Latest Entertainment News Headlines

C'mon Hollywood: Are movies getting too destruction happy?

06.18.2013

Like many of you, I saw MAN OF STEEL over the weekend (twice) and absolutely loved it. For me, it was everything I wanted in a Superman movie, hitting all the right beats to bring the classic superhero to life on the big screen for contemporary audiences, including some destructive, superhero-level action. Like, A LOT of it, so much so that they destroyed main street Smallville and downtown Metropolis to a large (and costly) extent, which has many moviegoers complaining that it was too much and unnecessarily so.

In the last few years we’ve seen the big-budget extravaganzas go out of their way to wreak havoc on some of the Earth’s most popular metropolitan architecture, leaving a wake of destruction that eclipses anything we’ve seen before, including real-world attacks like 9/11. Witness Michael Bay’s skyscraper devastation progression from the first TRANSFORMERS film to the most recent, in which we see New York, The Pyramids in Egypt, and the entire city of Chicago left in utter ruin by the time the credits roll.

Film has always been about spectacle and entertainment, showing us things we’ve never seen before, be it an alien invasion (INDEPENDENCE DAY), a hijacked skyrise (DIE HARD), an overgrown monkey on a rampage (KING KONG), or a regular ol' natural disaster (DANTE'S PEAK). If box office receipts are any indicator, it’s one of the biggest reasons we go to the movies in the first place. As technology and graphics have improved, however, it seems like the all-too-real representation of destruction has begun to wear on people.

Last year’s THE AVENGERS saw New York City ravaged by an alien invasion that had giant armored space worms careening into buildings left and right, leaving a repair bill and likely death toll unlike any we’ve ever faced in the real world. Director Roland Emmerich is probably the greatest proprietor of worldwide devastation, having ravaged cities over and over again including two separate attacks on the White House, both in INDEPENDENCE DAY and the upcoming WHITE HOUSE DOWN, not to mention floods, volcanic eruptions, and a second ice age.

It’s not always this way, however, as many big-budget bonanzas are still able to deliver the goods with some minimal disaster, including MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE – GHOST PROTOCOL, which “merely” blew up The Kremlin, broke a few windows, and crashed a few cars, or, say, the recent Bond adventure, SKYFALL, which took out MI6 headquarters, a remote mansion and a helicopter at its worst. So, does that make those movies less destructive than movies like MAN OF STEEL or TRANSFORMERS?

I think it comes down to context. For MAN OF STEEL, you’re looking at arguably the biggest superhero of all time with abilities that outweigh just about any other counterpart in the genre. Even SUPERMAN II tore the shit out of the city and that’s with 1978 effects. TRANSFORMERS is based on a cartoon that’s based on a toy. Talk about an opening for expressive mayhem (from “Bayhem,” no less). The source material for films like these, particularly from the comic book and fantasy genre, have always been and continue to be rampant with epic level destruction. Consider that both Marvel and DC have destroyed entire cities in the pages of their comics over and over and over again. And, they’ll do it again, probably next month. It’s the nature of the medium and isn’t showing any signs of stopping. So, in relation to its source material, these films have simply fallen in line.

Is there a point beyond the devastation? Absolutely, but it still serves the context of the world in which these creations live. The city-wide invasions of both THE AVENGERS and MAN OF STEEL served two purposes 1) Introduce the human world to the new superhuman threats that exist, thereby paving the way for superhero existence (i.e. believability) and necessity for future films, and 2) Look really cool while fighting in a metropolitan area. If either of these film’s finales took place on a deserted island or big open field you’d likely hear every fan cry foul. For one, you remove the human element and with no human beings in danger, everything is happening in a vacuum. Is a superhero throw down relevant if lives aren’t at stake? Depends on the story, I suppose.

What it all boils down to is suspension of disbelief and an understanding of the context in which you’re seeing all your favorite landmarks turned to rubble. Certainly, it can bring back memories of real-world destruction, but sheltering one from such reminders doesn’t negate their existence. Personally, I don’t need to have my eyes shielded from the horrors of reality, especially if it’s coming from a comic book movie, but that’s just me. Because, let’s face it folks, if Autobots, Avengers, or Kryptonian aliens were real and ever decided to use Earth as their battleground, we’d all be f*cked and that’s just the way it is. That's not to say there shouldn't be any kind of limit, but again, if it fits the overall story, then so be it. So, maybe it’s time to just enjoy the genre for what it is, rather than whining about how “unrealistic” or “excessive” it is, especially when it fits well within the parameters of the genre.

CLICK IMAGE TO OPEN GALLERY & SEE MORE PICS...

Extra Tidbit: What do you think? Does Hollywood need to tone it down or are they simply delivering the goods?
Source: JoBlo.com

RECOMMENDED MOVIE NEWS

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

+1
9:36AM on 06/19/2013

So no lives will be lost in an alien invasion? Really?

I agree with the article in the sense that the destruction in Man of Steel was justified for the realism in the story. Zod came to get back Superman and terraform planet Earth "on the bones of this world's inhabitants". Right now, that's 6 billion people. So what Superman had to do to save close to 6 billion was destroy Zod and his army PLUS his technology which was not easy. Keep in mind that Superman didn't WANT to destroy Zod. He wanted to live next to his people to "bridge the gap" between
I agree with the article in the sense that the destruction in Man of Steel was justified for the realism in the story. Zod came to get back Superman and terraform planet Earth "on the bones of this world's inhabitants". Right now, that's 6 billion people. So what Superman had to do to save close to 6 billion was destroy Zod and his army PLUS his technology which was not easy. Keep in mind that Superman didn't WANT to destroy Zod. He wanted to live next to his people to "bridge the gap" between their two worlds. Meanwhile in Metropolis (not New York, folks) the people were as good as dead. All of them.
Superman enters the situation and mayhem ensues. He couldn't fly out of the city because Zod's ship wasn't after him. Zod was after him! Not his ship. So the fight had to take place in the city. Then after all the destruction, Zod was hell bent on killing as many of Superman's precious human's as possible. Again, if Superman flies away, Zod kills EVERYONE! I would like remind people that Lester/Donner destroyed well known landmarks such as the Statue of Liberty. That says a lot more then the faces of nameless buildings to me.
You can estimate the death toll but you have no idea what it really was.
On top of that, Superman hadn't made his final decision to protect mankind unequivocally until the very end of the film. That's how I took it. I think all of this will be assuaged with a sequel now that Superman is firmly in place as Earth's protector.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:52AM on 06/19/2013
I agree.
Modern Hollywood seems to think more is always better. More detruction, better movie. More comedic smut, better movie. More shock value, better movie. While quality usually depends on injection moderation into your movies.
MoS didn't need to end as yet another dumbed down movie for the ADD-generation, but hey, it's Snyder, so what would you expect?
I agree.
Modern Hollywood seems to think more is always better. More detruction, better movie. More comedic smut, better movie. More shock value, better movie. While quality usually depends on injection moderation into your movies.
MoS didn't need to end as yet another dumbed down movie for the ADD-generation, but hey, it's Snyder, so what would you expect?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:04AM on 06/19/2013

BLOW IT ALL UP!!!

