and all in the same retarded "THIS IS WHAT WOULD *REALLY* HAPPEN IF THUPERHEROES FOUGHT HURF DURF BLUH I MADE 300 TOO!!"

style

also your tags are quite possibly the worst ever

I don't know, 'and other mishaps' has promise.

Indeed.

Zach Snyder shouldn't be allowed to direct a Christmas pageant.

People here pretty much hate everything, so you shouldn't be surprised by the comments.

It's also a part of the whole "Superman doesn't kill people" mythos.

Myself, I've got no problem with it after exhausting all options and coming to grips with it, Supes offs a super-powered bad guy for "the greater good." But I can also see people getting upset in the same way that they could be pissed off if Batman killed one of his enemies using a handgun.

I'm afraid I have no choice but to push my BEARD POWERS BEYOND MAXIMUM.

http://i.imgur.com/qD4ofcj.jpg

That's Zod in the hat. And yeah, they all die.

Also, remember the time Superman was killed off for like three months? He killed the other guy, too. It was a double fatal beating! Contrived, but still.

Wait, my beard sense is follicling:

1) Pre-Crisis anyway, kryptonite was harmless to unpowered Kryptonians, even temporarily unpowered. You'd need anti-kryptonite under those circumstances.

2) If Zod and his pals are powerless, why not use a shotgun? Or a pointed stick?

Actually, that does bring up something about villains in superhero movies: Most of the time, I hate them being killed off, since that means we won't see them again until the eventual reboot. This is really annoying in Batman movies, since (1) it means the Joker (or whoever) can't be a recurring threat and (2) no Arkham asylum.

If these movies do want to make some kind of continuity, killing all of the bad guys just makes stuff more confusing down the road when they're eventually re-used.

Is that why this is up here? I honestly thought it was submitted for being just all around bad.

Zod looks like he just stepped out of a Tom of Finland drawing

I bet it's part of the reason it's up there. From what I hear the general consensus is "fun Superman movie, but not 0 million fun Superman movie."

WHERE IS GENE HACKMAN?

Man, do I never tire of that!

UPDATE: I just saw the movie and only 17% of it is people being thrown through buildings and getting sort of hurt but not really. But another 22% is people getting thrown into concrete and leaving a trench behind.

to an 80s movie about a 50s comic book

Drawn by JEWS.

I hear a story there's also a scene where superman asks The Lord for help. And all I could think was "fuck you, Nolan and goyer. Hamfist away."

More of what I'm gettin at wih the whole goyer/Nolan pro military team americuh crap http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/man-of-steel

It also helps if you can get wasted at the theater. I love the Alamo Drafthouse. They sell buckets of beer, and it's great because at all the midnight showings, all of the brodudes get trashed and start fights in the parking lot. This movie was awesome -- it got all these shitfuck Texas meatheads pumped up enough to start wailing on each other like they were General Zod!

God damn it, I'm getting so emotional about people caring about a franchise I don't care about! Why won't you be more apathetic, damn it?!

Why? The live-action Dragonball Z movie was AWESOME!

Cam, your embarrassing tastes are showing!

Goyer wrote this. I've started making it a point to avoid anything be bad a hand in writing.

Movies are tricky, though. You're telling a single large story in the time you could air four or five cartoon episodes, and that single large story probably ought to involve multiple themes and say something about the hero. Now contrast with "Superman: The Animated Series", where virtually every episode was a standalone episode functionally interchangeable with the ones before and after.

Also, if you rewatch STAS without a nostalgic eye, you may find that the show really wasn't all that great. It wasn't horrible, and it was nice to work the Flash or Jack Kirby into episodes, but most of the stories were pretty one-dimensional tales of Superman stopping a bad guy. It was fine for a 22-minute medium in which the only resolution you get is to the problem of the week, but not so much for a movie.

The only really good episodes of STAS were the three-part series intro.

I think Bort sells STAS quite short. Among other things, in one episode, Darkseid murders a recurring character. The one where Lobo shows up is hysterical, and few (if any) cameos from the rest of the DCU are wasted for just "nostalgia."

Perhaps watching them with a less jaundiced eye is called for?

Personally, I'm a huge fan of the Superman comics, but I loved this movie. Great little popcorn flick. In a weird way, having Zack Snyder (whose other films are either offensive or embarrassing) direct it worked out. Whatever you want to say about the movie, it's not pretentious.

