HOME | DD
Neodusk — Fandumb #3: Adulthood Ruined
#dc #comic #dccomics #manofsteel #fandumb
Published: 2014-10-21 11:09:19 +0000 UTC; Views: 34328; Favourites: 495; Downloads: 76
Redirect to original
Description
Follow me (and this comic) on tumblr: neoduskcomics.tumblr.comNEXT:
PREV:
Updates Tuesdays and Thursdays.
Please comment and enjoy.
Related content
Comments: 93
My inner child is alive, well, and sometimes more in control than my mature side... T.T
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Mine is protected by "Volunteering at the kids section in an awesome science center."
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Mine's got a protective layer of Calvin and Hobbes comics and the 2016 Jungle Book soundtrack on repeat.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Mine is protected by pokemon yugioh and Cardfight vanguard
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'm so glad I found these comics... also, my inner child is protected by Kamen Rider Den-O, Ressha Sentai ToQGer and Judgment Dragon.
...too much protection?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don't know...if I bust and get Wing Form, one hit and he's dead.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
At least in Liner Form I can go Fist-of-the-North-Star.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
pretty sure inner child is what STOPS you from enjoying man of steel.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I absolutely love and am deeply saddened by how fitting for you it was to label one of the rocks "Michael Bay"
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think my inner child is still in there somewhere, probably only carryinga pebble sized version of some of those thingsXD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Why the hell would you connect your inner child to DC? They've actively made their movies to not appeal to children at all because they're not "super serious."
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
.... are the rocks supposed to be shaped like a dick, or have I just been spending too much time on 4chan?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Michael Bay murders inner children everywhere.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Aw. Too bad man of steel is on a objective level better then any of the marvel movies. Poor marvel they are killing themselves
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I can't tell if this is sarcastic or not.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It is and it isnt. I walked into the all the movies around the same time i walked into the comics so basically I went in without bias on what exactly the characters are "supposed" to look like.
As a movie lover i ended up liking man of steel on raw merit considerably more then i liked any of the marvel movies. Bear in mind im not saying i didnt find the marvel movies enjoyable i love them (mostly) but man of steel is a stronger movie. In ten years i know people will still be seeing man of steel, (in much the same way people still go back and see The Return of the King ) but Im not confident that i can say the same for most of the marvel movies.
As a comic lover i would say that man of steel asks questions about superman that for some reason no one has bothered to ask apparently. I can see why it pisses people off basically. Marvel movies dont do any of that and if anything the "threats" they face are so secondary to making sure the characters feel like their comic counter parts that i can see why people love them more often then not.
The short version is that IN a lot of ways i think Man of Steel asks too much of its audience, while the marvel movies are very safe and dont really do as much for me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Saying you liked it better is the opposite of objective.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think a lot of movies ask a lot from their audiences, and many of those films don't catch on, but usually when a film does something deep, interesting, and unique (and executes it well), critics are able to catch onto it. Man of Steel got a pretty lukewarm to mediocre reception with film critics, and while I'm not saying that necessarily makes it a bad movie, it's one of the reasons why I don't think it's probably going to have the same long term impact of the lord of the rings trilogy, which was adored by audiences and critics alike at the time of their release. I think Man of Steel was very ambitious in exploring the character and I definitely respect it for trying to expand on what Superman is and can mean, but I don't think it executed on those ideas very well, personally, which is why I also don't think it got a terribly amazing reception. After all, the Dark Knight trilogy was a film interpretation of Batman the likes of which no one had seen before, making him more a man than a comic book hero, and it did fantastically with both audiences and film critics.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah but bringing up the batman movies just brings up a whole different animal.
Its like bringing up bridge on the river Thai after you've seen Fury. (Its the best example i can think of, Fury being good but easily writen off while Bridge on the river Thai is really hard to find fault with its just really damn good.)
Bridge being the recent batman trilogy, fury being Man of steel.
Although in Man of steels case it is probably fair to say i disagree on its execution.
