Man of Steel answers insight commentary episode 23 Arctic adventure Lois and Perry welcome to Man of Steel answers insight commentary on your Man of Steel apologist Dr. awkward I cover a mosaic of topics for fans who love discussing the Man of Steel and the DC cinematic universe together will endeavor to answer the questions criticisms and controversies raised by Man of Steel and those eagerly anticipating the DCC you this episode we've got field expedient surgery the scout ship finally takes off but whose flying Lois Lane and Perry white this podcast dives deep into Man of Steel to answer the critics and the confused the show is not meant to convert anybody but the celebrate a film that will lead us into the DC cinematic universe reasonable minds will differ but this is a show for fans who love Man of Steel and who love to chew their food welcome back our last commentary episode was episode 19 and when we left off Clark and Lois were entering the ship one thing about Clark and his perceptions that we didn't cover in our last commentary directly was the fact that he only glimpses Jor-El's hologram at least for now in this moment Clark's perceptions are very humid he can be surprised that he could doubt himself it another way when Clark first perceives Jor-El he didn't slow down time to be absolutely certain that he had seen another person on the ship he didn't zoom in and take in all of Jor-El's details and then file them away into an eidetic memory and then he didn't sprint up to the hologram at superspeed before can get way instead Clark behaves very much like anyone what and this can be a further indication that Clark doesn't have superspeed in terms of reaction time or at least he doesn't have it now or in this context we talked about superspeed many times and how superhuman reaction times crate the risk of dehumanizing Superman and creating plot holes but they may find a way to do it within the limited windows like with heat vision or after some training with say the flash or after the introduction of the flash which sort of shifts that burden over to him or after the reality in the cinematic universe has been dialed back a little bit so that it's less of an issue I know in the past that we talked about Feodor up but aside from her movement she's not doing anything that people who've played intense action combo video games like Devil May cry or ninja guided in or Street fighter can accomplish their human level reaction times when I want you to take away from all that is the humanity of being surprised and doubting what you see when we pick up in the film Clark spots the hibernation pod and he wipes away the dust the hurrying in the score emphasize is also the hibernation pod with a body unit but you can listen to those at see the goal radio episode five of the government go into them here because it's a lot of speculation but the gist of it is that Kara put death am into the hibernation pod is a way of stopping him and that's the mummified body the Clark discovers from the film itself a first time viewer would have none of that context so for now acting up in a skip it I will say however that I love the open hibernation pod because mysteries like that make the film more intriguing we don't need to have answers for everything know what's interesting about the body is perhaps the kind the state of mind that it might put Clark into the Ito so much of this film is show don't tell and with the haunting music and the ghost of Jor-El and the slight jump scare of the body and the pod it's all conveying a sense of anxiety with entering this ancient relic the dust and the death of the decay make Clark clearly aware that this is something abandoned and inactive he's not expecting to encounter a living member of his species and this body perhaps gives them a peek into his own mortality until this day perhaps he's never known physical pain he's no stranger to sensory pain or emotional pain that he just faced off against a century that was able to challenge his strength and potentially cause him pain and now he's confronted with one of his own dad and it may force them to consider his own and seconds ago he thought he saw a ghost and Clark would be justified in feeling vulnerable and anxious yet when he hears Lois cry out his reaction is to leap into action so Clark's first instinct and action is to save Lois is very likely that he knows that she's a journalist and he's only just arrived at the scout ship he is literally moments away from obtaining the answers to the questions that have haunted him his entire life showing his face to Lois and rescuing her could potentially mean forever losing that opportunity it's not like Clark knows that the ship can and will fly away buried so deeply that he had the tunnel to it and if Lois can identify him and wants to do so the military could become a barrier to preventing him from accessing the ship for any future questions unless he's willing to fight them for access unfortunately it's really easy for the audience to not give Clark the credit for saving Lois because we take that for granted but in the context of the film it's a sacrificial risk and Clark's instinctive her own choice there's no hesitation to save Lois and there's no consideration afterwards whether it was the right decision I have two more notes here first Clark is strong enough to crush kryptonian materials and we can use this detail to add something to our logical matrix of troops and potentially