Short Tales

     So it has been a while since I've posted anything here.  Busy with life and things that seem more important.  But I have managed to get some writing in here and there at work.  I have been listening watching or more accurately listening to the YouTube channels that narrate the creepy pasta tales and scary stories posted on Reddit. On of the things that really amused me was the 1 sentence horror stories.  I thought I could try my hand at it.  I'm not good enough to create one with a single sentence but I did write a few down which are just a few sentences. Some of them aren't really horror more suspense or mystery but I like them.

     A few of these were written in my comedy journal, really just a writing journal I carry in my bag, I use it to jot down ideas for jokes, or just thoughts, random crappy ideas for stories.  Most of which don't go anywhere.  Like if I had the time or commitment to work on them I would turn them into novels, but I don't.  I digress, the best part about these tales is they are just blurbs, that don't need to go any further than they already have.  So I can post them as completed works.  Here we go.

•      She missed the last thing he said, it was caught in the wind as she stepped from the ledge

•      The first thing he wondered when he woke  up was "how much did I have to drink last night." The next thing he wondered was how he was going to hid her body.

• She lay on the park bench listening to the birds chirp.  The sun was setting and it grew darker around her, was that really the sun setting at 2:00 pm, or just her life leaving as the pills took hold.

•   She heard a snap of a twig behind her, she turned to look in that direction. There was nothing , the paranoia was only natural, her small female form alone in the woods.  She turned back and continued to feast on her latest victim.

• He looked into the mirror, examining the color of his eyes, looking closely at every detail in them,  It had been so long since he had taken a host with green eyes.

• He was stopped at the stop sign his bike rumbling as he put his foot down, the motor drowning out all other ambient sounds.  Out of the corner of his helmet, he saw shadows dancing in a jerking motion in the street lights.  He drove on ignoring it, The rev of the engine blocking out her cries for help as it faded into the darkness.

• She poured the wine into the glasses, checking over her shoulder to where he was in the living room.  She added the shining liquid to the glass on her left her hand trembling.  There was a sudden crash from the kitchen. She saw the cat had knocked over several items in the pantry.  She rushed over to scold it and pick up the mess.  As she turned back to see him handing her a glass with a smile on his face.

• Her mouth was dry and her feet hurt from the walking, the sun was beating down as the cicadas chattered away,   The light was so bright that all the shadows ere much deeper.  As she passed over the bridge she heard a splash in the shallow creek below.  She peered over the bridge to see what could have made it.  The deep shadows hid the view under the bridge, only the ripples in the water lapping at the banks could be seen.  As she leaned over to get a better look, all the sound of the chattering cicadas stopped.  The silence was abrupt and jarring, she looked around at the trees.  Soon she notices that the silence as complete.  No birds, No flowing creek, no foot steps as she turned around looking for the cause.  Only the splashing was audible.  She looked back for the source of the splashing, she saw it.  It was herself, her body was half in the creek half against a rock, her skull split open, her legs twitching in the water.  She stared at the sight, as the shadows grew deeper and spread around her, blocking out the light.

That's all I have done, let me know what you think, maybe I'm really bad at this, maybe I'm better than I think.  I'm just flexing that kind of creative muscle that needs to be flexed.  It's harder to get a moving tale in a shorter format than it is to write it out in a detailed novel.  Since all my story ideas end up going nowhere I figured these would be something I can say I completed. 

You like me because I'm a scoundrel

     Ian

I probably wouldn't think about this

History Channels new mini series

     Today, I was watching the new Preview of the Event Series on The History Channel called "Texas Rising"  In the preview, you see the events of the Alamo, and San Jacinto. Mostly though I saw lots of people fighting Native Americans.  Which is history, I know.  I mean I can accept that watching my cultural ancestry fight and lose on Television constantly, it is just something I've grown accustom to over the years.  This got me thinking, Is the United States the only country that constantly makes shows and films, glorifying the genocide of a culture?  Are there examples of this kind of film making in other countries, where the current dominating culture makes movies about how it systematically lied and dominated a culture?

