DCU: Man of Steel

[AzStevenCal]

Seriously? If you dive in head first to a frickin' certain death scenario to save a kitten or a puppy, I'm supposed to shed tears? No! Pets are great. Love them, cherish them, but don't be silly enough to DIE for them.

That's not what you said. In your earlier post you were talking about risk, about peril - not certainty. You said peril, I said mortal peril? And you said is there another kind? I can have the Forum Moderator read it back to you....

Steve

 

[Chaplin]

Seriously? If you dive in head first to a frickin' certain death scenario to save a kitten or a puppy, I'm supposed to shed tears? No! Pets are great. Love them, cherish them, but don't be silly enough to DIE for them.

You said anyone that risks their life for a pet DESERVES TO DIE. How is that NOT horrible?

 

[crisper57]

In terms of the tornado scene, here's what Mark Waid (writer of Superman-Birthright, the comic series that has a lot of elements gleaned from it for Man of Steel) had to say about it:

Spoiler

...And I loved, loved, loved that scene where Clark didn’t save him, because Goyer did something magical–he took two moments that, individually, I would have hated and he welded them together into something amazing. Out of context, I would have hated that Clark said “You’re not my real dad,” or whatever he says right before the tornado. And out of context, I would have loathed that Clark stood by frozen with helplessness as the tornado killed Jonathan. But the reason that beat worked is because Clark had just said “You’re not my dad,” the last real words he said to Pa. Tearful Clark choosing to go against his every instinct in that last second because he had to show his father he trusted him after all, because he had to show Pa that Pa could trust him and that Clark had learned, Clark did love him–that worked for me, hugely. It was a very brave story choice, but it worked. It worked largely on the shoulders of Cavill, who sold it. It worked as a tragic rite of passage. I kinda wish I’d written that scene.

For his full (spoiler-filled) review, click here.

I agree with him except I think Costner sold it just as we'll as Cavill.

 

[Stout]

You said anyone that risks their life for a pet DESERVES TO DIE. How is that NOT horrible?

How is it not horrible to deprive a family of a father or mother or son or daughter, because of a PET? Stupidity.

 

[Cheesebeef]

How is it not horrible to deprive a family of a father or mother or son or daughter, because of a PET? Stupidity.

especially with a kid who's got MAJOR problems with abandonment/fitting in!

 

[crisper57]

Spoiler-ish question:

Spoiler

If Superman can snap Zod's neck, then shouldn't all the punches the Kryptonians landed on each other have caused pain/damage/injury too?

 

[UncleChris]

Spoiler-ish question:

Spoiler

If Superman can snap Zod's neck, then shouldn't all the punches the Kryptonians landed on each other have caused pain/damage/injury too?

You booger!!!! Now you wrecked it all!!!!

j/k

 

[NJCardFan]

I have owned a dog before, and while I loved it, I sure in the hell wouldn't put my life on the line for an animal.



Anyone stupid enough to run into mortal peril to save a dog deserves to die. Sorry, but that's just silly.

I paid $7200 to save my dog's life and would willingly do it again. That same dog would risk his life to save mine. There are countless stories about dogs saving humans in life threatening instances so why wouldn't you do the same for them?

 

[NJCardFan]

How is it not horrible to deprive a family of a father or mother or son or daughter, because of a PET? Stupidity.

Because to some, a pet IS a part of the family. Tell you what, you live your life your way and we'll live ours our way. We don't have to come to you for approval, ok?

 

[crisper57]

You booger!!!! Now you wrecked it all!!!!

j/k

Ha ha!

 

[Stout]

I paid $7200 to save my dog's life and would willingly do it again. That same dog would risk his life to save mine. There are countless stories about dogs saving humans in life threatening instances so why wouldn't you do the same for them?

I personally think it's insane to spend such enormous amounts of money on pets, but hey, to each their own. A person can spend what they want on their pets. A person can dress their pets in human clothes and call them baby too. I roll my eyes at it, but more power to them. It doesn't change the fact that they're just animals, though.

Because to some, a pet IS a part of the family. Tell you what, you live your life your way and we'll live ours our way. We don't have to come to you for approval, ok?

Hey, you can throw your life away for an animal if you want. I neither care to or have the power to stop you. I'll laugh if you do it, though, because no matter how cherished a pet it is, it's still an animal. Try to explain to a baby growing up with no father that the kid will never have a parent because that father threw his life away over a puppy. Yeah, there's no way, IMO, to get around that. So, I guess you can throw your life away how you want it, but I'm also allowed to categorize it as Darwin award material.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Because to some, a pet IS a part of the family. Tell you what, you live your life your way and we'll live ours our way. We don't have to come to you for approval, ok?

sorry man...but I'm pretty sure Ma Kent would have gotten over her dog dying...instead of her HUSBAND dying along with it.

for my tastes, if my father sacrificed his life and completely ignored the effect his death would have on the rest of my family's life for an animal, I'd be furious forever. give me my dad alive then my dog any day of the week. not sure how this can really be argued.

 

[AzStevenCal]

sorry man...but I'm pretty sure Ma Kent would have gotten over her dog dying...instead of her HUSBAND dying along with it.

for my tastes, if my father sacrificed his life and completely ignored the effect his death would have on the rest of my family's life for an animal, I'd be furious forever. give me my dad alive then my dog any day of the week. not sure how this can really be argued.