Plus, most of the critical reviews ive seen dont talk about the movies credits rather they seem focused on the meandering path the movie took. They dont seem to care about what exactly Man of steel was dealing with, so much as they were bothered how much time he spent trying to deal with those problems. Fair but a little silly in context of how little time has been spent on those issues before hand. They also tend to ignore how connected all the little bullet points in his life are in context of his more dramatic conflict with his fellow kryptonians later.
Alternatively they focus solely on the last 30 minutes of the movie and call it "blockbuster trash" complaining on how it apparently focuses too much on the action, and just ignore the other two hours of movie.
With the general public i generally hear the biggest issue being how the supermans inner conflicts having never been brought up before, or that they didnt like the lack of "Feats." Which is silly, the former being a fault with the comics and not the movie, the second being ridiculous in the context of the movie itself.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Someone else who has seen Bridge! Neat!
I think I agree with your comparison of Fury to Man of Steel. Fury is a WW2 movie; a subject done to death by current media. But, it takes it from a different angle, and shows a new light on how soldiers acted on the front lines. The scene where the tank commander forces the new kid to murder in cold blood a German soldier was extremely effective, because that is what happened historically; GI's did not want to take prisoners after a long, drawn out bloodbath of a fight. Man of Steel was and is good, one of the best Superman movies to date, but I think it could have been better in some ways. The Ad placement could have been more subtle, and I'm not sure I like the simpering nature of the human background characters and the jumping around of the chronology early on. Fury and Man of Steel are rehashes of old news, but done in such a way that they become better than most if not all of their predecessors.
In comparing the Dark Knight trilogy to Man of Steel, I can't say that's fair. Three movies against one is skewed. So I just review Man of Steel to the best of the Trilogy, Dark Knight (2nd one) I've always found Superman to be far less interesting than Batman or most other DC heroes. Though the films are both by Nolan, Dark Knight is superior to Man of Steel, and I think the reason for that is because Batman has more character and better villains than Superman. Still, I have hopes that the next Superman movie will be as good if not better than Man of Steel.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol it is odd to find someone who's seen bridge I'm glad.
But yea this ties back into the original point it's harder to appreciate the marvel movie list when you see more truly good movies,and it's not fair to people who haven't seen all those movies to talk like that hbubut still
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
My main issues with the movie, personally, are that I felt like the characters were very bland (especially Clark) and it was full of very monotonous, repetitive speeches. If the movie is about Superman and about the conflicts he was facing, regarding his powers, his isolation, the risk of his exposure, what he means to humanity and what humanity means to him, I feel like I should have gotten more of what was going on in Superman's own head. Instead, most of the film is dedicated to Superman listening to people giving him lectures on all those things, with him, the protagonist, very scarcely actually contributing any meaningful dialogue. His father tells him who he should be and what he should do, then his birth father, then his adoptive father again, then zod, then Lois Lane or something, then his birth father again. The movie never even really gives us any kind of a look into the conflict this is creating within him, so it often feels like Clark is more of a subject of discussion rather than a person I'm meant to care about and sympathize with. If the film is going to address all these themes and issues, I'm fine with that, but I feel like it did it very heavy handedly, like it didn't know how to use the medium of film and storytelling to address those things so they put most of it in a bunch of monologues where they beat the audience over the head with it. Because of that, I felt like the film did a poor job of depicting its characters very compellingly. They often sort of just felt either like mouthpieces for those monologues or, in the case of Superman, their generally passive and silent audience.