Movies are cathartic, and they are make believe, blow-it all up.
Movies are cathartic, and they are make believe, blow-it all up.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+4
11:49PM on 06/18/2013

Hillarious photo!

Agree on the topic. Contextual violence/destruction is ok but it shouldn't be stretched too far. If you're hell bent on showing too much of that in your movie go make an R rated movie and not shove it down our throats in PG-13 disguise.
Agree on the topic. Contextual violence/destruction is ok but it shouldn't be stretched too far. If you're hell bent on showing too much of that in your movie go make an R rated movie and not shove it down our throats in PG-13 disguise.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:34PM on 06/18/2013

To much destruction? Well...

...well, it is a superhero movie. It's also a summer action movie as well. So I didn't think it was a bad thing to have a crap load of destruction...at first. My problem was with one of the last scenes of the movie. Without going into any huge spoilers: Superman destroys a military drone.
"KABOOM" "That drone you just destroyed cost 12 million dollars." And I'm thinking to myself... "Yea? What about the 8 trillion dollars in damage to Metropolis. Would you like to comment on that?
...well, it is a superhero movie. It's also a summer action movie as well. So I didn't think it was a bad thing to have a crap load of destruction...at first. My problem was with one of the last scenes of the movie. Without going into any huge spoilers: Superman destroys a military drone.
"KABOOM" "That drone you just destroyed cost 12 million dollars." And I'm thinking to myself... "Yea? What about the 8 trillion dollars in damage to Metropolis. Would you like to comment on that?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+5
10:21PM on 06/18/2013

Zod's massive destruction was fine, Superman's wasn't.

I'm not at all upset that thousands of people we're killed by Zod. He's a diabolical villain, what's the point of having an evil villain if they don't do acts of inhuman cruelty. What I did not stand for was Superman's neglect of the unarmed civilians around him in Smallville and the people in the streets and buildings in Metropolis. He may be god like, but Superman is protector of people of Earth, doesn't help we see people in these buildings that he carelessly damages. Damages which include
I'm not at all upset that thousands of people we're killed by Zod. He's a diabolical villain, what's the point of having an evil villain if they don't do acts of inhuman cruelty. What I did not stand for was Superman's neglect of the unarmed civilians around him in Smallville and the people in the streets and buildings in Metropolis. He may be god like, but Superman is protector of people of Earth, doesn't help we see people in these buildings that he carelessly damages. Damages which include collapsing buildings and explosions. Superman's number one objective is to protect humans from harm. In "Man of Steel" he causes a lot of damage in populated areas. They may not show people dying by Superman's impulses to fight, but when they show people go inside buildings which are then moments later heavily damage by Superman crashing into them or by throwing the villains into them. In the "The Avengers" I never thought for a split second that the team was putting civilians in harm's way while battle the aliens in New York, unlike Superman in "Man of Steel".
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:47PM on 06/18/2013

Let's look at it from the perspective of good story telling

The extended fist fight Between Kal El and Zod at the end of SuperManofSteel were just too long and so over the top that it just didn't add anything meaningful to the story. At least in The Avengers the final battle - despite the over the top destruction - showcased how the team joined together and put aside their differences for the greater good. In SuperManofSteel (let's face it; no one is really calling it 'Man of Steel; even at the ticket booth you ask for tickets to 'Superman') there is no
The extended fist fight Between Kal El and Zod at the end of SuperManofSteel were just too long and so over the top that it just didn't add anything meaningful to the story. At least in The Avengers the final battle - despite the over the top destruction - showcased how the team joined together and put aside their differences for the greater good. In SuperManofSteel (let's face it; no one is really calling it 'Man of Steel; even at the ticket booth you ask for tickets to 'Superman') there is no team; just Kal El against Zod. And if they're trying to show how much Kal El wants to protect the citizens of earth they have failed miserably. He could EASILY have taken to battle outside the city; out over the water or into an unpopulated area. Instead he keeps the fight inside Metropolis, smashing Zod through buildings, toppling skyscrapers onto other buildings and killing tens of thousands of innocent people. The end battle has nothing to do with Kal El protecting the people of his adopted planet; it serves only to show off the latest in computer-generated mayhem. And even there it fails; we've seen bigger and better effects in other movies. By killing off half the people in Metropolis they have abandoned the premise of Kal El being earth's savior. Halfway through the fight, after countless people have died I should think that the citizens of Metropolis would start shouting at Kal El "STOP SAVING US!!"
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:45PM on 06/18/2013
While I had my flaws with 'MOS', I did like it, and found the level of destruction in the film to make sense, given that it's basically gods fighting.

This was an excellent article, and very well reasoned.
While I had my flaws with 'MOS', I did like it, and found the level of destruction in the film to make sense, given that it's basically gods fighting.

This was an excellent article, and very well reasoned.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:36PM on 06/18/2013
Stop defending MoS.it sucked.it tried to be a cross breed of Batman begins and The Avengers.it ended up being neither.i like to see Action and explosions in movies but there has to be some story development and emotion in that.MoS lacks it.during all those bayhem/invasion scenes,iam not involved and interested in the movie and i felt like 'what the hell is this and what the hell is happening?! Oh,god! Is this a shitty alien invasion film?!'.The Avengers climax handled the destruction action
Stop defending MoS.it sucked.it tried to be a cross breed of Batman begins and The Avengers.it ended up being neither.i like to see Action and explosions in movies but there has to be some story development and emotion in that.MoS lacks it.during all those bayhem/invasion scenes,iam not involved and interested in the movie and i felt like 'what the hell is this and what the hell is happening?! Oh,god! Is this a shitty alien invasion film?!'.The Avengers climax handled the destruction action scenes well
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:19PM on 06/18/2013

This article is a waste

Too much destruction in alien invasion movies???? Go watch Nicolas Sparks' movies then...
Too much destruction in alien invasion movies???? Go watch Nicolas Sparks' movies then...
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:41PM on 06/18/2013
You clearly missed the point entirely.
You clearly missed the point entirely.
5:37PM on 06/18/2013

Bitching for the sake of bitching.