Texas Rising Main Cast

     If I were a dedicated journalist I would probably make a more in depth look into this question but this blog is merely a hobby and just a place to throw my own thoughts up about the subject.  Basically an opinion page.  I'm not trying to change the world with this.  I am just merely thinking out loud.  What got me thinking was this preview.  Watching all these white men all clad in period western clothing, dirty and weathered like REAL MEN, and seeing all these Natives whooping and running around in their paint and one would hope cultural accurate dress.  I say that because I am very unsure of what the difference between a culturally accurate Native, and a "Hollywood Indian."  I'm far from knowledgeable of my own culture.  I grew up in white suburbia, hell my father wasn't even sure about his ancestors, he grew up thinking he was Mexican because it was safer to be Mexican than to be Native.  That is how suppressed and scared the U.S. government made the indigenous population.  Terrified of it's own identity, so much so that its parents would rather lie to their children about their origins, than admit to being the first people living on this land.

Extras for Texas Rising

   

     When I see Natives depicted on films it is always one of two ways.  Silent stoic and uncaring, dangerous.  This being when they are depicted as the "enemies" of the protagonists, or just and obstetrical that must be dealt with.  The other is, they misunderstood savage, the noble race that are really full of depth and knowledgeable, if only a white man is captured by them and force to live among them to see who they really are, If that white man goes back to his own culture He is sham
ed for being a sympathizer of the "enemy."  These kinds of films are rampant thru out all American cinema.  The cliche of  "white man to the rescue." Films like "Thundarheart," "Dances with Wolves," "The Last Samurai," and "Avatar." Granted these are not all specifically about Native Americans, but the premise is the same.

Graham Greene

     As much as I am afraid to admit it, due to his more recent remarks, Mel Gibson has actually been in and made films that I feel more comfortable how the Natives are depicted.  In films like Maverick, the character of Joseph, was smart and personable, he is treated like a regular human by Maverick, and even cheats the main character out of money.

Mel Gibson and Graham Greene

In his film Apacalypto, there are no white men until the very end.  It is a film that takes place before that whole mess started.  Which is something I would love to see more of.  Not films where white men save the culture by learning about it.  A film where one Nation fights of an invading Nation.  The real struggles that happened before the Europeans showed up on the continent.  Things that show of more of the culture in aspects of now how a white man can help theses people, more of how they don't need the help of white men to solve their issues.

Saginaw Grant and Loren Anthony 'Ridiculous Six.'

     With the resent walk off of several Natives from the Adam Sandler film that when in knowing full well it was suppose to be a satire of western films.  The jokes and disrespect toward the women portraying natives, cause many of the actors to leave the set sighting offence.  This immediately puts people on the defensive saying that they will need to get thicker skin and learn how to take a joke. I think they have earned their rights to say when they are not comfortable with how something is depicted.  Jokes or not,  this culture has little left of a voice.  The biggest tyrant of the culture, the man that started it all is still celebrated in a holiday after his name.  Getting rid of Columbus day, wouldn't end that oppression but it's a step in the right direction.  The same with using derogatory terms for natives as sports teams is not "Honoring" the culture.
     All in all I will probably not be watching "Texas Rising" anyway, I find that most of Texas history to be a series of poor judgments by the white invaders into what was then Mexico, and the disrespect of yet tactical tenacity of Houston's attacking a Mexican army while they were taking their siesta.  We get mad at the Japanese for attacking on a Sunday morning while a majority of service men are at church at Pearl Harbor, but when white men do it, it is a stroke of genius.  I think I've made an ass of myself enough today.  I'll step down off this soap box.
You like me because I'm a scoundrel,
    Ian Serna

I'd be shorter

    Harrison Ford, the actor that portrayed Han Solo, is 6'1'' (185.42 cm); I would be shorter, not by much, but 2 inches shorter.  It is fairly significant to some people.  I haven't felt like a tall person, or even a very large person, for all of my adult life.  There a just moments when I am reminded that I am a large imposing person.  I'm 6'3'' (190.5 cm). I am not a skinny person, even when I was lighter.  I have very broad shoulders and a tick torso, my legs are thick and toned from being on swim team, skateboarding, and bicycling. for a good portion of my childhood, and teen years.

