WB Debuts Trailer for Snyder's "Man of Steel" Superman Reboot

[Twickster]

It's also part of a movie that's something bigger than one image. In the context of who Superman is, the handcuffs just become a stupid visually symbol because they are being used purely symbolically. It isn't like if Batman turned himself in and we had a shot of him in handcuffs being surrounded by guards, in that case the imagery would at least arise from a real practical use within the story.

As for that little multiple choice bit, if by the time the movie got to that scene, and it was trying to convey A; and people thought B, C, and D were even options...well, the movie would have huge problems in it's storytelling, or the people are idiots.

It is an *ad* for a movie. Said ad should efficiently and unambiguously convey a message within one image.

The "context" of the movie, and what the movie "might" contain, and what people "might" think as the movie is playing, particularly as the movie isn't even out yet, is irrelevant to the aims of an ad. The ad seeks to show a message as pointedly and succinctly as possible (i.e. there can be no room for ambiguity. The handcuffs are there because it makes the meaning as clear as day).

Your response completely fails in refuting this.

[Simbob4000]

It is an *ad* for a movie. Said ad should efficiently and unambiguously convey a message within one image.

The "context" of the movie, and what the movie "might" contain, and what people "might" think as the movie is playing, particularl as the movie isn't even out yet, is irrelevant to the aims of an ad. The ad seeks to show a message as pointedly and succinctly as possible (i.e. there can be no room for ambiguity. The handcuffs are there because it makes the meaning as clear as day).

Your response completely fails in refuting this.

It's an ad for a movie using scenes from the movie.

Refute what? The point wasn't that the handcuff aren't symbolic and the meaning isn't clear. It's that as symbolism it's stupid in relation to Superman because they act only as a symbol...a symbol that doesn't mean anything because Superman just choosing to go with them is symbolic.
The cuffs can't act as some kind of symbol of authority over Superman when he lets them put handcuffs on him and they don't serve their function on him, if they're handcuffing Superman then it's just some kind of dumb in-story symbolic gesture that just doesn't make any sense.

In a trailer that looks like the Superman movie is trying so hard to be artsy, the symbolic handcuffs just jump out as something that's going to be incredibly stupid and heavy handed.

[Phil Clark]

The handcuff scene, wasn't there a similar scene in Hancock, complete with him in prison?

As for the Batman Schumacher films...I liked Batman Forever a lot. Batman and Robin, not so much.

And let us not forget the time in Hancock when the ball ends up outside the fence, and Hancock jumps the fence to get the ball, looks at the open ground in front of him and considers just leaving, but instead jumps back inside the fence. That is the moment he truly changed inside. He knew if he left, he would never be accepted, and he wanted that so badly that he was willing to stay in prison to achieve that goal.

Same as Superman here. He will do anything to show that he is not a monster. That he is there to help.

[Pro]

The cuffs can't act as some kind of symbol of authority

The radiation symbol doesn't actually irradiate people either.

[Treqqor]

^^
Actually, I totally get where he's coming from.
Think of the scene where he's arrested or whatever.
"Sir, we're going to cuff you."
Superman says "Why? I said I'll go where you need me to."
"So that you won't escape?"
"I'm Superman."
"Oh... right."

Unless they're kryptonite. Then that makes sense.

[MagnusRex]

It's an ad for a movie using scenes from the movie.

Refute what? The point wasn't that the handcuff aren't symbolic and the meaning isn't clear. It's that as symbolism it's stupid in relation to Superman because they act only as a symbol...a symbol that doesn't mean anything because Superman just choosing to go with them is symbolic.
The cuffs can't act as some kind of symbol of authority over Superman when he lets them put handcuffs on him and they don't serve their function on him, if they're handcuffing Superman then it's just some kind of dumb in-story symbolic gesture that just doesn't make any sense.

In a trailer that looks like the Superman movie is trying so hard to be artsy, the symbolic handcuffs just jump out as something that's going to be incredibly stupid and heavy handed.

LMAO! Superman is pretty much a god. If he wanted to, he could pull a Kid Marvelman and make the world rain with blood and body parts. So him letting handcuffs placed on him is a gesture that he's safe and conforming to the law. It's him saying that even though I am damn near a god, I don't see myself as above you. They're not a symbol of authority over him. It's pretty clear that he can do whatever he wants. The cuffs are simply a gesture of good will.

[Mike Pothier]

^^
Actually, I totally get where he's coming from.
Think of the scene where he's arrested or whatever.
"Sir, we're going to cuff you."
Superman says "Why? I said I'll go where you need me to."
"So that you won't escape?"
"I'm Superman."
"Oh... right."

Unless they're kryptonite. Then that makes sense.

At this point, though, we don't know the circumstances or even if they have a grasp of his powers. Even if they were told how strong he is, there's a huge difference between telling and seeing it first hand.

[Spike-X]

LMAO! Superman is pretty much a god. If he wanted to, he could pull a Kid Marvelman and make the world rain with blood and body parts. So him letting handcuffs placed on him is a gesture that he's safe and conforming to the law. It's him saying that even though I am damn near a god, I don't see myself as above you. They're not a symbol of authority over him. It's pretty clear that he can do whatever he wants. The cuffs are simply a gesture of good will.

That's the way I see it.

[Vibranium]

That's the way I see it.

that was my initial reaction to it as well

still not crazy about the suit though...its not bad, just not as vibrant as I would like it to be

[Surtur]

Though Jonathan Kent telling a young Clark that he maybe should have let people die really caught my attention.

This also struck me as something Mr. Kent would never say.

[kalorama]

This also struck me as something Mr. Kent would never say.

It struck me as something a father would definitely say if he's scared of his son being locked away as a lab rat or a prisoner or hunted down and killed if the world sees him as threat. If given a choice between sacrificing the lives of strangers to protect their own children, most parents would at least give it serious consideration. And, really, that's all Jonathan was doing. He didn't say "hell yes, let them die!" He was just reluctantly acknowledging the possibility that saving their lives could potentially cost Clark his (albeit indirectly).

[kalorama]

They're not a symbol of authority over him. It's pretty clear that he can do whatever he wants. The cuffs are simply a gesture of good will.

It's not an either or thing. They're both. It's a gesture on Superman's part but, at the some time, he recognizes the symbolic power of allowing himself to be cuffed and and taken into custody.

[Sonofspam]

that was my initial reaction to it as well

still not crazy about the suit though...its not bad, just not as vibrant as I would like it to be

I don't think the original version of the suit would work well in what seems to be the tone and style of this movie.

[SephirothDZX]

The suit just needs a little more hot rod red on there.

[west3man]

I don't think the original version of the suit would work well in what seems to be the tone and style of this movie.

I think that is unfortunate because, I agree, the movie doesn't appear to have the brightness I want in a Super-flick.