MoS's level of destruction was in par with the scope of the film. I would even say that it was necessary to fully convey the danger of a fucking ALIEN INVASION ! 20 minutes in and an entire planet explodes and a civilisation is wiped out. And people are bitching for two cities being partially destroyed ? The destruction IS shoking as it should be for the story to be engaging.
MoS's level of destruction was in par with the scope of the film. I would even say that it was necessary to fully convey the danger of a fucking ALIEN INVASION ! 20 minutes in and an entire planet explodes and a civilisation is wiped out. And people are bitching for two cities being partially destroyed ? The destruction IS shoking as it should be for the story to be engaging.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
5:30PM on 06/18/2013

Excess

I'm afraid I disagree. Violence in a film like Man of Steel is excessive to the point that the viewer becomes accustomed to it and immune to the emotional impact that the destruction should evoke. I think The Avengers handles the destruction well because it addresses the carnage and the fallout caused by it. The heroes are also unable to control the carnage because they're facing an immense army from space that they can't control. Therefore, much of the destruction can be forgiven because the
I'm afraid I disagree. Violence in a film like Man of Steel is excessive to the point that the viewer becomes accustomed to it and immune to the emotional impact that the destruction should evoke. I think The Avengers handles the destruction well because it addresses the carnage and the fallout caused by it. The heroes are also unable to control the carnage because they're facing an immense army from space that they can't control. Therefore, much of the destruction can be forgiven because the heroes are trying their best to prevent it. With Man of Steel, Superman has the ability to control the fight, but doesn't feel the need to redirect the fight to an empty cornfield or a mountain or somewhere where he wouldn't risk the lives of innocents. He's not fighting a massive alien invasion that he has no control over. I guess I just feel that destruction on a massive scale in these tentpole blockbusters is acceptable if it serves the story and fits within the reality and parameters of the film. But in a case like Man of Steel, it's just uncalled for when taken to that excess.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:02PM on 06/18/2013
Well put.
Well put.
10:05PM on 06/18/2013
You sir, are very spot on.
You sir, are very spot on.
5:11PM on 06/18/2013

It all depends on the tone of a film

Superhero movies can take themselves so seriously, it's kind of ridiculous when so many people behind them dies without them even mentionning it. If you want to be light entertainment, go for it, but if you want to be taken seriously, be serious. When half the city gets destroyed, finish on a somber tone.
Superhero movies can take themselves so seriously, it's kind of ridiculous when so many people behind them dies without them even mentionning it. If you want to be light entertainment, go for it, but if you want to be taken seriously, be serious. When half the city gets destroyed, finish on a somber tone.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-8
4:38PM on 06/18/2013

Go watch The Notebook if you don't want to see destruction

This article is a waste of time
This article is a waste of time
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:31PM on 06/18/2013
Shirley's right, dammit! So much of the same destruction that it loses meaning. You get desensitized to it and then it doesn't mean anything it's just like "oh, the obligatory city destruction. Yawn." To me, the fight scene between a Batman that doesn't care about dying and a Bane that has his fucking number and wants to break his spirit and his body was about a million times more intense than anything in MOS, Transformers, Avengers, etc. You don't need a grand scale to have great action, just
Shirley's right, dammit! So much of the same destruction that it loses meaning. You get desensitized to it and then it doesn't mean anything it's just like "oh, the obligatory city destruction. Yawn." To me, the fight scene between a Batman that doesn't care about dying and a Bane that has his fucking number and wants to break his spirit and his body was about a million times more intense than anything in MOS, Transformers, Avengers, etc. You don't need a grand scale to have great action, just some heavy meaning behind it.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-12
4:24PM on 06/18/2013

Go watch The Notebook if you don't want to see destruction

This article is a waste of time
This article is a waste of time
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+2
3:03PM on 06/18/2013

This is a ridiculous argument.

If you don't want to see a city destroyed, don't watch movies where aliens are planning an invasion or highly powerful creatures are going head to head with each other. It's as simple as that.
If you don't want to see a city destroyed, don't watch movies where aliens are planning an invasion or highly powerful creatures are going head to head with each other. It's as simple as that.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+0
3:02PM on 06/18/2013

This is a ridiculous argument.

If you don't want to see a city destroyed, don't watch movies where aliens are planning an invasion or highly powerful creatures are going head to head with each other. It's as simple as that.
If you don't want to see a city destroyed, don't watch movies where aliens are planning an invasion or highly powerful creatures are going head to head with each other. It's as simple as that.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:34PM on 06/18/2013
As Harrison Ford noted, action sequences nowadays are soulless. You watch a CGI city get leveled and no one gives a shit. Not the characters. And more importantly, not the audience.
As Harrison Ford noted, action sequences nowadays are soulless. You watch a CGI city get leveled and no one gives a shit. Not the characters. And more importantly, not the audience.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:02PM on 06/18/2013
Yeah, Ford's the one to bring this up after the amazing stuff done in Crystal Skull!
Yeah, Ford's the one to bring this up after the amazing stuff done in Crystal Skull!
7:01PM on 06/18/2013
Oh yeah, I forgot that Ford directed Crystal Skull.
Oh yeah, I forgot that Ford directed Crystal Skull.
+10
1:43PM on 06/18/2013

Got what I wanted from MOS

As a fan of the fights and action in the animated feature versions of superman,I am totally happy with the way MOS turned out. Animated superman has been outdoing live action superman in the action and destruction aspect for some time now. Its about fucking time we have a live action superman truly showing off his power. Zack snyders direction is better than micheal bay regardless of the destruction.
As a fan of the fights and action in the animated feature versions of superman,I am totally happy with the way MOS turned out. Animated superman has been outdoing live action superman in the action and destruction aspect for some time now. Its about fucking time we have a live action superman truly showing off his power. Zack snyders direction is better than micheal bay regardless of the destruction.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+0
1:26PM on 06/18/2013
haha two weeks ago there was an article about trailers spoiling too much and now the article starts with spoiling Superman for the people who didn't see it over the weekend.
haha two weeks ago there was an article about trailers spoiling too much and now the article starts with spoiling Superman for the people who didn't see it over the weekend.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:07PM on 06/18/2013
If I spoiled Man of Steel for you by telling you there's a lot of destruction, then it might be time to stop coming to movie sites. Also, it might be time to go live in a cave with no internet or TV. Some incredulous crap right there.