discover more about kryptonian tech or powers in other words we have to reconcile the fact that Clark can crush the kryptonian century here but that the kryptonian armor withstand his strength later as a century serves a security function you'd assume that it should have the same or similar or better durability than kryptonian body armor yet here it appears to have worse well how you decide to reconcile that can give us insight is the kryptonian armor exceptionally rare is something about century technology not compatible with armor or is the durability of kryptonian armor attributable to powered kryptonian's rather than the material itself should we revisit that bioelectric field theory I have to think on this some more but it's one of the things I enjoy about doing this podcast is that going over everything with a fine tooth comb means that sometimes I have to reevaluate my own positions and keep an open mind to the possibility that I've missed something or that I might have to reconcile something the second note that I have markdown is about what constitutes a quote unquote saves I don't think there's really a formal definition as what constitutes a save in the superheroic context so I simply rely on common parlance doesn't make sense when you say it Superman saves Lois his life multiple times of the course of their lives the fact that Lois is saved repeatedly doesn't make it just one save it would be abnormal to say Superman saved Lois once and only once in all comics similarly the fact that Lois is mortal and will eventually pass away doesn't mean that Superman didn't say for either it would be odd to say that Lois is going to die anyways so Superman didn't save her yet in my tongue-in-cheek Superman saves no one video I see that objection raised again and again that people can't be saved repeatedly and that people who will eventually die once saved while the third objection commonly raised is that you can't save someone that you endangered or that saving somebody that you've endangered doesn't count what we've already address part of that back in episode 19 there is little or no basis for alleging Superman danger people in the first place however if you want to make that claim the counterargument is that you can save people that you've endangered and it does count for something how much accounts is a philosophical question but consider the following example to the doctor's negligent and their patient is dying due to their mistake you have choice one the doctor regrets her mistake and tries to save the patient and does or choice to the doctor walks out of the room and says my mistake no point in saving him since now it doesn't count now are these two choices morally equivalent I don't think anybody would say that they are nonetheless people make this claim about Superman all the time that being to blame for the harm means that he is just as bad or equable into somebody who took no effort to mitigate the harm and that's a poorly thought out allegation in my opinion now is a legitimate philosophical question as to whether to concurrent related or proximate events would constitute separate saves or not and that's not something easily defined or untangled which is why in the comments of the video I say it's not something to seriously worry about for example in some cases you can make a relatively easy distinction like Clark saving the oil rig workers from fire and oxygen deprivation as one save and then saving them from being crushed by the following Derek is a separate save you can also conflate all of that together as a single dangerous situation and call it one save perhaps but their other cases where did that come to parsing is less clear like saving Lois from the damaged escape pod you can parse it out as her's being saved from the damage pod and then being saved from the fall in the being saved from the explosion which are all three separate means of her coming to harm but I thought it would be reasonable to conflate all three of these because there's only one saving action that addresses all three of these are semantics and philosophical questions which ultimately we don't need to worry about the exact count is less important than the fact that Superman does indeed save many people over the course of Man of Steel right that to the movie I thought he knew everything to go quietly using the hallway or well earlier I made a big deal about Clark showing his face to Lois but let's also remember the context in which he's doing this he's trying to calm her down Lois is hurt and she's wounded and she's just seen the stranger crush her attacker with his bare hands is it any wonder that she's scared he's saying calming words it's all right repeatedly and this mirrors Superman and Lois his first encounter in action comics number one where Lois is visibly frightened by Superman whose first words to her our evening be afraid of me I won't harm you in panels 72 of action comics number one Lois although frightened is looking Superman in the eyes at his face and in the next panel trust him enough to climb into his arms and be taken away to be returned home in Man of Steel it's only once Lois locks eyes with Clark that his face strikes a deliberately serene look and she settles down will get more into her viewpoint of the situation a little later but Clark's actions and exposition are so matter of fact it's crazy but I think that belies a certain amount of experience helping people in situations like these if