Really though, the only way you could truly make a movie about Superman the icon is to make a movie about Siegel and Shuster. That would be awesome. They were Jewish socialist speed-freak misfits who were only ever exploited by the comics companies. Their hatred of the suits who ran these companies translated into Superman too, like when he beats up a robber baron to stand up for striking workers, or breaks up a war in South America to fuck with rich people. Shuster was bad-ass -- he would stay up for days on end tweaked out of his gourd drawing comics to meet brutal last-minute deadlines. His bondage art is great too -- at a time when DC was shafting them out of royalties and credit for their work, he was drawing their biggest character getting tied up and whipped by Lois Lane. Dude was a freak!

I like your Lobo idea, ROUS. If they really really really want to drag Superman out again, then they could do the storyline where Lobo fights Superman and kills him. Not the one where Lobo kills EVERY superhero on Earth, including Superman, but the one where Lobo goes one-on-one with Superman, and, realizing he's no match for The Last Czarnian, Superman tries to cheat by using a robot and then a missile TO NO AVAIL hahaha.

Actually, no, screw that. Do the one where Lobo kills every superhero on earth. Malo Perverso was a great saga, and they could have it be like a DC version of Avengers. Only all the Avengers get fragged in this one.

Also, non-comic people come to the movies for the villains, not the heroes. It takes a long time in a movie to introduce and explain a new villain correctly. That time cuts out of the need for immediate violence and noise and spectacle. To maintain the spectacle, they have to use established villains, even if those villains are from long out of the comic continuity.

Why they just don't bring back Gene Hackman to play Lex Luthor is beyond me. He was golden in the role.

Ugh, not another Lex Luthor = real estate con artist. We've had Hackman and Kevin Spacey both do that schtick. If they bring Lex Back, he should be like an evil Tony Stark, a genius who's already rich and not a source of comic relief.

But this movie is yet again another origin film. Unless it's the first big-budget outing for a superhero or they haven't been in theaters in over 20 years, we don't need to hear how they became who they are yet a-fucking-gain. Reference it in the movie, maybe even give out a free comic if the suits are really concerned, but nobody needs to know Bruce Wayne's parents got shot, Peter Parker got bitten by a radioactive spider, or that Superman landed in Kansas in a rocket.

To be sure I preferred STAS to, say, "Road Rovers". But compared to BTAS -- where they did a lot of exploring of the hero and of his relationship to the world around him (which BTW changed over time) -- STAS was a weak followup effort. Sure, the Mxyzptlk episode was a lot of fun (the first one anyway), but Gilbert Gottfried's screechy voice goes only so far.

Remember that BTAS episode where Bruce Wayne got amnesia and was pressed into working in a mine? You know, that episode that everyone hates? Even that episode had some good in it, with Bruce Wayne becoming one of society's forgotten people, then becoming as Batman as he could despite not looking the part, and then finally trying to help those people once he was Bruce Wayne again. Could they have done anything at all like that with Superman? Maybe, but they never even tried as far as I recall. I wish they'd had something of the sort to say about Superman, but they didn't.

Still, Lobo and Bibbo had the same voice, and that was something.

One episode, Superman was brainwashed and became Darkseid's herald, basically. There was also a Kingdom-Come-ish episode where we got an alternate universe where Lois had died and Superman teamed up with Lex Luthor to create a dystopian perfect society.

Did you really watch this show?

The Darkseid one was series finale, so fair enough, they dared tell a daring story at the end of the series. And the alternate universe one was okay, but I've seen that one done so many times (they did virtually the exact same thing on "Lois and Clark" a couple years prior) that it's hardly an achievement.

Yeah, I watched the series, so I know it never had half the juice that "Batman" did. Even you know it. Some would say it's because Superman is a harder character to write, and maybe he is, but they didn't much test the boundaries of the character either. Remember the Batman story ("New Adventures" maybe) with the kids telling stories about Batman? That was a window into how normal folks view Batman, and additionally a way to rip on Joel Schumacher. Did they ever do anything like that with Superman? I would have liked to see an episode about his impact on normal folks, but I guess they were too busy with yet another return of Metallo story.

I also like how the Kryptonians have to have "space helmets" instead of just "helmets" a technology that has existed since primitive ages.

It is and it isn't Ursa, it's Faora, but they're essentially the same character. Ursa was amazing in Superman II.

Somewhere after Hard Boiled, the man just lost his mind. Sadly.

There were signs of it even in "Dark Knight Returns". Take a look at the contempt Miller had for the common man; everyone who wasn't Batman, Jim Gordon, or Robin was a stupid worthless sheeple of some stripe or other. I was never left with a sense that Miller was interested in complexities, and sooner or later that led to bad storytelling.

The main problem, though, is that Miller got big enough to be his own editor. I'm trying to think of a single big name comic book writer who edits himself well, and I can't think of one; they all do better having someone to rein in their self-indulgent sides or to tell them when they need to rework their ideas.