And, yeah, I thought the actors were boring. I don't really know how else to put that. None of the dialogue felt engaging or natural to me, the story felt sort of generic and needlessly complicated, and the movie was ambitious, but, I mean, if it really executed on its ideas that well, I feel like a lot more viewers and critics would have come away with some impression of that. If nobody's discussing what the film was dealing with, like what was important about it (and maybe that's something you should be questioning rather than just assuming they missed it somehow) maybe the movie didn't make them care enough about it to bother. That's the thing about following through with an ambitious idea. If you do it poorly, nobody's going to care about or focus on what your intention was, they're just going to focus on how badly it was presented at face value. So, yeah, meandering story, action scenes that felt wholly gratuitous because nobody was made to care enough about what was happening, and actors going around what FELT like spending way too much time on certain issues because the critics and fans were never made to care about them. It's like if a guy gives a speech about something but he takes forever to get to the point, doesn't make anything he says engaging, doesn't make himself engaging in any way, and puts in a bunch of fluff that might've been engaging if he had delivered on those other things...his audience probably isn't even going to focus on what he was talking about because he made the process of getting to the content of his speech so unbearable. All they'll probably talk about is the subpar, visceral experience of it. And if someone wants to tell me, well, maybe it's just that, plain and simply, it's only the thematic content and ideas and issues that matter in this film, above all else, then maybe don't make it a film. Maybe just make it a speech (which is what this movie seemed to be trying to be half the time anyway).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
While his is buried under those rocks, mine just vanished into dust.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Michael Bay movies are very childish actually. Come on, a robot riding a robot dinosaur is a plot a 5 year old would think up.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, but last time I checked, most kids things don't exactly have pedophiles and drug references.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Those things don't make a story necessarily more mature.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, but it's what michael bay's movies usually have. In movies based off kids shows.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
These movies will be rushed to ride on Marvel's wave. Don't try to get hyped, your hopes are gonna be crushed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
what is the connection to any of your comics at all?
it's pointless me clicking next... none of it humours me
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
So your point of being here is...?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
well considering I thought there was an actual point to these comics....
but now That I know they are pointless it's become obvious no one has any business at all being here.
well of course this exempts the idiotic and those hopelessly infatuated with the fan related context.
this concludes my review
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Some people do find it humorous. Therefore, the links.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Our inner child is crushed a little by at least 2-3 of these rocks.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
poor inner child...micheal bay was the first thing to crush him...that asshole!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
My inner child isn't crushed by rocks of reality, but rather chained with a dog collar. It's still there, no matter what reality throws at me. It's just on a short leash what magically grows longer when I watch anime.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I like Superman, personally. It's very easy to write a bad Superman story, but when someone writes a good one, it somehow seems more impressive to me than writing a good story for a lot of other iconic heroes. Probably because he is so ridiculous and over-the-top and archetypal that when someone manages to ground him in a narrative that's sincerely identifiable and gripping, it's often very profoundly so.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Holy dodongos! Did I actually just read that someone other than me likes Superman? It's a miracle! He's not my favorite, but I feel he doesn't get the credit he's due. Everyone says "Superman is boring because everything's too easy for him" to which I respond "you're watching/reading Superman for the wrong reason." Superman's story is not one of struggling to accomplish a task, but struggling which path to take. Kingdom Come and Red Son were two of the best comics I've ever read, as they demonstrate what happens when the man who can do anything and wants to help humanity chooses the wrong paths.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, I think the claim that Superman is boring because he's so powerful is a little misguided. I mean, is Batman's lack of powers really what makes him so audience-pleasing? The guy practically HAS superpowers if you ever look at his list of abilities. It's all a matter of tailoring the right story to the right character. Characters like Batman might just be a little easier to tailor stories to, because their images have been a little more historically flexible. And I admit, there's a lot of Superman stories out there that are boring, but I think when they're done right, they're really done right. Superman is all about ethics--what it means to an alien god to be human, and what it means for someone who can do almost literally anything to hold himself to the same moral codes to which he believes any other man to be held. Also, Superman is a great source of comedy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, I agree, especially that part about Batman. I love the dark knight and admittedly Batman comics are more entertaining than Superman comics on a regular basis but I think it's really unfair that Superman is criticized for his ability to do anything with powers, while Batman is praised for his ability to do anything "without powers." They are both overpowered, people just relate to Batman more because he's "human."
If you get a chance, check out the youtube series After Hours by itsjustsomerandomguy (not me). The first season is dedicated to Superman and how the world views him.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>