you've ever tried to help somebody during a medical emergency when the patient is freaking out it takes a certain amount of experience on your behalf to remain calm yourself here Clark is again risking his secret before somebody who's very profession is to publish and spread the truth but he's call is cool and collected in getting Lois to trust in diagnosing her and then treating her this shows that Clark has picked up some knowledge and skills along his travels knowing exactly how to helping crazy situations like this one I can't remember the episode off the top my head but in a past podcast we talked about Superman using his x-ray vision to catalog peoples skulls of this isn't that but it does show a level of experience using his powers to diagnose an injury and knowing that his powers can treated the development of those skills would have to be intentional about Clark is on a quest to find his answers he has been deliberate about learning how to use his powers to help the calming of Lois also reinforces one of the rational justifications for Superman as a mask lists hero the need for cooperation and trust from those being rescued I believe I seen a brought up several times from justice league new frontier to Batman beyond to Superman to daredevil a hero who has to unmask himself and reveal himself to be human to earn the trust and the cooperation of somebody needing to be rescued in a way this is thematically important to saviors and rescuers that while they have the power to save you they don't impose their will upon you and require that you accept the rescue to an extent through the entire exchange Clark never lies to Lois and he doesn't sugarcoat the truth this is going to hurt and the surgical use of his powers reveals two things one that he can use them with that level of precision and to that he uses them still within a human frame of reference again I keep repeating it but it's because so many people brings superspeed related baggage into the film note that Clark doesn't just blitz the surgery it's not like action comics number 775 where spoilers for a 14-year-old story Superman performs neurosurgery on Manchester black in the blink of an eye without Manchester's knowledge the procedure takes time and it takes enough time that he needs to hold are still invites her to hold his hand she feels the pain and presumably passes out from it I don't think anyone believes that Clark Knox or out so again this isn't just solved by superspeed and likewise he doesn't just deliver her back to her camp after the surgery via superspeed so Clark says that he has to cauterize her internal bleeding and I'm surprised that many people don't think this is a thing that's possible I'm not a doctor of medicine but between my friends who are general domain knowledge and a brief obsession with the trauma Center games and one time oral surgery I was hope is aware of this cauterization as a medical procedure is often accomplished by probe which delivers electric current to burn tissue and seal blood vessels and to reduce or stop leading how over such burning to seal can be accomplished by chemicals like asset direct heat like hot metal or lasers and it's even possible with sound waves in fact the military have a set it and forget it off or blanket in development meant to cauterize internal bleeding with high-powered ultrasound this would allow for field expedient emergency treatment of battle wounds in combat zones by putting the cuff over the wound to cauterize it the link in the show notes what we cut from Lois screaming under the red glow to Stokowski sleeping and I don't have much to say here except that they put a lot of detail into the interior of the set in the shaking realistically moved a lot of the props throughout the pod so this wasn't simply a poor man's process of shaking the camera the liftoff gives us our first complete view of the enormous scale the scout ship and you can appreciate that this is alien technology since we didn't cover krypton and we didn't talk about Cal's vessel taking off indoors but hopefully this should be obvious that that's not possible with conventional human technology PBS digital recently released a great video about the loudest sound possible upper link in the show notes that shows how tremendously loud a space launch can be but here despite the rumbling incredible thrust kryptonian tech allows for liftoff without rendering Col. Hardy and Company completely death Richard Scheffler you may know from Arron Sorkin's West Wing talks a little bit about the set I I'm Richard Schiff now is a good time to collect some of the other stuff that we have about the North con research station which is actually on the set in Vancouver and 360° green screen which was the largest set that I've ever worked on it also the most green I've ever seen in my life obviously all the background was a CGI rocketship that were looking for that takes off his CGI and eyes were looking a lot of dots on the screen which I now spent seven years in acting school learning how to do shift is a bit glib about it but there is something to the level of pretend that these actors have to bring to a visual effects heavy film if you watched any of the visual effects breakdowns or behind the scenes for this or other similar films you can imagine the challenge of treating that scene with authenticity Michael Shannon had to convey menace and authority while wearing what looked like quote unquote adjusters outfit a tight