>>To address some of what's been said already, I took Pa
>Kent's
>>death as Clark's "I'll never stand by and just let something
>>happen again" but right before the tornado, he was
>discussing
>>that there was more in store for him than just staying in
>>Smallville, so not sure why so many people don't "get" what
>>his next logical step was, it made sense to me.
>
>Since, up to this point in the movie, we'd never seen Clark
>just stand by and not help someone, and since, right before
>the tornado, he was arguing against standing by and not
>helping, why would he need a "I'll never stand by" moment?
it was actually an "i'll never stand by AGAIN" moment.


>It doesn't really seem logical to me that Clark says, "I
>should help people!" then he doesn't help, which leads him to
>say, "I should help people!"
>Did he really need his father to die to realize that letting
>people die is kinda shitty? He was already arguing that he
>should do more so why would he need to do the least to realize
>that, yeah, he should do more?
there was a conflict between him and his father as to how active a role he should take in altering the course of human events. much of what we see are natural or normal occurrences, motor vehicle accidents, storms, in which lives are lost, but where he can make an actual difference. this had nothing to do with figuring out why "death is shitty," this was about him specifically changing events in a way that humans before then were not accustomed to, and the repercussions of these changes.


>
>Similarly, if Clark was intending to leave and was arguing in
>favor of helping people, why let his father die? I know it was
>how his dad wanted him to act but to say, "OK Dad, I'll give
>you this one but then I'm going to do it my way" makes his
>father's death ultimately meaningless and somewhat heartless,
>when you factor in he's now leaving his mother widowed and
>alone.
his father feared how the world would receive him despite the good he could do and wanted him to protect his identity over protecting other people. his father wanted him to live a "normal life" but he wasn't a normal person so that was never going to work. i wouldn't say his father's death was meaningless at all. it could actually be interpreted in a few ways
1) his father realized that he would never be "normal" and perhaps didn't want to see how the world would react to that
2) his father did not want to shackle him any longer and relieved him of whatever conflict Clark felt, freeing him up to seek out his destiny
3) in coming to terms with why he let his father die, he came to figure out that he DID need to protect his identity in some way so that his life could have some normalcy. seemingly he found that by getting a job at the daily planet.

now it may seem dumb that Pa Kent allows himself to die to send his son a message but this was the same person trying to rationalize to someone with super powers that being a farmer is "just fine."

in terms of "leaving his mom," i mean shit, can't he get to her faster than anyone if need be?

>
>And finally, isn't it odd that Clark's reaction to his Call to
>Arms moment is that he runs away to the furthest corners of
>the Earth?
no, it kind of seems like the right time. even the original superman movie did that. at such a pivotal time, when it's clear his earth parents aren't his REAL parents, the time to discover his destiny is now, especially as things are reaching a tension point, people discovering and starting to look closer and closer at what he's doing.

>---
>
>>Really don't get all the objections to his
>>death. We're not talking about killing a human being, we're
>>talking about a super being who was only going to kill
>people.
>
>It's just a change in the canon of Superman. Nolan objected to
>it because of that.
>But in the actual film, not killing Zod made little sense and
>I do think that Snyder and Goyer were right that, given the
>film they built, having Zod get sucked into the Phanton Zone
>(the original ending) wasn't a very satisfying climax. The
>problem was that they painted themselves into a corner and,
>rather than rewrite the whole thing, they just threw in yet
>another bash 'em up fight scene and had Supes do the deed.
>
>
>>Every other telling of
>>Superman in TV and big screen has presumed that he was more
>>welcome than feared. Finally the very real notion of people
>>fearing what they don't know and can't control is
>manifested,
>>as well as the feelings that one can feel knowing they're
>>different, even if more powerful than others.
>
>Do people have a problem with this? I think it's a great idea
>to add but it's very difficult to pull off and I don't think
>they succeeded with this film.
>

i think it worked very well. even if hostile, anyone with that type of power is viewed as a military threat and a response is mounted BEFORE questions are asked.