My body type is what is called an Endomorph.  All my life, since I was a little kid, I've always had a little belly, even when I was physically active like crazy, my older brother noticed it and for a whole summer would supervise or order me to do sit-ups for hours a day.  I didn't lose the belly I just developed  very dense muscles under the fat.  Now over the years, of drinking to many soft drinks, beer, liquor, and just generally being a lazy fuck, I have put on much more weight then I even wanted to.  I have started my efforts to lose some of that weight and get back into better shape.  When I started working out, and eating less.  I didn't really change much of my current eating habits, except for cutting out a majority of breads and pastas.  I am simply eating less of them, smaller portions.  I fight off the urge to eat more by simply drinking more water, or occasionally a "hunger curving" shake.  I haven't needed one of those in a couple of weeks though.  I have gone from 299 lbs.(135.6 kg) to 287 lbs. 130.18 kg).  I have a ways to go if I want to get to where I want to be which is close to 240 lbs. It also may be more than that, since I want to build up stronger core muscles.  Anyway I figured talking about this will give me a record of the commitments I am trying to keep up and I can look back and feel shame or pride that I kept to it for failed. This isn't what really drove me to write this blog today.  I'll get to the point now.
    I was browsing imgur.com again, of course.  When I cam across a meme stating the unpopular opinion, of you shouldn't wait for a girl to hit you before you defend yourself.  No despite being inflammatory and misogynistic it got me to read a few of the comments, one was from a guy that was stating he is a big imposing guy and it would take more than just 2 punches to bring him down.  He then said that he was 5' 10'' and 280 lbs.  I read that and was like, this guy is 5 inches shorter than me and weighs nearly the same as I do.  Now I am not going to lie I have a pretty big gut if I don't stand up strait and suck it in for the sake of keeping good posture which I try to do. This guy is either very muscular or is just as doughy as me, if not more so.  No I don't know many people who will openly admit on the internet of being fat.  I did ask him since he was 5 inches shorter than me and weighed as much as I do, did he have the physical stamina to take the strain of throwing a punch?  Yeah it was a fairly dick move to call him out like that but hey this is the internet, I can be a dick if I want to.  He went on the say he has and athletic build but has a bit of a belly.  I was satisfied with that.  Hell I'm not going to press the guy.

 What really struck me was the fact that he thought 5'10'' was tall.  That got me thinking.  I stated before I never felt like a big guy, mostly because I was surrounded by friends of mine that were just as tall if not taller than myself.  6'4'', 6'2'', even 6'8''.  I didn't feel like a tall person around all of them.  I would imagine that we probably looked pretty scary walking together as a group though, but we were all fairly non-violent nerds, just looking for a place to play Magic: The Gathering.
    I just was wondering why on earth this guy on the internet thought that 5'10, was tall?  I looked up the national average of men in the USA, and 5'9'' is the average.  So he was only an inch taller.  That isn't much but maybe he is in an area that is much shorter.  I work with and meet people that are as tall or taller than men quite regularly.  I don't feel out of place or imposing, I feel normal.  It is only when I get told, "Wow you're huge." or I get stories from my girl friend about how her co-workers are intimidated by me.  I mean I fell like my favorite line from Bane, in the Dark Knight Rises was when the CIA agent said "Come on, you're a big guy." His replay is "For you."

 Which I found to be brilliant, because that is a relative comparison.  I'm not a big guy compared to my friend Robert who is 6'8''.  Which would make it all possible for this guy to be an imposing guy even at 5'10''.  Though how he doesn't run into guys much taller than him I will not know.  I don't really care to follow his daily interactions, and that would be kind of creepy to want to.
  I decided to ask a friend of mine that I made a few months ago, she's 6''(182.88 cm) tall.  I asked he if she often forgets how tall she is.  If she thinks of herself  in a different perspective than just being tall.  She told me she is always aware that she is much taller than average.  She told me that times she wishes she was shorter.   That makes sense to me, because a majority of females are not that tall.  So you'd be constantly reminded that you are tall by just looking around at other girls.  I would image this is probably a similar issue to men that are below height.  Thus the giving rise to the "Napoleon complex" not that only short people get it, I am pretty sure tall women feel the same as a short man for not being "normal."

