DC/WB Films/Worlds (No Spoilers)

[Frontier]

Superhero movies didn't care about collateral damage until MoS. It was all completely or largely ignored.

Yeah, it kind of started a mild trend. I mean, pre-Civil War Daredevil dealt more with the fallout of the Chitauri invasion then the movies did.

[Agent Z]

This was back when Superhero movies were having an...interesting discussion about collateral damage. Civil War did it too.

Superhero movies don't care about collateral damage for the most part.

[Frontier]

Superhero movies don't care about collateral damage for the most part.

Yeah, it was kind of a mild trend that didn't last long .

[HsssH]

One of the weirdest things to me is how some people talk about MoS. Movie is not perfect and has bunch of flaws, yet some people have to go extra mile and basically make **** up to make it sound worse than it was. I just don't get it.

[Lightning Rider]

For people saying it's not canon. Quotes from zack snyder. This how his powers worked in both mos and bvs.

City here is Gotham


Gotham is a hellhole.Who know what he sees at the same time. Rape,child molestation, abuse of everykind, horrific accidents , corruption,brutal murders, bank robbery ... Etc. Humans can be Barbaric. The darkness of the scene would entirely depend on what kal gets at the same time. Yeah! I would totally shut myself out. Especially, if I had the deep altruistic instinct like clark does to always jump in. This is'nt like daredevil who only senses two blocks or something. It's like byakugan on steroids(if you have watched naruto) .if you don't, he gets everything around for miles and miles.

What are those panels from?

[The Darknight Detective]

One of the weirdest things to me is how some people talk about MoS. Movie is not perfect and has bunch of flaws, yet some people have to go extra mile and basically make **** up to make it sound worse than it was. I just don't get it.

Using this post as a springboard...

Comic-book discussions on the Internet are exactly the same thing as political debates in the sense many are not just giving you their opinion, but are trying to win their particular "battle" at the same time. The good thing is, unlike politics, superhero film "wars" shouldn't (though I know that's not the case for some) make you lose any sleep in the long run.

[Steel Inquisitor]

The destruction that was caused almost entirely by Zod with Superman being at worst unable to stop it.

Superman did zilch to stop any destruction in any fights in Man of Steel. "Unable" implies he actually tried to do anything it, which is incorrect.

In BvS, we see Clark fighting Doomsday away from populated areas and even punches Doomsday into the atmosphere. The only reason the fight returns to ground level is because of the missile strike.

Rewatching the scenes you're right, he did improve in B v S.

Other superheroes either never make these mistakes or they repeat them over and over again with fans ignoring them. In their first battle, the Avengers do far more damage to New York than Clark does to either Smallville or Metropolis and in Civil War they engage in battle in populated areas, tear up a highway protecting a wanted fugitive and later trash an airport. That's not even getting into Wanda deliberately siccing the Hulk on a populated area which is far less forgivable than anything Clark does in MoS or BvS.

Sure they do, the MCU is very self aware about this. It's more controversial with Snyder's Superman since he goes all out, he wants the most destruction on screen and his fights emulate monsters fights from Godzilla more than traditional super-hero fights. The Avengers worry about casualties and evacuations in all their movies. The battle in the airport doesn't go off until the airport's evacuated and Stark's lectured by Ross after it, anyway. Cap protected the German SWAT when they tried to capture Bucky, as well. Wanda was a super-villain when she did that.

Again, see above.

The Avengers have improved, they spent scenes preparing a city being evacuated before going to war with Ultron in act 2. Superman hasn't done this in nay of his Snyder movies.

Never happens in the Smallville fight.

I was wrong, this occurred when he fought Zod in Metropolis.



It's at 2:43

Because he doesn't have any. Did you pay attention to the movie at all? Clark avoided fighting another person up until the Kryptonian invasion. Your arguments aren't even being consistent. You claim that Clark is both being impulsive and precise at the same time. You do know those two words mean different things right?

Then why does he fight like he does? If he had no training whatsoever these soldiers should have had a larger gap between them with their skills, instead he's able to match veteran soldiers blow for blow. He is impulsive, he also acts like he has training in self defence. These sort of fighters are called brawlers not everyone who knows how to defend themselves knows martial arts. We don't know if he got training in B vs S, either, but I'm thinking no - which is strange. He was a full blown super-hero by B vs S.

We don't know that he's avoided fighting people before the Kryptonians appear, we have a brief sketch of his activities but he's a black slate until the oil rig. We know he hasn't fought street crime, but we're not told why and it never comes up in conversation. When he does use his powers to save people he does it in front of everyone and bounces once that occurs, because he never learnt to invest in masks or gloves. What we do know is that he's learnt to hone his vision powers, he tells Zod that in their Smallville fight, that's why Zod has to retreat when his helmet is busted.

Man of Steel isn't the whole story of Clark Kent becoming Superman, it's not Batman Begins. Large swaths of his life are blank and nobody asks him about it and he's not telling. He could heave learnt self defence from someone in Metropolis as a young adult and that couldn't change the film, because it's a blank slate.

Both Superman and the Kryptonians are at disadvantages. Superman has never fought before and the Kryptonians aren't used to fighting with super powers. Clark also isn't going at them alone. Up until the final battle with Zod, he has the military helping him.

Except Superman fights the Kryptonians more than once in battle in the movie and his tactics don't change. The military aren't responsible for his actions, he is. The military are his support but he's doing the heavy lifting in hurting the Kryptonians.