If I spoiled Man of Steel for you by telling you there's a lot of destruction, then it might be time to stop coming to movie sites. Also, it might be time to go live in a cave with no internet or TV. Some incredulous crap right there.

6:03PM on 06/18/2013
Exactly Paul, and that's what you should've written two weeks ago. Instead of c'mon hollywood you should've written c'mon schmoes and called bullshit on the readers of Joblo who cry that trailers reveal too much, but are still coming to this site.
Exactly Paul, and that's what you should've written two weeks ago. Instead of c'mon hollywood you should've written c'mon schmoes and called bullshit on the readers of Joblo who cry that trailers reveal too much, but are still coming to this site.
1:18PM on 06/18/2013
As is somewhat referenced here, and as a paraphrase of an article I read on another site: How come when Michael Bay does it, everyone rolls their eyes, but if it's something like MoS, everybody loves it? As I've said before, my problem with the destruction in MoS is that nobody acts like several blocks of Metropolis are leveled. You get Perry and Jenny's scene, which is very well done, but Superman NEVER drops to his knees and mourns all the death and destruction witnessed.

It was not
As is somewhat referenced here, and as a paraphrase of an article I read on another site: How come when Michael Bay does it, everyone rolls their eyes, but if it's something like MoS, everybody loves it? As I've said before, my problem with the destruction in MoS is that nobody acts like several blocks of Metropolis are leveled. You get Perry and Jenny's scene, which is very well done, but Superman NEVER drops to his knees and mourns all the death and destruction witnessed.

It was not necessarily over the top. It was just unnecessary since nobody batted a flippin eye to it. Hollywood is totally destruction happy, but that's not really a bad or good thing. Some movies do it well, others do not. And like most people will attest here, they've got no problem with mindless, obsessive destruction.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:03PM on 06/18/2013
How do you have a movie where two Kryptonians go at it and the city ISN'T destroyed?
How do you have a movie where two Kryptonians go at it and the city ISN'T destroyed?
10:03PM on 06/18/2013
I'm not saying that it SHOULDN'T have happened, I'm saying they should have included a scene towards the end with Superman feeling a great sense of anger or guilt that he wasn't able to save all those thousands of people that were vaporized. Really, any movie with Superman SHOULD have lots of destruction, even if it's in the desert or in space. Well OK, space would be hard to destroy stuff. Although they managed to do that in MoS, haha
I'm not saying that it SHOULDN'T have happened, I'm saying they should have included a scene towards the end with Superman feeling a great sense of anger or guilt that he wasn't able to save all those thousands of people that were vaporized. Really, any movie with Superman SHOULD have lots of destruction, even if it's in the desert or in space. Well OK, space would be hard to destroy stuff. Although they managed to do that in MoS, haha
1:17PM on 06/18/2013
Man of Steel was awesome, and having that much havoc happen in the movie was just how Zod intended for it to happen. Justifiable. Avengers was the same thing. It happened, and the heroes had to stop it, so what was lost was the least amount they tried. Is Hollywood being too destructive? Yes and no.
Man of Steel was awesome, and having that much havoc happen in the movie was just how Zod intended for it to happen. Justifiable. Avengers was the same thing. It happened, and the heroes had to stop it, so what was lost was the least amount they tried. Is Hollywood being too destructive? Yes and no.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+3
1:12PM on 06/18/2013

Nope.

Destruction is fine, it just has to be well directed and work for the characters.

Avengers worked because you could see everything that was going on clearly and concisely. The mood was right for the material, everything was planned, shot and edited smoothly. There were moments of humour, moments of pure awesome (the hulk reveal) and character based moments such as Captain America was giving orders and saving civilians, Iron Man was flying about blasting and quipping, Hulk was trashing
Destruction is fine, it just has to be well directed and work for the characters.

Avengers worked because you could see everything that was going on clearly and concisely. The mood was right for the material, everything was planned, shot and edited smoothly. There were moments of humour, moments of pure awesome (the hulk reveal) and character based moments such as Captain America was giving orders and saving civilians, Iron Man was flying about blasting and quipping, Hulk was trashing aliens, Thor was throwing lightning, Hawkeye and Widow were being ninjas. it worked.

Man of Steel, as much as I really really was looking forward to seeing a godly smackdown, was messy. It was dark, grey, grim, shoddily shot, badly edited, missed the whole point of Superman saving humans or moving the battle away from them, and never let up for long enough for you to take any of it in or appreciate any of it. There's a point in that fight where Supes punches Zod into space, clangs him off a satellite and then punches him, in flames, back down to earth. That should've been incredible, I should've wanted to high five someone.....but it barely registered. It was just visual noise.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:10PM on 06/18/2013
Does Hollywood need to tone it down? Yes and no. I think the parallels people make within movies and reality is getting more excessive than Hollywood's hardon for destruction. Take TF3. People complained about the Skyscrapper and jumping out the windows and how similar the Apollo blew up for the Autobot ship. Was it intentional or merely reference? I dunno. Personally I hated the skyscraper scene mostly because I wanted Shockwave, not some dumbshit snake thing. That aside, it did feel like
Does Hollywood need to tone it down? Yes and no. I think the parallels people make within movies and reality is getting more excessive than Hollywood's hardon for destruction. Take TF3. People complained about the Skyscrapper and jumping out the windows and how similar the Apollo blew up for the Autobot ship. Was it intentional or merely reference? I dunno. Personally I hated the skyscraper scene mostly because I wanted Shockwave, not some dumbshit snake thing. That aside, it did feel like Bayhem that didn't really need to happen. Or take Man of Steel. Many of those fights fit but some scenes where Superman COULD have kept Zod and co away from buildings would have been good too.
In the end, it doesn't matter. It's just a movie.People will whine no matter what
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:08PM on 06/18/2013
I think the destruction makes sense through the story. Not to mention it will further the story in Man of Steel 2 where Lex Luthor will build the areas back up.
I think the destruction makes sense through the story. Not to mention it will further the story in Man of Steel 2 where Lex Luthor will build the areas back up.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:40PM on 06/18/2013
SPOILER