   It was during this conversation that I had a bit of an epiphany, I often find myself more comfortable and drawn to being around taller women.  I am more friendly to them and I will engage them in conversation much sooner than I would a girl that is shorter than say 5' 8''.  I realized that I am just trying to feel not as tall as I am buy seeking out women that are only slightly shorter than me, sot that I feel that I am average height.  It makes me feel normal.  I suppose that is really all what it boils down too, is just the never ending quest to feel "normal" or fit in, but also stand apart.  It is a funny thing the way we perceive ourselves, so erratic and contradictory at times that to an outside observer the place is just a giant insane asylum.
     I'm happy with who I am, I just forget I am as large as I really am. It probably makes people scare at times, or worried when I try to do things that are something I shouldn't be doing being as tall as I am. Like climbing up the wall of an apartment building to get onto a balcony to get into the apartment I was locked out of... long story.  It is just those random things that pop into my head that I feel like typing out.  I hope you enjoyed reading this.

You like me because I'm a scoundrel,
    Ian

I would be forever young.

     It has been a while since I felt the inspiration to write a blog.  I've been putting some effort into writing a scary story, also life distractions since this is not my job and only my hobby,  If I could write as a job I might actually update this thing less.  I digress, to the point now.

     I have written about this subject matter before.  I simply saw a new image on imgur that gave me some additional thoughts on it.  Since it is hard to convey full ideas and aspects in a box of 140 characters, I will fill out my thoughts here.  This image, shows they young beautiful celebrities and how they are now old and saggy.  It is amazing to think that such an image would come as a shock to people.  Then again this come back to that bubble of time, that celebrities live in.  That film that made them a star, all youthful and fit,  they are forever frozen in that time, their image seen by people far younger, or born long after they are no longer alive.  Look at old films and stars.  They are beautiful in those films, Judy Garland, Audrey Hepburn, James Stewart, and Kerry Grant. They are gone now, but their films are still here, they are still beautiful in them.  They have reached the point where, they are not the subject of every day exchanges but they are now young and beautiful forever. If you google those names, you will not see photos of what they looked like they months or years before they died,  You will see the photos of how they looked then.  Sure if you do a deeper image search I am sure you will find more current photos.  But Google only shows the initial photos on the search, you their youthful good looks.  This show that we would rather be not reminded that the grim sector of age encompasses us all. To keep that reality at bay, when we think of older celebrities we only look at them as they were young.  

    There is a way to stay young and beautiful for celebrities, or even people.  The cost is higher than anyone is really willing to pay, it is your life.  Celibates that die young, still remain alive in their films, they are young attractive and that is why they became stars in the first place, yes of course their acting had things to do with it true, or maybe even their music.  The point is they were suddenly view by a much wider range to people, their images where captured in film and photography.  Then their lives were cut short. James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, Kurt Cobain, River Phoenix, and Heath Ledger. All these people have become frozen in time, because there is no record beyond their shining beauty and youth.  Forever young to coin a phrase.  This will not work for stars that have already lived past the point of their looks.  Even if Micky Rooney dies tomorrow, he will still have his films, and photos of  how his looks have changed for the worse.  Not many people remember him from 9 1/2 Weeks, they remember him from things like Iron Man 2 and The Wrestler. After his brush with bad plastic surgery trying the recapture his youthful look.

     I think most people get upset or angry at the celebrity for getting old and no longer looking good, because they are not be lied to anymore, they are being told the truth.  The truth is you are not a god, you are not timeless.  Depressing as it feels, you will not remain like that, unless you stop aging by dying.  The only your photographs remain, Frozen in time forever young.

You like because I'm a scoundrel,

     Ian

Would he think about this?