What behavior in BvS? Where he takes the fight into the atmosphere? Where he sacrifices himself to stop Doomsday? Where he attends the Senate hearing to answer their questions something most movie superheroes don't do? Where he spends most of his screen time in the suit rescuing civilians rather than fighting anyone? Where he saved Luthor from Doomsday despite the guy kidnapping his mother, nearly killing Lois and framing Superman for murders he did not commit? The only logical way you'd come to the conclusion that Superman doesn't care about anybody is if you ignore everything he does in these movies just to focus on the destruction of Metropolis which, again, was not his fault.

How about his fight with Batman? He barely tried to convince him to stop the fight, and went all out far too quickly and didn't bother using his x-ray vision during it to make sure there were no bystanders around. He attends a senate hearing who ends up being blown up so we don't know his defence, and it's not like he's broadcasting his case to the media, and he's too stupid to figure out what Lex is doing. He doesn't use his x-ray vision ever, despise the fact in Man of Steel he tells Zod he has that under control. In B v S Superman rotates between killing dictators like he's in the Authority and natural disaster relief, and he looks happier doing the former than the latter. He loathes using his powers as a super-hero, when he found joy in them in Man of Steel. He floats ominously above a flooded area like a distant god rather than swiftly recusing people right then and there. He is controversial in the media but they react to him he doesn't interact with them. He tries to murder Lex when he first met him! Lex was able to do that because Superman is incredibly passive, not very smart, and has few allies to speak of to help him do anything. Rather than defend himself from the frame up he hides because he couldn't be bothered trying to convince people he didn't do it. Nope, all I need to do is recognise how he acts and it's a far cry from being worthy of the name Superman.

[phantom1592]

Superman did zilch to stop any destruction in any fights in Man of Steel. "Unable" implies he actually tried to do anything it, which is incorrect.

He was busy.

MoS is not a good movie, and i really dislike a LOT about it... but the destruction i have zero problems with. That's just what happens when you're fighting an uphill battle. The exact same thing happened during the original Doomsday fight. They showed aftermath pictures with a huge trail of destruction running straight up the middle of metropolis with fires all around. By the time they got through Funeral for a Friend, World without a Superman, AND reign of the Supermen... They were STILL pulling people out of rubble and Clark was able to pass off that he'd been buried the whole time and it was believable.

Superman vs. a Kryptonian invasion? In the best case scenario.... things are going to get REALLY messed up. People will die all over... and the thing people need to focus on is not how much of the city was destroyed... but how much he was able to prevent being destroyed. That's just comic mentality there. The only real option was going straight at the destroyers... because with super speed, every time he stops a building from falling, 3 more are knocked over. He really HAS to go straight at Zod and stop the threats there. Then help with cleanup and damage ccontrol afterwards... but during hte fight? he needs to be right in Zod's face.

Like i said... a lot that sucks in that movie, but that's not an issue for me.

[Agent Z]

You know what, Steel Inquisitor, believe what you want. I've had this argument too many times to see how pointless it is for people already convinced MoS Superman is the devil. Have a nice day.

[The Darknight Detective]

He was busy.

MoS is not a good movie, and i really dislike a LOT about it... but the destruction i have zero problems with. That's just what happens when you're fighting an uphill battle. The exact same thing happened during the original Doomsday fight. They showed aftermath pictures with a huge trail of destruction running straight up the middle of metropolis with fires all around. By the time they got through Funeral for a Friend, World without a Superman, AND reign of the Supermen... They were STILL pulling people out of rubble and Clark was able to pass off that he'd been buried the whole time and it was believable.

Superman vs. a Kryptonian invasion? In the best case scenario.... things are going to get REALLY messed up. People will die all over... and the thing people need to focus on is not how much of the city was destroyed... but how much he was able to prevent being destroyed. That's just comic mentality there. The only real option was going straight at the destroyers... because with super speed, every time he stops a building from falling, 3 more are knocked over. He really HAS to go straight at Zod and stop the threats there. Then help with cleanup and damage ccontrol afterwards... but during hte fight? he needs to be right in Zod's face.

Like i said... a lot that sucks in that movie, but that's not an issue for me.

Yeah, I can see some people's POV in regard to some things in the film, but I have also never understood the complaints about the destruction.

[Vakanai]

Yeah, I can see some people's POV in regard to some things in the film, but I have also never understood the complaints about the destruction.

Their complaints are less about the actual destruction and more the tone of that destruction. Avengers had the same level of city destruction, but it was fun and quippy. MoS's destruction is dark and somber and serious, so it feels worse. They focus on it because it leaves more of an uncomfortable impact since there was no levity to allow them to joke it off.

At least that is what I believe.

[The Darknight Detective]

Their complaints are less about the actual destruction and more the tone of that destruction. Avengers had the same level of city destruction, but it was fun and quippy. MoS's destruction is dark and somber and serious, so it feels worse. They focus on it because it leaves more of an uncomfortable impact since there was no levity to allow them to joke it off.

At least that is what I believe.

You're probably right, but the idea of joking around when people are getting hurt or even killed seems nonsensical to me.

[Frontier]

You're probably right, but the idea of joking around when people are getting hurt or even killed seems nonsensical to me.

Well, modern Robin's quip and make jokes while fighting killers and deranged madmen...the comic book genre just has a lot of contrasting tones .

[The Darknight Detective]

Well, modern Robin's quip and make jokes while fighting killers and deranged madmen...the comic book genre just has a lot of contrasting tones .

One liners while fighting a supervillain are a different story, IMO. That I could see, as long as noncombatants weren't in harms way.

[Vakanai]

You're probably right, but the idea of joking around when people are getting hurt or even killed seems nonsensical to me.

Logically sure, but it is a staple of the action genre to offset the violence with a lighter tone. Audiences are used to it, and the MCU thrives on it. All the destruction, but everyone is cool with it because Iron Man is making fun of Loki.

Also the music helps. Light and exhilarating action music vs a more subdued or sombre track.