Exactly. I can't imagine terraforming being a very peaceful process. In fact, in Marvel there is a company called Damage Control, Inc. that specializes in handling the damage cause by "supers".
SPOILER

Exactly. I can't imagine terraforming being a very peaceful process. In fact, in Marvel there is a company called Damage Control, Inc. that specializes in handling the damage cause by "supers".
1:01PM on 06/18/2013
You can never have too much destruction in a movie. As for MOS, people wanted action in this movie. Then when they get what they asked for, it's suddenly too much. Come on people!!!
You can never have too much destruction in a movie. As for MOS, people wanted action in this movie. Then when they get what they asked for, it's suddenly too much. Come on people!!!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:21PM on 06/18/2013
Agreed! These days, you just can't please everyone. They'll be asking for something and when you give it to 'em, they will bitch about it. I say fuck 'em...
Agreed! These days, you just can't please everyone. They'll be asking for something and when you give it to 'em, they will bitch about it. I say fuck 'em...
7:22PM on 06/18/2013
Agreed! These days, you just can't please everyone. They'll be asking for something and when you give it to 'em, they will bitch about it. I say fuck 'em...
Agreed! These days, you just can't please everyone. They'll be asking for something and when you give it to 'em, they will bitch about it. I say fuck 'em...
1:01PM on 06/18/2013

Missing the point

The issue isn't gratuitous destruction, but who's responsible for the destruction. Roland Emmerich movies are specifically about destruction which sets it apart from others. My problem with Transformers 1 was when the good guys took the cube to the city. They had control of the fight's location. The other Transformer movies, the enemies controlled the location of the fight (i.e. Chicago). Now, in MOS's case, I'd say it was lazy writing to have them pointlessly throw each other into buildings
The issue isn't gratuitous destruction, but who's responsible for the destruction. Roland Emmerich movies are specifically about destruction which sets it apart from others. My problem with Transformers 1 was when the good guys took the cube to the city. They had control of the fight's location. The other Transformer movies, the enemies controlled the location of the fight (i.e. Chicago). Now, in MOS's case, I'd say it was lazy writing to have them pointlessly throw each other into buildings just to show destructive "action". Superman just didn't care and neither did I.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:46PM on 06/18/2013
This comment speculates. However, how closely do the Man of Steel scenes resemble actual 9/11 footage? And, how closely do they resemble other recent war footage? Now ask. Do the other movies mentioned, such as The Avengers, resemble real-life combat footage closely? They might, or they might not. But, I thought that the Man of Steel scenes did. For example, aircraft crash into buildings and explode. Skyscrapers collapse while terrified people run down the narrow metropolis streets. The scenes
This comment speculates. However, how closely do the Man of Steel scenes resemble actual 9/11 footage? And, how closely do they resemble other recent war footage? Now ask. Do the other movies mentioned, such as The Avengers, resemble real-life combat footage closely? They might, or they might not. But, I thought that the Man of Steel scenes did. For example, aircraft crash into buildings and explode. Skyscrapers collapse while terrified people run down the narrow metropolis streets. The scenes reminded me of 9/11 footage, and other viewers might have made similar associations.
Should film-makers imitate recent violent events? Is such imitation a healthy metaphorical examination of reall anxiety? Or, is such imitation distasteful exploitation? I am not going to answer those questions. I feel that the answer is yes and no and maybe.
However, the 'net is currently discussing why the Man of Steel destruction has hit a nerve that other similar films have not. So, I throw out a question. I know what I saw and experienced while watching the film, which I loved, BTW.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:44PM on 06/18/2013
I don't mind all the destruction but at least make it look good, Man of Steel was one of most dreary looking movies I've seen in some time, couldn't even tell if the military planes were real, second rate effects for what should have been a first rate summer comic book action movie. Zack Snyder needs to sit down with someone like James Cameron, Joss Whedon or heck even Michael Bay and find out how to do effects correctly. Goyer just needs to find a new career, screenwriting is not for him
I don't mind all the destruction but at least make it look good, Man of Steel was one of most dreary looking movies I've seen in some time, couldn't even tell if the military planes were real, second rate effects for what should have been a first rate summer comic book action movie. Zack Snyder needs to sit down with someone like James Cameron, Joss Whedon or heck even Michael Bay and find out how to do effects correctly. Goyer just needs to find a new career, screenwriting is not for him obviously.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:41PM on 06/18/2013

LOL! Stupid people

Go home...watch sleeping beauty & cinderella..that'll GUARANTEE you non-destruction..

Go home...watch sleeping beauty & cinderella..that'll GUARANTEE you non-destruction..

Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:40PM on 06/18/2013

What?

Two aliens fighting, what you expect them to do, have a cup of tea?
Get over yourself and enjoy MoS!
Two aliens fighting, what you expect them to do, have a cup of tea?
Get over yourself and enjoy MoS!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:15PM on 06/18/2013