     It is one of those moments when I am unable to find a video game to hold my attention, nor am I willing to brows Netflix long enough to find something worth watching,  So I am just going to write out my thoughts while drinking coffee and listening to music.  This particular moment what I am thinking about is about something I remember reading about or hearing about on something I was watching, probably a combination of both.  Having evolutionary and physiological effects on our feeling or what we perceive as scary.
   While flipping through the images on Imgur, I came across some one who posted a bunch of "scary" gifs.  This has become common to do in the evening and is referred to as Late Night Imgur or LNI.  It is when people post the most creepy looking kind of images or animated gifs, in attempts to give the people up this late a fright. Personally I don't find them creepy I just find them amusing.  Though I was thinking about one image that many people said they found scary.  I started to look at it and analyse it.  The image is that of what appears to be a woman sitting in a bed,  She is wearing a white gown, her skin is pale and sickly looking, her face and jaw are stretched longer than humanly possible, in her mouth are long fangs that would not allow her to close her mouth properly.  She has no eyes, instead they are just black empty sockets.  The gif is animated and she appears to be screaming.  This image has been posted several times and every time some one mentions that is scary.  Even with a large gallery of other images this one seems to be singled out quite a bit.  Lets look that the parts of the image that add to this value of terror. Why each part is contributing to the whole image to make it as unnerving as possible.
     First off, she is wearing a white gown.
 White is traditionally thought of as pure and innocent, something that a pure clean and good person wears.  Which is why brides are often wearing white in western culture.  It shows purity.  Angels and saints are often depicted wearing white garments. So maybe it add that this might at one time been a nice person that has gone bad.  People fear corruption.  The blouse appears to be some what like a hospital gown.  This could infer that she had taken ill with an unknown disease and is in a hospital to recover.  This leads directly into the second and third features.
    Second, she is sitting in a bed, this may be that she has taken ill and is trying to recover from an illness, this could also play on the viewer as something they see when they enter their bedroom,  A bedroom is something people usually feel safe in.  It is comforting to be tucked into a warm bed.  Though it is also a place where you experience nightmares.  Late at night when it is dark and you hear a strange noise that wakes you, you experience the adrenaline response of flight or fight.  Your imagination conjures all kinds of scenarios.
    The third thing is that this lady's complexion is very pale, very sickly looking, this plays into the fear of illness.   We are driven away instinctually to avoid the sick,  because we have a drive to stay healthy and avoid illness.  This is why Zombie films are so popular in the horror genre.

What can be more scary than an illness that kills you but makes you continue to spread that illness even though you are dead?  Pale skin and sores on the body suggest a state of illness that you want to avoid.  You'll never fear a zombie with a healthy glow or bronze tan.

     The next part of this image is they stretched face, and open mouth bearing teeth. Many animals view the showing of teeth as a sight of aggression, it is threatening to bare teeth to a dog, they will growl or bark at you if you do this, smaller animals will cower, a large animal baring their teeth might show that the plan on having them as a meal.  The human animal though is different, we bare our teeth as a sign of affection from one another, this is what we call a smile.  That is why if you're going to make the showing to teeth feel threatening you have to make them as inhuman as possible.
The jaw opening impossibly wide gives the snake like appearance to the image.  There is a deep rooted fear in the image of a snake that plays into this aspect of the image. This lady has something you would not see in a normal set of teeth, long sharp fangs that would be better suited inside the mouth of a snake.  Since they are far from human in appearance we perceive them as a threat instead of a smile. There is another way to provide them as threatening yet maintain their human appearance.  Missing or rotten teeth are yet another perception of disease and to be avoided.  This could be seen in films where the threatening role is played by a man of poor hygiene, there is a very good example of this in the film Willow.  When the character of Madmartigan is introduced he is disheveled and this teeth are yellow green in appearance.  The heroes see him as dangerous and scary.  The next morning he is cleaning his teeth and they appear white and straight.  Suddenly the character still feels less scary, maybe not to be completely trusted but not dangerous.  Something as simple as they appearance of teeth effect the perception of fear.
   Lastly the missing eyes, this is something that plays quite highly in the psychological aspect of fear.  Now something that is missing eyes, is commonly perceived as blind.  Yet in horror films something missing eyes acts nothing like a creature that is blind.  They appear to be able to see perfectly well.  What plays on this as a fear feature is.  There is no way to tell were this creature is looking,  how it is able to perceive you even though you can't tell how it is seeing you.
  They Xenomorph created by H. R. Giger played this aspect of fear well.  It had no visible eyes but it knows right were its victims are.  The idea of sight where it is perceived as blind causes feeling of uneasiness in people.

  Now, I've said this before that I don't typically get scared at images of scary things, but that will not mean I won't jump at a startling noise or scream.  That's an inherent reflex action that is hard if not impossible to control.  The things that scare me are the things that cause my mind to make up the menace.  This little short story caused me to get scared.

   


   


        You are upstairs in your room on the computer.  You hear your mother call you down stairs.  As you get up and head out of your room you feel a hand grab your shoulder, it is your mother she's pale and scared. She says to you, "Shh, don't go down there baby.  I heard it too."