bodysuit covered in tracking markers Amy Adams had to act against a paper cutout of that century drones and so on and so forth I don't think there was a single moment in the film where I thought that the actors were seeing something different than what we were seeing on screen so the performance and the visual effects came together seamlessly ship talks about the size and the scope of the research station set which gives the actors more to play with but note that they still shot much of this film on location in our next little interstitial scene with Lois is voiceover Lois being found by the helicopter was shot on location as was her arrival at Ellesmere just literally seconds of Lois waking up and reacting but they went to the effort of doing it practically and on location instead of a set their small things but these kind of things lend authenticity to the film and they give the actors things to work off of it helps keep the director on his toes and creatively challenged now another note about this scene is that the cats out of the back there are military personnel and civilian contractors who witness this event there's an expression three can keep a secret if two of them are dead and this explains in part Lois his interest in publishing this story because it isn't unreasonable for her to think that this is eventually going to get out there anyways and she wants to get out in front of it but more Lois his motivation later let's talk about the logistics of two issues which arise from dropping Lois off these are questions that sometimes get raised as die genic plot holes so let's do our best to answer these questions somewhat first who's flying the ship and to why can't the military track the scout ship well for the first question I don't think I have a final answer yet but let me give my outline of my theory and then perhaps as our commentary continues will finalize it someday so there's a bit of a time skip in the story from Clark saving Lois to the scout ship taking off to Lois being dropped off and then to Jor-El meeting Clark for the first time we have to assume that Lois being dropped off is something that Clark is comfortable with for example if Clark finishes cauterizing her wounds then some centuries come to take her away Clark is unlikely to just let that happen without following them to ensure that their intentions are wholesome similarly even if they take off and land elsewhere Clark isn't just going to let Lois be dropped off unless he knows that she's going to be okay he didn't save her simply to abandon her to die in the Arctic after all but without seeing it the logistics of this are a little awkward to imagine there's basically three candidates for pilots we have Jor-El the ship itself and Clark however Jor-El doesn't introduce himself to Clark until after Lois has been dropped off so it seems unlikely that Jor-El was flying the ship and asking Clark if they could drop Lois off I also don't think the Jor-El can fly the ship completely autonomously if we assume that fact it addresses questions like why Jor-El didn't fly the black zero into the sun why Jor-El did in a try to attack Zide using the scout ship centuries why Jor-El didn't fly the scout ship away from's odds dropship or why Jor-El didn't take the scout ship into the sun when Zide stepped aboard all of those questions get dressed if the Jor-El AI has more limited control the ship and that makes a certain amount of sense it's a little heady to think about but at one point in the film there were at least three copies of Jor-El's consciousness out there with two of them running one on the black zero and one on the scout ship with a dormant copy on the command key now we're conditioned to trust and like Jor-El and to take his good intentions for granted but consider for a moment if the AI that we were talking about was brainiac or all Tron something benevolent able to replicate and potentially prone to rampant say sorry had to throw in that marathon reference in there but please disregard especially with AI that's self-aware and deems itself consciousness there's cause to be concerned and to limit the powers and the access of such a hot so it's not unreasonable the Jor-El designed's AI to have such limits maybe the ship seems like a slightly better candidate but we have a slightly similar situation the ships AI doesn't seem to be fully functioning until Jor-El appears and we hear it say recursive diagnostics complete guiding presence authenticated all systems operational and then Jor-El appears while the ship taking off on its own seems normal it's a little more difficult to believe that the ship considered the conscientiousness of dropping Lois off within the parameters of its agenda in other words the ship would be just as happy to continue on without dropping Lois off or if it felt that Lois needed to be disposed of I don't think he could of been done in an autonomous way the Clark would've been okay with if he wasn't involved in so that leaves our last potential pilot Clark whose motives align perfectly with everything that we seen if he's the one that guides the ship to drop Lois off then it makes sense that he be comfortable with parting with her because he set up a situation where she be found safely otherwise Clark would probably be inclined to just keep her on the ship or to stay with her rather than with the ship it only makes sense to drop her off if you know that she's going to be okay the main issue with this is