MarsAtlas said:
but you must understand who Superman is in the first place to do a different spin on him.
No, you don't, people like Bruce Timm and Frank Miller do their own takes on superheroes, besides, what about Red Son? That's a completely different take on Superman that goes against the core of who he is, yet it's praised all the time.
MarsAtlas said:
Now Man of Steel takes a different approach by... framing him as a being of infinite hope and optimism that humankind is very slow to accept.
Because in real life, people WOULD be slow to accept him. He's an alien with godlike powers; even if he says he's here to help, many people, such as Batman, wouldn't trust him right away. He'll probably earn that trust at some point, possibly by the end of Justice League.
MarsAtlas said:
To try to demonstrate Superman as a being of hope, they have him... haphazardly destroy Metropolis in a reckless duel, leading to the deaths of over a million people.
Wrong, ZS said the death count was 5000. Keep in mind, at this point in time, Superman isn't a being of hope yet, this was his first day on the job, and to think that two super-powered beings are going to fight and there to NOT be collateral damage is absurd. You're acting as though he deliberately destroyed the city, which he certainly did not.
MarsAtlas said:
The movie doesn't frame the destruction of Metropolis as him screwing up supremely, it frames killing Zod as screwing up, and even then he's somewhat redeemed by the fact that he stopped Zod. People have every single reason to be afraid of him and no real reason to be appreciative of him (Zod was brought to earth by Superman, after all).
This is going to be addressed in BvS.
MarsAtlas said:
Even after all of that, the film itself frames him as a hero who deserves to be recognized as hope. Its important to remember that the film himself makes it very clear that he symbolizes hope, as Superman himself outright says it in a conversation, and he film ends off on that note. It doesn't end in melancholy, it doesn't question the value of his existence, it ends trying to frame him as a hero who deserves admiration.
He saved the entire planet, he SHOULD be viewed as a hero. Interestingly, a guy at the end of the Avengers said that they have to be held accountable for the damage done, but the waitress thinks they deserve to be praised, and frankly, she's right.
MarsAtlas said:
"So humans are allowed to be imperfect, but Superman's not?" YES, THATS THE ENTIRE POINT.
But how can anyone relate to him then? Batman himself said that Clark is probably the most human of all the Justice League, and if so, shouldn't he be flawed and have to face moral dilemmas?
MarsAtlas said:
aside from its technical problems
What technical problems?
MarsAtlas said:
We're not supposed to upset at Superman showing little regard for human life
This claim is verifiably false. It's mentioned a few times that Clark has an inherent need to help people. He saved a bus full of children, saved oil rig workers, saved a helicopter crew, saved several soldiers during the battle in Smallville, attempted to save 7 billion by surrendering to Zod, then actually saved 7 billion people by destroying the world engine. That's plenty regard.
MarsAtlas said:
we're not supposed to be upset that he doesn't try to be more diplomatic with Zod than he tries to be, and even though we know he'll refuse, thats not the point. Its the gesture, not the result.
He surrendered because he thought it would make Zod spare the Earth. It didn't work, but he tried it, so you're wrong on that account.
MarsAtlas said:
flattens an entire city in the process, and all around acts unheroic. He's acting more like a bully who tells us that we should be grateful that he's not beating us up.
He acts plenty heroic as I said above. And a bully? Really? That's just blatantly false. Did you actually watch the movie?
MarsAtlas said:
and in all liklihood will do the same for the sequel.
The sequel will address the destruction and the world's reaction to him.
MarsAtlas said:
Thats the real problem with Man of Steel, not that he does these things, but that he does these things and then handwaves the concerns of anybody who thinks that they were wrong. We're not even being told a story where Superman demonstrates his value, we're being talked down to by having his story being recollected to us and then telling us that what he did have been unquestionably good things that should earn him respect and admiration rather than letting his value be self-apparent, which it isn't to many. Again, I bring up Batman Begins, which sets out to do the same thing as Man of Steel but with a different character. Batman demonstrates his value by stopping a villainous plot to destroy the city while acting at the same to try and minimize human suffering.
The film isn't talking down to us, it's showing us what would happen if people like Superman existed. Superman did as much as he could to minimize deaths, and for an inexperienced superbeing, he did quite well. Practically all of your criticisms seem to boil down to personal taste. If you didn't like the movie, fine, but don't hate on it because you think it says things it doesn't say.