But that's not the point, we were no longer talking about the movie. Yes, most of us would probably agree that intentionally throwing away a human life to save the life of a pet is silly. But, RISKING your own life for a pet is not silly. I know a lot of animal owners that would willingly take that risk as long as it's just a risk, not a certainty. Stout stated his objection to this in such a way that it infuriated a lot of animal lovers, me among them. Initially, he didn't make it clear that he was just talking about the movie specifically. It came across as a general comment that anyone (IRL) willing to risk mortal peril for an animal was stupid and deserved to die.

As far as the movie goes, I haven't seen it yet but based on what you guys have said I'd probably agree with your point of view about this particular scene.

Steve

 

[crisper57]

I wasn't like he made a premeditated decision to throw his life away for a dog. It was a spur-of-the-moment, instinctual act. Fight or flight.

We've had weeks to digest his decision and debate his actions. But in that context, in the middle of crisis, he didn't exactly have time to internally debate the merits that we've been discussing.

I think he (rightly) saw a member of his family in peril and had the decency to not just stand by and do nothing. His character was all about protecting his family at all costs, so if he saw the dog as a member of the family, it stands to reason that his instinct would have been to put himself at risk to save it.

He didn't have time to think what his death might mean. Hell, he probably didn't even consider that he might die when he ran in. His only concern was for another living creature.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I wasn't like he made a premeditated decision to throw his life away for a dog. It was a spur-of-the-moment, instinctual act. Fight or flight.

He ran into a tornado. chances aren't good you're coming out of that alive.

We've had weeks to digest his decision and debate his actions. But in that context, in the middle of crisis, he didn't exactly have time to internally debate the merits that we've been discussing.

I think he (rightly) saw a member of his family in peril and had the decency to not just stand by and do nothing. His character was all about protecting his family at all costs, so if he saw the dog as a member of the family, it stands to reason that his instinct would have been to put himself at risk to save it.

hard to protect your family when you're dead. and this wasn't just any family. he did have time to think about it. Clark was going to go and his Dad stopped him. Put himself in danger, knowing that it was likely a disaster. And knowing what he knew about Clark, and consistently pounded into Clark's head about being afraid of what people would do to him, you'd think the character would a) want to be around as long as possible to guide the son he was worried about and b) wouldn't sacrifice protecting Clark...for a dog.

He didn't have time to think what his death might mean. Hell, he probably didn't even consider that he might die when he ran in. His only concern was for another living creature.

i don't buy this specifically because he wouldn't let Clark go. The whole reason he wouldn't let Clark go is because Clark might have exposed himself because of the mortal danger he was running into which he'd likely come out unharmed. there was a specific choice there made and it was an idiotic one IMO. You won't let Clark go because you know he would likely withstand what a human can't...thus exposing himself to the world. so, he'll throw himself into what he knows is going to be mortal danger? sorry. felt incredibly false.

 

[Chaplin]

Maybe this is a better question for someone that has kids, not just pets.

 

[Mulli]

Anywho, I am glad I didn't bother seeing this.

 

[Stout]

Maybe this is a better question for someone that has kids, not just pets.

LOL I had pets but not kids, so I just don't understand--that being the implication? Ridiculous. Pets are animals, not people. Certain death, which is what he was knowingly running into, deprived the family of the patriarch, all for a pet.

 

[crisper57]

LOL I had pets but not kids, so I just don't understand--that being the implication? Ridiculous. Pets are animals, not people. Certain death, which is what he was knowingly running into, deprived the family of the patriarch, all for a pet.

But it wasn't certain death. He got to the car and got the dog out. The dog made it back to safety. If not for the injury, Pa Kent could have conceivably made it back too. Death wasn't inevitable when he started to run back. (Except we all know in the mythology that he has to die somehow).

 

[Chaplin]

LOL I had pets but not kids, so I just don't understand--that being the implication? Ridiculous. Pets are animals, not people. Certain death, which is what he was knowingly running into, deprived the family of the patriarch, all for a pet.

Whoa, whoa, I was referring to the idea of Jonathan Kent putting his kid's life/reputation over his own. It's not about you.

 

[NJCardFan]

LOL I had pets but not kids, so I just don't understand--that being the implication? Ridiculous. Pets are animals, not people. Certain death, which is what he was knowingly running into, deprived the family of the patriarch, all for a pet.

Why are you getting all worked up over a movie? And like I said, you do you.

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Funny...spoiler filled, but funny!

 

[Shane]

Completely enjoyed it! Good stuff!

 

[Mulli]

Disappointing to say the least. I can't believe they let someone actually say "I'm a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter."

Or what about "Jenny, where are you? I am over here." Ugh. Come on.

Laughable dialogue. Fight scenes that were WAY too long.

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Disappointing to say the least. I can't believe they let someone actually say "I'm a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter."

Or what about "Jenny, where are you? I am over here." Ugh. Come on.

Laughable dialogue. Fight scenes that were WAY too long.

I know, right? Zack Synder should have learned some lessons from Michael Bay and his Transformers movies.