MuyJingo

@fallschirmjager:

Sure, but that doesn't excuse anything in the first film. If Pa Kent wasn't such an idiot, maybe he wouldn't be making so many mistakes in the first place.

@sandman_:

I read the Walmart comic. I can't remember if it was Earth that was clearly shown or not, and there could have been additional ships.

Good lord the quoting system on this sites forums is the worst I've ever encountered. It actually prevents you from typing before or after the quoted section, and cutting and pasting distorts the quote!

@fallschirmjager: Only the scene at 1:48 is relevant, and blimey...what a blink and you'll miss it moment.

So I agree that Zod takes command of the scout ship (Sorry sandman, not sure it's Kara's)...but he doesn't do so until well...1:48:00 into the film

So, there was still plenty of time for Clark to talk with Jor-El up until that point.

It does invalidate my point that he could have talked to Jor-El at a later stage though, which is frustrating.

But yup, I was wrong on that point. Happy to admit it.

@deranged_midget:

@sandman_: Affleck was the bomb in Phantoms, yo.

I'm telling you you're wrong.

You seem to have imagined this.

If not, please tell me the scenes this scene occurs between, or approximately how long into the film.

Can anyone else confirm this scene fallschirmjager is referencing?

@fallschirmjager: None of that happened, at all.

Clark gets his suit, flies a bit...then at some point changes out of it. Talks to priest..flashback to him being bullied...interrogation...and then military handover, which is where we first see Zod on Earth.

There is absolutely nothing shown on screen indicating that Zod took control of Clark's ship.

That's a nice assumption, but it simply isn't supported by anything seen in the film.

@ultimatesmfan: Superman isn't about revenge...

@fallschirmjager: And like I said, I think that is nonsense.

It's pretty pointless in my opinion trying to argue that there were no alternatives because a screenwriter said so. Don't underestimate the power a screenwriter has. If he wanted to write the scene with Superman flying Zod onto the dark side of the moon or any other more permanent non lethal solution, he could have done so. My point is, if we're going to use an out of universe argument, then it only supports my point.

Sticking to an in universe argument, there were certainly several possible solutions. As we didn't see them attempted or tested, we won't know either way if they would have worked.

At the very least, I think if Superman had tried to get Zod as far away from the city he had just threatened to commit genocide on before he could even fly, that would have been a start.

@sandman_: Oh, I love Superman! I didn't mean to give that impression at all. That blog was mainly a response to CitizenBane's blog where he tried to claim Batman had never and never could beat Superman.

The way I see the two characters, I think it's entirely possible that Batman could beat Superman although obviously not in a straight up bloodlusted match. I just tried to elaborate on why.

@fallschirmjager: I've replied to all your posts, and didn't see one where you replied to the criteria I listed that can be used to objectively evaluate a film.

Where is Zod shown stealing the ship? He comes flying back in his OWN ship. What makes you think it was Clark's ship?

For what it's worth, I chose the pictures I did because I think the film could have been very different if these were changed.

Superman in a lighter blue and red suit, an inspirational suit if you will. Some guidance from Pa Kent why killing is never right, every life is valuable etc. Superman doing his best to make sure no one gets hurts, since the reason the Kryptonians are there hurting people is his fault (no guilt over that either...), doing his best to prevent collateral damage instead of causing it...Jor El and Kal El work together to save the day...maybe put Zod and crew back into the phantom zone.

Yup, a very different film it could have been.

@fallschirmjager: I don't really care that he killed other movies. That's a problem as well. And yes, there were alternatives. It's not a lack of perspective, but in my opinion, and I don't mean this as an attack, arrogance on your part. As is claiming art transcends objective critique.

@k4tzm4n: All good, missed the edit :)