                                   

I would still enjoy the Man of Steel.

    I'm writing this as a reply to all the film critics out there that are saying less than stellar things about the new film Man of Steel.  I'll have to admit that I do have a bit of a bias when it comes to enjoying all things Superman.  Though as a faithful fan of the "Boy Scout" I should probably dislike this film.  Some Superman fans have been angry at the changes made to Superman with this new film.  I think this film is a nice change of pace to all previous incarnations of the Blue Bird.  Though the critics seem to think, that he's been made into just another brooding outsider.

   This is my take away from watching the film.  There was very little strong character development in this first film.  I am sure that can be said about lots of films that were made with hopes for squeals to follow.  The character development of the first Star Wars film was very lacking.  How can you criticize something like character development when you've been living with the culture of Superman for years and years before.  Saying that there isn't any character development to the film like this one is like saying, you upset with the fact that you ordered a pizza, but were not told that there was cheese and tomato sauce along with the toppings you ordered for it.  There are things that you should know as a given when going to see a film that already has a history to it.   I actually found more character development in this film for the villain, General Zod, than in Superman 2.  Both characters I found have their place in the stories they are in, but I found there to be much more depth in this Zod, than in the one from the 80s.  There is more of a focus on what the world of Krypton was really like, and a little less of what earth is like.  Which is something all the previous Superman films lacked severely.  This film did an excellent job of bringing to light the world that Krypton was, and how it crumbled. Giving an important lesson in it that power and decadence will ultimately destroy a civilization.  The current quotes I am reading seem to skip over that aspect and focus mainly on how they think this is some kind of "The Dark Knight" clone.

Chris Nashawaty, Entertainment Weekly:"'Dark Knight'-style makeover never quite comes together. Sure, Superman is still faster than a speeding bullet and more powerful than a locomotive. ... But he's been transformed into the latest in a long line of soul-searching super-brooders, trapped between his devastated birth planet of Krypton and his adopted new home on Earth. He's just another haunted outsider grappling with issues."

    This kind of view in that quote is kind of a "I want my cake and to eat it too."  All my life I have been laughed at for being a bigger fan of Superman and not Batman.  Batman is the dark brooding mysterious hero.  So much depth so much struggle with his emotions and moral code.  Where all I hear about Superman is, he's boring.  He's good, he never dose anything bad he just  has no depth like Batman.  So when I see a film that gives that similar dark moral struggle that Batman has, given to Superman, people complain that it isn't like Superman.  Well you can't have it both ways people.  You want Superman to stay Superman "boring" as many have said?  Would you like him to be given a bit of depth and focus on his own moral struggle, which is that he could just as easily become the planet's ruler instead of its protector.  You can't have both, so when you go with one people complain about the lack of the other. If you put out the stigma that no one likes Superman because he's too goody of a good guy, you can't complain when some one tries to tarnish the sparkling image to give him some depth.  There is even more depth given to Kal El at the very start of the film.  His birth, it was very different from all the other living Kryptonians.  I'm not sure if anyone else really thought of that aspect of it.  If you're confused, I suggest you watching the film it is subtle if you're not really thinking about it.

  Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times: "Given the 'Dark Knight' trilogy's Nolan and Goyer's involvement, it's no surprise that 'Man of Steel' is conceptualized in the Batman mold, a dark end of the street extravaganza where, theoretically at least, epic vision would be joined with dramatic heft. It hasn't worked out quite that way.

   I feel that critics of this film seem to focus mainly on the films they know of Superman and not the depth he is given in his comics.  They complain that this isn't the same kind of light heated silly Superman that it was in previous films.  Which is almost laughable to say.  What do they think a "re-boot" "re-imagining" is suppose to be?  Just spit shine Superman and Superman 2, and put them back in theaters if that is what they were hoping for? No wonder they dislike this film.  What happened to the Superman films is the same thing that happened to the Batman films, the first two that Tim Burton released were fairly Gothic and dark in nature, but gradually they got more and more cartoon like and silly, until Batman Begins.  I'm sure if the Man of Steel was just as lighthearted and silly as the previous Superman films, the critics would complain that nothing about the concept of Superman has changed.  This film had everything I was hoping for the film to be.