of course that Clark should have no ability to pilot the kryptonian ship and I'm not sure that there's an elegant answer that just covers all of this and it's not a film breaking concern but if I had to do apologetics for it I think the answer lies in a mixture of all three potential pilots working together basically the ship is able to pilot itself but needs commands and Clark has the intentions but not the skill and so Jor-El's command key gives Clark the authority to command the ship and he does so in line with his intentions essentially you'd imagine the scene models the AI that we've already seen on krypton the AI anticipate Jor-El's needs and volunteer information and queries and prompts for him to respond to other Jor-El is a bit rude and says nobody cares key Lex we've seen that the ship response to voice commands under's odds control at least twice once and deleting Jor-El's AI and also in targeting the C-17 so after Clark saves Lois you can imagine the ship informing Clark that the ship is surrounded by alien humanoids and asking him if he'd like to relocate Clark would say yes in the ship would take off and at some point midflight the sensors would indicate that there are flying vessels out there and Clark would ask how far way that search party was an being satisfied that she would be recovered shortly he could command the ship to touchdown drop off and then he would resume the relocation of the ship of course everything that I've explained is beyond boring and properly excluded from the film nevertheless I don't think there's anything in there which is completely contradictory it just isn't nice need an elegant as a theory so if you've got a better one for working out what happened the sure to let me know I think a minor rewrite would have smoothed out these logistics if Lois simply woke up in or near Instead of being discovered later some distance away everything else in the film plays out the same that the audience would reasonably conclude that Clark took be unconscious Lois back to camp before returning to the ship to have it take off honestly it really doesn't matter either way and is ultimately inconsequential to the movie there you have it the second issue regarding tracking gets brought up more in the context of the dropship's to the Kent farm but it's applicable here to the basic objection takes a number of forms and it's based on the faulty assumption that we can track anything on our planet perfectly but they go something like this how can Clark calmly converse with Jor-El when there should be fighter jets scrambling towards their position and after the battle small bill the question is why does the government know Superman is Clark based on where the dropship's landed well first recall that under the radar is an expression because it's an actual thing when the dropship's moved through Kansas airspace they could and were tracked but once they dropped below the radar the military lost the ability to track their movements with that kind of granular detail note that tragically Malaysia Airlines flight 370 even had transponders broadcasting its position but its final position was unknown precisely because we lack this kind of absolute omniscient tracking of human airspace similarly if there was military omniscience as to where everything was in airspace at all times that would tend to run contradictory to tasking a drone to observe Superman at the end of the film there would be no need for a drone if they knew where he was at all times so the assumption that the military contract anything is faulty that said the scout ship is in nor mess and it potentially could be pinged and if you go by the comic it's actually in permitting a signal and later Zide is able to detect and find the scout ship from the black zero when he couldn't find or detect Clark's vessel something that we explained in episode 15 so you could argue that the scout ship could be tracked but even if we assume this it's distinguishable from the response time to the battle of small bill for two basic reasons first Ellesmere research station is in the middle of nowhere when compared to small bill which is within striking distance of North come and second this is essentially a close encounter of the third kind where humanity basically now knows that there's an extraterrestrial presence on earth but one that hasn't communicated with humanity and hasn't made any kind of action except to avoid actual contact you can imagine Col. Hardy immediately contacting his superiors and a mad scramble to decide what their response should be a hostile response is it advisable at this point for a technologically superior presence that has done nothing hostile itself whether or not they knew where the scout ship was you can imagine Clark having plenty of time while the world's leaders decided in frantic closed-door meetings what to do the context is completely different from the battle a small bill which came after's odds ultimatum after Superman surrender and where the decision-makers have already crystallized and formalized what the responses would be by the time Jor-El's AI is up and running many of these things can be mediated through Jor-El to explain Clark's comfort would leaving the ship unattended later for example okay so that some of Clark's perspective and apologetics but before we move on to Lois I just want you to remember two things entering the ship made Clark feel mortal and to the trust must be earned these ideas will