not really

I agree that the action in "Man of Steel" was way too much over the top. But other movies you mentioned like Skyfall, Avengers, and Mission Impossible, all did the right amount of destruction. Even Transformers 3 had the skyscraper be the apex of destruction and everything around it was mostly broken windows and torn up streets. In "Man of Steel" it seemed like their werent any buildings left in Metropolis by the time the credits ran.
I agree that the action in "Man of Steel" was way too much over the top. But other movies you mentioned like Skyfall, Avengers, and Mission Impossible, all did the right amount of destruction. Even Transformers 3 had the skyscraper be the apex of destruction and everything around it was mostly broken windows and torn up streets. In "Man of Steel" it seemed like their werent any buildings left in Metropolis by the time the credits ran.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-13
12:04PM on 06/18/2013
Welcome to the Michael Bay Club, Mr Snyder. Terrible movie.
Welcome to the Michael Bay Club, Mr Snyder. Terrible movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+3
12:04PM on 06/18/2013
Zod was using a laser that would change the face of the planet and its atmosphere and placed that big bastard in the middle of a city and on top of that you got two men who have the power of a god fighting it out over the destruction so what did you think was gonna happen? That perhaps a few cars got flipped over and a few crators will be bashed in?
Zod was using a laser that would change the face of the planet and its atmosphere and placed that big bastard in the middle of a city and on top of that you got two men who have the power of a god fighting it out over the destruction so what did you think was gonna happen? That perhaps a few cars got flipped over and a few crators will be bashed in?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:49AM on 06/18/2013
This was a very well written article. I wholeheartedly agree. I don't emember hearing complaints when city sized spacecraft laid waste to all of the major citis in te world in Independence Day. Or when mother nature reclaimed theplanet in 2012 or the Day After Tomorrow, etc. As a comic reader I've seen countless cities leveled by these superpowered fights only to be leveled next month by a different hero & villain. Compare the genre before passing judgement.
This was a very well written article. I wholeheartedly agree. I don't emember hearing complaints when city sized spacecraft laid waste to all of the major citis in te world in Independence Day. Or when mother nature reclaimed theplanet in 2012 or the Day After Tomorrow, etc. As a comic reader I've seen countless cities leveled by these superpowered fights only to be leveled next month by a different hero & villain. Compare the genre before passing judgement.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:47AM on 06/18/2013

yes!

I've seen movies where spaceships crash into cities and nobody cries over the dead. I've seen movies where superheroes fight monsters in midst of a city with soooo much destruction and no innocent bystander died.

The destruction is only effective when it has an impact on the audience (like "wtf?? i didn't expect that!! these poor people!!").

Todays movies just destroy a lot and nobody cares anymore.
I've seen movies where spaceships crash into cities and nobody cries over the dead. I've seen movies where superheroes fight monsters in midst of a city with soooo much destruction and no innocent bystander died.

The destruction is only effective when it has an impact on the audience (like "wtf?? i didn't expect that!! these poor people!!").

Todays movies just destroy a lot and nobody cares anymore.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:45AM on 06/18/2013

Its not the scale, but the similarity...

I guess the main problem recently is NOT the scale of the destruction rather the SIMILARITIES of those destruction from one movie to the next, namely: Transformers 3, Avengers & Man of Steel, as all these movies basically had an all out Alien invasion over a massive metropolitan city. For all the craps Emmerich gets for his disaster-heavy movies, no one can say the destruction looked alike from ID4 to Day After Tomorrow to 2012, thats why those mayhem were entertaining and didn't feel
I guess the main problem recently is NOT the scale of the destruction rather the SIMILARITIES of those destruction from one movie to the next, namely: Transformers 3, Avengers & Man of Steel, as all these movies basically had an all out Alien invasion over a massive metropolitan city. For all the craps Emmerich gets for his disaster-heavy movies, no one can say the destruction looked alike from ID4 to Day After Tomorrow to 2012, thats why those mayhem were entertaining and didn't feel repetitive (I mean the guy destroyed White House in almost EVERY films, but still each time in a wildly different way than the previous time!). And I think thats what the filmmakers have to learn, its not just about how big you can blow stuff up anymore (and with today's increasingly larger scale blockbuster, its more & more common), but about HOW CREATIVELY you do that so that audience can be entertained as well as it would feel fresh. Another VERY important factor is how smoothly the director can coordinate & navigate through the destruction, for example, Transformers 3 and The Avengers both have very similar looking third act, but one gave me a nausea-inducing headache and the other made me breathless & excited me to the core. I'll leave to your judgment which one gave me which.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:40AM on 06/18/2013
It can be too much but it's up to the story to back it up. I loved Man of Steel, and even if the destruction was a tad much I think it made sense. When you have Gods who are gentically engineered to not care about anything but Krypton's survival, it's makes sense to dispose of humans in this way. And I think it was a good way to limit Superman's powers since he can't be everywhere at once like on the previous movies.

But one example of it being way to much was and not making sense was Gi
It can be too much but it's up to the story to back it up. I loved Man of Steel, and even if the destruction was a tad much I think it made sense. When you have Gods who are gentically engineered to not care about anything but Krypton's survival, it's makes sense to dispose of humans in this way. And I think it was a good way to limit Superman's powers since he can't be everywhere at once like on the previous movies.

But one example of it being way to much was and not making sense was Gi Joe Retaliation. I mean, they completely level London and NOBODY cares, it isn't even addressed.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:40AM on 06/18/2013
Typical fanboys. They bitch for YEARS they want to see a Superman movie really let loose and show what these characters are capable of. They FINALLY get it, and what do they do? Bitch about it to high heaven.
Typical fanboys. They bitch for YEARS they want to see a Superman movie really let loose and show what these characters are capable of. They FINALLY get it, and what do they do? Bitch about it to high heaven.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+2
11:39AM on 06/18/2013

Thank You

I said the exact same thing. Did we need 2 collapsing buildings. That was my only complaint about the film but it's getting too standard in film.
I said the exact same thing. Did we need 2 collapsing buildings. That was my only complaint about the film but it's getting too standard in film.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+13
11:24AM on 06/18/2013

Not a chance

Action comes with consequences. It isn't clean. Filmmakers need to show the consequences. Look at Olympus Has Fallen. It showed the consequences of action and I applaud that.
Action comes with consequences. It isn't clean. Filmmakers need to show the consequences. Look at Olympus Has Fallen. It showed the consequences of action and I applaud that.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:18AM on 06/18/2013
There is a group of superhero aliens that speak English on other planets and all magically have superior powers and people wonder about the believability of destruction of a city?

Of course Transformers, Superman, Avengers, etc is going to have unbelievable destruction because they're unbelievable characters and of course MI4 and Skyfall is going to have more believable action sequences because they're more believable characters.
There is a group of superhero aliens that speak English on other planets and all magically have superior powers and people wonder about the believability of destruction of a city?

Of course Transformers, Superman, Avengers, etc is going to have unbelievable destruction because they're unbelievable characters and of course MI4 and Skyfall is going to have more believable action sequences because they're more believable characters.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:12AM on 06/18/2013
The only movie that I think is too Destruction Happy is "2012". It's practically destroying the whole world. Other than that, Transformers, Armageddon, The Avengers, etc. - I'm okay with that.
The only movie that I think is too Destruction Happy is "2012". It's practically destroying the whole world. Other than that, Transformers, Armageddon, The Avengers, etc. - I'm okay with that.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+16
11:11AM on 06/18/2013
In the latest F&F you have a tank going over cars on a highway and in GI Joe 2, London was destroyed. Both movies are meant to be over the top popcorn flicks - so I suppos we let it go. Avengers and Transformers fall in to this boat too. As it is, I don't think people have a problem with the needless mayhem and destruction and loss of life in over the top summer popcorn flicks.

