>>78969667>There is a reasonable amount of expositionIt's really not reasonable. A good point of comparison is for example the fact that in Man of Steel Lois literally looks at the camera and says she's a Pulitzer Prize winner. The Superman movie before this? It just SHOWS the award. Or hell. "They're calling him Superman" is exposition. Organically would be to just call him Superman and cut out the middleman.
Lois was about as subtle as a brick. And shoehorned awkwardly into the movie. For all you tend to complain about how the Donner movie turns Lois into a generic Damsel in Distress she's absolutely that int his movie; she does dumb shit, and is unnecessary half the time so that Clark will have someone to save and fight for. There's no reason for her to go onto that ship without so much as a coat or any protection (she could've brought a coat and a gun. THAT would've at least been reasonable). There's no reason for Zod to invite her aboard,etc.
By the way if you're trying to argue that a character isn't flat, calling them subtle isn't a good way to phrase the refutation.
Action beats and inorganic action is for example, if Jonathan is so paranoid that Clark will get discovered for being an alien, why isn't Clark homeschooled? LOGICALLY he would've gotten pulled out after his heat vision and super senses triggered, but he was obviously kept in school past then since he was older when he saved the kids on the bus, which is what, strike two?
And as far as forced symbolism I was actually thinking about the poor man's giger sexuality injected into Kryptonian design aesthetic. It's one of those things that's clever for about thirty seconds.
And there's nothing mysterious about the pacing. It's all a forgone, boring conclusion so empty in character depth that I fell asleep during it the first time and it was only the blaring of the World Engine that woke me up.
Predator worked because we didn't know what the threat was. We do here.