Peter Bradshaw, The Guardian: "This is a great, big, meaty, chewy superhero adventure, which broadly does what it sets out to do, though at excessive length. What I missed were the gentle, innocent pleasures of Superman's day-to-day crimefighting existence.... Due to the cataclysmic battle in this film, much of the Man of Steel's mystery and novelty have been used up. Subsequent adventures may lose altitude."

 I think the grand scale of this is prefect for Superman.  The massive cataclysmic fighting and events unfolding in this film are the same kind that took place in the first two films.  The splintering of the North American continent in the first film and the attack of the 3 Kryptonian criminals in the second film. In fact it is both of them combined if you look at it. I'm not sure where this, not enough day to day crime fighting, is coming from that this critic is pointing out.  There are a few places where Superman is simply rescuing innocents.  If you where hoping to see him to rescue a cat from a tree for a little girl, that is probably why it isn't in the film, because it was something you were expecting, clearly they were trying to avoid that kind of silly lighthearted heroics.  Maybe they will give that more of a focus in the next film before the main threat arrives.  Given the way critics are treating this film thought I don't know how likely there will be a second film.

Stephanie Zacharek, the Village Voice: "'Man of Steel' is a movie event with an actual movie inside, crying to get out. Despite its preposterous self-seriousness, its overblown, CGI'ed-to-death climax, and its desperate efforts to depict the destruction of, well, everything on Earth, there's greatness in this retelling of the origin of Superman, moments of intimate grandeur, some marvelous, subtle acting, and a superhero costume that's a feat of mad mod genius."

The massive threat to the Earth and the grandeur of the fighting at the films ending is necessary, how else is this alien suppose to gain the trust, all be it shaky, of the planet, if he hasn't saved it from utter destruction?  If the final fight looked more like a boxing match; than two beings with unimaginable strength fighting at the end of the film, it would be very Super would it?  Saying that there is too much Super Power fighting and effects in this film is like saying, There are to many cowboy hats in a Clint Eastwood western.  I didn't see this kind of criticism pop up in the Avengers Assemble film.  There was just as much CGI fighting and effects in that film as this one.

 Lisa Kennedy, Denver Post: "The chief problem here is one of rhythm and balance in the storytelling and directing. The movie swings between destructive overstatement and flat-footed homilies."

I'll have to agree with some of this, the pace of the film was a bit off.  There were events in the film that, rather being a slow build up to a grand action scene, it was inter mixed in with flash backs of story development.  This caused the tempo of the film to feel choppy and a bit melodramatic when it should be moving at a faster pace to keep up with the action it was just displaying.  That aside think the breaks in the film added a moment of reflection to think about what exactly was happening, and why it was happening.  For me it was a moment to think about the perspective of General Zod,  I found myself looking at him as less of a villain and more of just some determined to see his race survive.  This was the same dream that Jor El had for this people, but unlike Zod he understood that due to the nature of their lives, they could not be a part of that new world.  I found this to be the most tragic and sad thing about Zod, he just couldn't see past his given destiny.  Unlike Kal El, he was a slave to the Kryptonian past. Something that Jor El knew and was a well placed plot device to explain why he did not escape Krypton with his son.

This is my conclusion, this film was a perfect start to a re-imagining of the character of Superman,  one that struggles with his morality, who is more human than Kryptonian, which being raised as a human would have the same emotional traits as one.   Although he is Kryptonian physically his heart and soul are rested in the love of his adopted planet.  The feats he preforms in this film to save the planet are what earn the trust of the American government to not be consider a out right enemy of the state.  Though it is clear that they still hold their complete trust back, at the end of the film.  I would hope and love to see more of this story unfold,  I think it is being misjudged by critics, and I normally find most of their opinions to be agreeable.  My advice would be to go see this film, it is very good,  I found myself weeping, laughing and even silently cheering to myself through out the film.  I'm normally one for the evil side of a story,  I've constantly find myself cheering for a villain over a hero, and quietly sad when I see them fail.  Though I have always found Superman to be my most revered of super heroes.  This is because he has the ability to take over the planet on a whim, yet he instead defends and protects the planet as if he were the same as its inhabitants.  The restraint in that power has always fascinated me.  Love it or hate it, go see it and judge for yourself. This is just my perspective and concepts of this film, I'm just a scoundrel.