My issue with MoS, despite it being a summer popcorn flick is that first it is also presented as dark and
In the latest F&F you have a tank going over cars on a highway and in GI Joe 2, London was destroyed. Both movies are meant to be over the top popcorn flicks - so I suppos we let it go. Avengers and Transformers fall in to this boat too. As it is, I don't think people have a problem with the needless mayhem and destruction and loss of life in over the top summer popcorn flicks.

My issue with MoS, despite it being a summer popcorn flick is that first it is also presented as dark and realistic take on what it would be like if Supes exisits in a real world scenario and that secondly (more significant to me), the destruction that the hero - the boy scout – causes. Even if it was unavoidable, no reference was made to his concerns or feelings about what was going on - heck he destroys an American asset in the final moments of the film when he could just have put it down. In Superman 2, such concerns are addressed - whether it's Superman telling Ursa and Non that there are people in the bus when they're about to throw it or Superman apologising to the President at the end and saying he'll never let them down again - neat little acts/gestures I think MoS could have benefitted from.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:42PM on 06/18/2013
He had literally just became superman, this was al new to him. He had to save the entire planet for the first time, fighting someone as powerful as he.
So realistically I doubt he would be thinking oh I cant hit zod that way we will bring down a building.

Your point is nonsense.
He had literally just became superman, this was al new to him. He had to save the entire planet for the first time, fighting someone as powerful as he.
So realistically I doubt he would be thinking oh I cant hit zod that way we will bring down a building.

Your point is nonsense.
2:35PM on 06/18/2013
He...on more than one occasion took an opponent in to a populated area - you don't think it'd occur to him after doing it the first time, perhaps I should try...emphasis on..."try" ....to direct the fight elsewhere. We saw no such actions. His personal message to the military at the end - you don't think there was a better way to deliver it than the way he did - the speech to him was fine - what he did with the drone was not necessary - surely you're not going to pin that down to him just
He...on more than one occasion took an opponent in to a populated area - you don't think it'd occur to him after doing it the first time, perhaps I should try...emphasis on..."try" ....to direct the fight elsewhere. We saw no such actions. His personal message to the military at the end - you don't think there was a better way to deliver it than the way he did - the speech to him was fine - what he did with the drone was not necessary - surely you're not going to pin that down to him just becoming Superman. Incidentally, in Superman 2, that's the first time he fights people like him - but we see some really in your face compassion for humanity - stuff that being new to this kind of fighting should not hinder - he's already been saving people for some time.
8:13AM on 06/19/2013
But is superman 2 he was already superman, he may not have fought powerful beings yet but he had already saved the planet. So that point aint really valid. And no i really dont think he would stop to think about taking the fight elsewhere like i pointed out this was all very new to him, im sure in the next movie he will be less destructive. Honestly this is the most stupid pathetic bitching ive ever heard about a movie, just go watcj superman returns or some pg marvel action.
But is superman 2 he was already superman, he may not have fought powerful beings yet but he had already saved the planet. So that point aint really valid. And no i really dont think he would stop to think about taking the fight elsewhere like i pointed out this was all very new to him, im sure in the next movie he will be less destructive. Honestly this is the most stupid pathetic bitching ive ever heard about a movie, just go watcj superman returns or some pg marvel action.
11:11AM on 06/18/2013
It can be too much but it's up to the story to back it up. I loved Man of Steel, and even if the destruction was a tad much I think it made sense. When you have Gods who are gentically engineered to not care about anything but Krypton's survival, it's makes sense to dispose of humans in this way. And I think it was a good way to limit Superman's powers since he can't be everywhere at once like on the previous movies.

But one example of it being way to much was and not making sense was Gi
It can be too much but it's up to the story to back it up. I loved Man of Steel, and even if the destruction was a tad much I think it made sense. When you have Gods who are gentically engineered to not care about anything but Krypton's survival, it's makes sense to dispose of humans in this way. And I think it was a good way to limit Superman's powers since he can't be everywhere at once like on the previous movies.

But one example of it being way to much was and not making sense was Gi Joe Retaliation. I mean, they completely level London and NOBODY cares, it isn't even addressed.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:08AM on 06/18/2013
People have been going on about the final action sequence and yeah, while it did get noisy and messy, it's a fight scene between two superpowered beings, and we got nothing like this from Superman Returns. G.I. JOE Retaliation and its complete decimation of London with nobody so much as batting an eyelid was kinda egregious. Thing is, action movies have to deliver on their promise of scale and spectacle, and the best way for filmmakers to make the audience feel they got their money's worth is
People have been going on about the final action sequence and yeah, while it did get noisy and messy, it's a fight scene between two superpowered beings, and we got nothing like this from Superman Returns. G.I. JOE Retaliation and its complete decimation of London with nobody so much as batting an eyelid was kinda egregious. Thing is, action movies have to deliver on their promise of scale and spectacle, and the best way for filmmakers to make the audience feel they got their money's worth is by staging something expensive - and nothing quite says "expensive" like wanton property damage. It's the way these things work, Roland Emmerich has basically built an entire career out of that. It's the job of the filmmaker to make sure that such scenes actually carry an impact and don't devolve into an incoherent mishmash where audiences can't tell who's bashing who *ahem*Transformers*ahem*. I don't think Man of Steel got to that level.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:08AM on 06/18/2013
Superman V Zod? Expect shit to be broke.
Superman V Zod? Expect shit to be broke.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+3
11:07AM on 06/18/2013
It's a ridiculous critique and the main one I've read about the film. This movie was everything I hoped for and it blew me away. I didn't give one thought in tune with "I wonder if all the people were out of that building!" because it seems silly to think that people would actually do that. Mind you, I can't imagine the audience clapping at the end of the movie here in the UK but apparently it happens in the US so what do I know.
It's a ridiculous critique and the main one I've read about the film. This movie was everything I hoped for and it blew me away. I didn't give one thought in tune with "I wonder if all the people were out of that building!" because it seems silly to think that people would actually do that. Mind you, I can't imagine the audience clapping at the end of the movie here in the UK but apparently it happens in the US so what do I know.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:05AM on 06/18/2013