come up in the future when we address the questions of why Clark didn't consult Jor-El abounds odds ultimatum to have a very smart Surrounding his voice is definitely coming to you again I doubt that is what history and in a variety of the conclusion okay on to Lois and her perspective here Lois gets to with the four voiceovers in the film and like the other voiceovers they consist of dietetic dialogue which is repurposed by the filmmakers to tell the story when Lois reads her story to Perry and asked provide a reflective leap in time over her rescue to this point is the same when she reads her unpublished follow-up story when Jor-El's dialogue to Cal is used in voiceover it serves as an entry point into Cal's thoughts and recollections as he learns to fly and when Zide gets his voiceover it's putting images desired story I think we've covered the first half of the voice over in the past so I'm not can a comment on her prose style since I'm prone to unnecessary verbal flourishes like arrived at the inescapable conclusion myself but I want to bring up two more things first that Lois is reading her article allowed to Perry and it makes for a convenient voiceover but it also isn't unrealistic I'm not a journalist but I've had my fair share of editors of the years and a few of them for whatever reason prefer being read drafts allowed I can send had by email what can provided in print but some like to hear it read and it should go without saying that such a preference isn't a plot hole but some people raise it as such so I'm addressing it there's nothing inconsistent about the logic or which breaks the rules of the world built by the film but having one particular story read aloud her hairdressers Lois you might've hallucinated half of a civilian contractors who corroborated story Pentagon is denying that there was a ship are prize-winning reporter and like it or I walk you can't your under contract I'm not running story aliens what is now second Lois raises a theme that Jonathan raised back when speaking with 13-year-old Clark Lois says bringing to contemplate and it is it means as Perry says that aliens walk among us without our knowledge and the age of the ship suggest that they predate human history meaning the scope of that infiltration is unknown it's a radical and newsworthy claim whose revelation from Lois his perspective is not only absolutely true but inevitable but from Perry's perspective something so confronting requires serious corroboration and they go back and forth on the quality and the reliability of the sources Perry questions Lois is eyewitness account and then Lois raises the contractors but then Perry holds the Pentagon above them but then Lois impeaches the credibility that kind of back and forth is what happens every day in also to situations and often in a court of law you got witnesses called their testimonies taken their credibility is questioned and than the fact finder the jury or the judge must weigh the testimony and decide witnesses can be reliable unreliable and they can earnestly believe that they're telling the truth be an error the 1950s Akira Kurosawa film Rashomon is a perfect parable of the same event from different perspectives and I raise all of that because differences in opinion are comment and reasonable it's part of the reason that we have multiple jury members or multiple judges in higher courts rather than rely on the judgment opinion or determination of a single individual and it's kind of crazy how many alleged plot holes get raised because people try to treat human behavior like it's deterministic that given a set of inputs there is one and only one outcome more opinion which could ever arise I've heard it said that there is no way that Perry would ever sit on this story than that seems unnecessarily close minded to me we get that this story is history in the making but when it flies against everything that we've known in human history I can understand the difference in opinion Perry is interested in sources and corroboration because print journalism is no longer about being first or fastest but expected to represent real standards and accuracy and expertise Perry is properly protecting the reputation of the paper as editor-in-chief and Lois raises her credentials bringing up the Pulitzer Prize but Perry raises the underlying principles of the process he says then act like it not necessarily because there's any one way the Pulitzer Prize winners act necessarily but consider the context of the conversation it's about the veracity of the sources and the strength and the quality of the corroboration Lois is saying somebody with a Pulitzer isn't going to lie trust me Perry the Perry is saying somebody with a Pulitzer knows that I'm going to need more to print something like this and so there's that reasonable back and forth with very talks that the lines about her walking under contract in the past basically they both feel strongly about this their scene and their interaction is short but it's an interesting performance and here's fish born talking about the back-and-forth time on March Fishburn my play Perry white in Man of Steel so the introduction to the daily planet there's a sense of history between Lois and Perry we were able to bring a kind of shorthand Amy and I were you get the sense of these people have known each other and working with each other for quite a while and you also recognize that Lois is one of his stars it's really important for him