Ian

I might find the means to do this.

     This is probably the worst time to really make a post like this.  I'm going to end up on a list for saying this.  The ability for Congress to make progressive and beneficial decisions for this country seems to be becoming more and more of a exercise in futility.  The idea of causing and effecting mass hysteria in order to change things seems the only way they get anything done, yet with the events of something that caused a new debate on gun control ended in no change, it seems like mass murder of children can't change the minds of how much the Congress likes to get re-elected.  This now makes me think that we should just change the way our elected officials are elected.  In other words, why have we not just made seats in congress only 2 terms?  If people lose focus of what they are there for and just simply want to get re-elected. Why not just eliminate the thing that is distracting them?

     Lobbyists are paying out for agendas, corporations are paying for campaigns anonymously.  It has already gotten way out of hand. I feel an anger and frustration at the way I see our government making no real changes to the way it is.  It is ineffective in making changes, and the "people" of this country don't know what they want either. I watched as the media asked people picketing for change, and were asked what changes did they want?  The couldn't agree on any changes, they just wanted to see change.  This is like asking a 3 year old why they are crying and they respond with "NO!" It isn't helpful it isn't progressive it is just stressful.  The ones that have the best idea of what they want changed are the ones with the funds to make that change.  "What do you want changed?"  "I don't want gun control to change, here is 5 million for your next re-election campaign."

     If there is going to be any change in the current state, there needs to be aggressive and decisive change.  Congress seems to think, that by holding their ideas as rigidly and uncompromising as possible they will stay in office, because by holding true to the people paying for their elections they will in turn be re-elected.  So this polarization is happening.  No one is compromising, no one is listening to the other side.  Congress might as well just be dissolved and just let the richest corporations run that branch of the government,  Just cut out the middle man.  I want to see the money make the choices without the smiling puppet telling me that it has my best interests in mind. 

     This county seems to be again in the grips of a less obvious civil war.  The sides are the screaming, kicking, biting, crying idiots, vs the stubborn, apathetic, lazy, unthinking idiots.  It is doing nothing but spend money. I am sick of hearing people say we should nuke other countries, we should nuke this country.  Then maybe we'll get a reaction that is progressive.  Threaten this countries existence is a more obvious way than they way it is already being threatened.  It seems like the peaceful occupy movement did nothing to change anything.  In fact I am still unclear as to what the hell the occupy movement was suppose to be doing besides making the homeless people in those areas look like not such a bad thing.  Did all these unwashed ineffective activists go out and vote?  Or did that just sit around smoking pot, and playing hacky sack?

     I think doing something as radical as repealing the 2nd amendment would probably work to give Americans something to think about.   It seems to me that Congress wants to do something about gun control but it doesn't want to appear anti gun, so they can become re-elected.  So it will say they will do something be in reality it will just make a lot of long drawn out gestures and in the end do nothing.  I really don't know how long this has been going on.  I've never paid much attention to government for the first couple of decades in my life. I honestly think that most of the country is the same way.  They don't care, they just want to go to work, make money, and not be hassled with the idea of making changes to a system that seems to run fine.  Except it isn't running fine at all.  The younger generation the 20 somethings, seem to point this out like "Hey this isn't working."  They are not active about it and don't care to change anything.  They'd rather just drink and get high, play video games and ignore it.  Until it effects something that they have an interest in.  If a bill came across that would make having cellular phones illegal, suddenly you'd see a huge out cry from these coddled privileged children.  No one in congress will make that kind of move, because they want to get re-elected.  

     Our government needs an inoculation, it needs to be rid of the idea that nothing that happens in the country if it causes it's members of congress to lose their seat.  It causes members of congress to act like spoiled children in order be re-elected.  I'm sick of the way things are, there needs to be a change, not the the people running the government, but in the way the structure is working itself.  The problem isn't the people, the problem is there is a flaw in that system that is corrupting the people.  That exploit needs to be fixed and changes will happen.  If the Government is unable to make this change with it's current elected officials, then they need to simply be removed and replaced with ones that will make this change. Your jobs are not to get re-elected your jobs are to make decisions about this country that effect change for the better of it's people not for the better of the highest bidder.