertaining (e.g. no Ledger) - you can't say it's Joker, since Suicide Squad made far less than TDKR, and BUTTLOADS less than TDK.

Likewise, the money difference between BvS and Civil War (or Ultron) can also be assigned to casuals not being entertained. Not enough to talk it up, to give it good scores, to tell friends to go see it, to watch it a third, fourth, etc.

It's geeks, not nerds.

>no one wants this movie, not Donner fans, and not Batman fans and there are no other movie goers somehow.

Ever dawn on you that he was putting up examples? I have a hard time believing half the movie-goers are just Batman fans

>you guys steal shit instead of buying it

Just because you see that shit on here doesn't mean that's the majority of the community

I think he was in a hard situation in a horribly written movie and had to make a choice.

I would have preferred it way more if he didn't kill anyone. But if he absolutely has to kill someone, he should make the hard choice before the entire city becomes a crater, not after.

>Casuals want to be entertained.

And nerds don't? Do you read the thins you write?

>It's geeks, not nerds.

That's pointless semantics, not a real distinction.

>he should make the hard choice before the entire city becomes a crater, not after.

That's premeditation. Superman killing someone as a last resort is frigging leagues better than a Superman who kills someone as a first resort. He's not frigging Wolverine.

Geeks - Focus on learning all there is about entertainment (sci-fi, video games, comics, etc.)

Nerds - Focus on learning all there is about something that's actually applicable (science, math, history, mechanics, etc.)

It's not that difficult

Superman knew right from the beginning that Zod was a psychopath with all his powers, and he knew how destructive his powers were.

If you're going to have him wait that long before his ultimate decision, you should have him find a way to get around it.

If Superman has to lose the moral high ground, he should at least be able to save the day so efficiently that it doesn't matter.

If the city is going to lie in ruins by the end of the film, Superman should at least keep that moral high ground, finding a way to non-lethally stop Zod.

But the Superman in Synder's movies isn't Superman. He's a manic depressive loser who can't save anyone without whining about how much it sucks. He's not a hero, he's just a movie prop.

>Superman killing someone as a last resort is frigging leagues better than a Superman who kills someone as a first resort.
You're comparing turds here and arguing that water, liquid turds are better than nice, soft, solid turds.

The only acceptable option is Superman not killing anyone. But because this movie was developed by a low-functioning autist, that didn't happen.

>It's not that difficult

It is pointless semantics though.

Semantics - the meaning of a word, phrase, sentence, or text.

>Superman knew right from the beginning that Zod was a psychopath with all his powers

It was never plain that Zod would never give up until the very end. You're using the events at the end and the journey Clark took to get into that position to make that decision as a bunch of givens that he would have had access to at some earlier point and that's just not so. There was no point that Superman would have had enough information necessary to summarily execute the second to last Kryptonian.

To break it down: There was no way to tell that Zod had all his powers, because he just didn't. he couldn't fly, he wasn't as strong, and he couldn't blow shit up by looking at them. He gained them at a rapid pace though, much faster than Clark did. At what point did you expect Clark to know this was going to happen prior to the fight exactly?

There was also no way to tell that Zod was beyond surrender or negotiation until he proved without a doubt that he was. Superman isn't an assassin. He isn't an executioner either. For all he knew he could have hit Zod hard enough to subdue him somehow along the way. Killing was only on the table when it was at the point where he had to either do that or watch a family fry.

To use a real world example: You can protect yourself from a dude in a fist fight al day long, but if you skip the fight to kill him because you did the math beforehand, you've just committed murder.

what about a movie where batman and superman, after a brief misunderstanding, they quickly learn that their methods and beliefs may be different, but they both have the best interests of the people at heart and team up to fight a greater threat