Moot

Things get destroyed and people die in movies all the time,deal with it.
Things get destroyed and people die in movies all the time,deal with it.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:06AM on 06/18/2013
by the way, none of it is real, if you think it is, THEN YOU ARE A MORON!
by the way, none of it is real, if you think it is, THEN YOU ARE A MORON!
10:55AM on 06/18/2013
I can't believe this bitching over Man of Steel has come to this level that it warrants a C'Mon Hollywood. What's there to debate! People love to watch stuff get blown up and shattered, or at least that's what I thought until these pussies started whining about Superman wrecking shit up. Whatever happened to people just enjoying movies, and not worry about political correctness.
I can't believe this bitching over Man of Steel has come to this level that it warrants a C'Mon Hollywood. What's there to debate! People love to watch stuff get blown up and shattered, or at least that's what I thought until these pussies started whining about Superman wrecking shit up. Whatever happened to people just enjoying movies, and not worry about political correctness.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:59AM on 06/18/2013
One problem is certainly that Man of Steel is 100% destruction, 0% character development, so when the destruction occurs it means nothing.
One problem is certainly that Man of Steel is 100% destruction, 0% character development, so when the destruction occurs it means nothing.
12:37PM on 06/18/2013
@ModHip... I think you saw a different movie. Check your ticket stub dude!
@ModHip... I think you saw a different movie. Check your ticket stub dude!
12:49PM on 06/18/2013
I agree with Dodong27 on ModHip...although I have heard the argument from others. I thought the second half of MOS was 100% destruction, but geez, the first half was ONLY character development. All we did for that first half is learn about Clark and the values/morals that his two fathers instilled in him. I personally felt like I knew this superhero's "character" more than any other I could think of...except possibly Bruce Wayne but that's only because I have 3 Dark Knight movies that I've
I agree with Dodong27 on ModHip...although I have heard the argument from others. I thought the second half of MOS was 100% destruction, but geez, the first half was ONLY character development. All we did for that first half is learn about Clark and the values/morals that his two fathers instilled in him. I personally felt like I knew this superhero's "character" more than any other I could think of...except possibly Bruce Wayne but that's only because I have 3 Dark Knight movies that I've seen him in.
1:03PM on 06/18/2013
@ModHip - wut character development? how superman found out that masturbating is so much fun? go watch porn, good super heroes movies just not your type..
@ModHip - wut character development? how superman found out that masturbating is so much fun? go watch porn, good super heroes movies just not your type..
8:58AM on 06/19/2013
lolololol ok
lolololol ok
+5
10:54AM on 06/18/2013
Good read paul. I think we're all becoming desensitized to the destructive nature of films now. It looks like films are trying to out due each other with the amount of damage they can cause to a city. While the Man of Steel fight scene between superman and zod was awesome it would have been nice for superman to acknowledge the damage they were casuing and try to lure Zod away from the city. Thats something that happenes alot in the comics. Goyer has stated in an interview that they wanted to
Good read paul. I think we're all becoming desensitized to the destructive nature of films now. It looks like films are trying to out due each other with the amount of damage they can cause to a city. While the Man of Steel fight scene between superman and zod was awesome it would have been nice for superman to acknowledge the damage they were casuing and try to lure Zod away from the city. Thats something that happenes alot in the comics. Goyer has stated in an interview that they wanted to show what would happen if two god-like beings were to duke it out in a middle of a city and the damage they would cause which kinda gives the destruction a bit of a reason even if it is over top.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:54AM on 06/18/2013

it can be too much

But in the case of superman I dont think it can ever be too much. He is ment to be one of the most powerful beings in the universe so when he has a fight it should be destructive.

I cant even really think of a film where it is excessive either.

I dont remember the same complaints when the avengers came out. Plus superman is far more powerful than the avengers so a fight between kryptonions would be far more destructive.
But in the case of superman I dont think it can ever be too much. He is ment to be one of the most powerful beings in the universe so when he has a fight it should be destructive.

I cant even really think of a film where it is excessive either.

I dont remember the same complaints when the avengers came out. Plus superman is far more powerful than the avengers so a fight between kryptonions would be far more destructive.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+2
10:38AM on 06/18/2013

ModHip

I'm not gonna get on a high horse or anything but it does distract me a bit when I'm supposed to be thinking, "Wow, Zod just thew Superman clean through that highrise!" but the content and its presentation actually makes me think, "Shoot, wonder if local law enforcement evacuated that building? That little 'cool' moment probably just cost a hundred lives..."
I'm not gonna get on a high horse or anything but it does distract me a bit when I'm supposed to be thinking, "Wow, Zod just thew Superman clean through that highrise!" but the content and its presentation actually makes me think, "Shoot, wonder if local law enforcement evacuated that building? That little 'cool' moment probably just cost a hundred lives..."
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:44AM on 06/18/2013
i chose to think that metropolis highrises were mostly evacuated after the spaceship came down, and that perry and crew stayed because they are reporters. Most of the lives lost were probably from the gravity device on the ship knocking down buildings.
i chose to think that metropolis highrises were mostly evacuated after the spaceship came down, and that perry and crew stayed because they are reporters. Most of the lives lost were probably from the gravity device on the ship knocking down buildings.
10:36AM on 06/18/2013

I'd say, probably...

BUT, in the case of Superman, I think it was awesome. For the first time ever in a movie I got to see Superman's destructive power and brute strength. It was about damn time.
BUT, in the case of Superman, I think it was awesome. For the first time ever in a movie I got to see Superman's destructive power and brute strength. It was about damn time.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:08PM on 06/18/2013
Yea, 100% agree...I mean a guy with so much superpower like him wont do any destructive damage? i think alot of those brainless idiots who would think that when supe & zod hit each other, they'll stop & avoid building
Yea, 100% agree...I mean a guy with so much superpower like him wont do any destructive damage? i think alot of those brainless idiots who would think that when supe & zod hit each other, they'll stop & avoid building
View All Comments

Latest Entertainment News Headlines


Top
Loading...

Featured Youtube Videos

Views and Counting

Movie Hottie Of The Week

More