to treat her with respect but it's also very important for him to make sure that she stays within the boundaries that they set for themselves as journalist that she doesn't just run often cause a panic so a neck clip fish born talks about the sort of shorthand conveyed by the performance and this is what I saw both actors are subtly animated by standing as equals pacing around the room as they try to work this out gone is the frenetic energy or cartoonish bellowing of an editor for rating his star reporter I've known at least one is your like that to and instead this is a Perry who stands toe to toe with his reporters on the content of his concerns and not the volume of his displeasure where Lois is less comfortable and that's where she Powerful answer well that carried out to work with actors like my client is reporting with Clark at the beginning of working with clients hell immediately have Overriding contentious relationship with look at how that is the key people who really have a lot of respect for when they're not anything to write they had printed there is not a fan of antipersonnel points is needed for e-zine from Kerala to falling Perry is willing to stand I die with Lois in order to hear her pitch but what's remarkable is that when he lays down his final verdict he does so by sitting down in his chair despite literally lowering himself before Lois it instead conveys authority he gets grounded settled into his throne and he owns his office and his position and the fact that he has this authority is why he's able to settle down comfortably an issue an edict even when Lois is standing basically while standing in moving he was showing his willingness to be persuaded and to move with her arguments once he sits down his immobility of position is reflected physically by having him rooted to the spot you notice later when Perry choose Lois out he does so sitting from his immovable position of authority if you go back over that scene you'll see that Lois is exasperated as Perry starts to get behind his desk and lets out a sigh right before he sits down so it's like a game where you still have a chance if Perry hasn't sat down yet so whether consciously or unconsciously she knows that one's Perry sits down it's all over I love that we get that little beat of Lois reacting to Perry's final word however with a slight smile because basically she's already planning her next move and has decided to go around Perry these are two Oscar caliber actors working with relatively dry expositional material they still managed to get a lot out of it in a really subtle and naturalistic way not just with the words and expressions of their faces but their body language and motion that is a great out for the lady is a better fit insurance describe my site is a creeping cancer of falsehoods history and why came into knowing that you so Lois meets with Woodburn a blogger with the name which is a portmanteau of Woodward and Bernstein of the Watergate affair but in an interview with Empire writer David Coyer abstracts at one level above by saying it's a reference to all the Presidents men a 1976 film starring Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman is Woodward and Bernstein Coyer also mentioned that originally Woodburn was supposed to be Jack writer who comic fans might know as the creeper and that adds a neat little not when Lois calls his blog a creeping cancer of falsehoods what we've already talked about ordering Scotch in a past mailbag episode but YouTube or recently asked why is beer for boys questioning why beverages have become gendered in our culture when the product itself is completely gender-neutral and I find that an interesting lens to look at Lois's choice of drink and it's probably a deliberate creative choice in the novelization it started out as an old-fashioned but in the film it's Scotch straight up take that for what you will please keep that in mind when contrasted against this next little tidbit which I don't think has been raised by anybody that I could find in my cursory Internet search for a big-budget film like Man of Steel with a commitment to veracity reality and texture the prop department is going to spend hours upon hours crafting little details that the viewer may never appreciate which may only come onto the screen for a mere split second or sometimes never even make it into the film in Perry's daily planet office for example there are certificates and diplomas and art hung on the wall on his desk are awards and knickknacks only in the behind the scenes footage can we read some of those awards one where Perry wins the man of the year award for humanitarian efforts all in an effort to make a living breathing lived in world the prop department spends time crafting Perry's unseen life much of it which will never come into focus for us to read and knowing that it may never make it onto camera the prop department often has fun with the text of what they right they may make reference to creators comics or characters or even tell complete stories one example of this was later in the film when populating Lois Lane's apartment there is a corkboard and newspaper clippings into it which contained a story which was about essentially kryptonite scattered throughout metropolis the pop showed up again after Man of Steel's release and briefly started a rumor that it was the basis for the sequel the rumor was quickly quelled when the image of that same paper showed up in Man of Steel prerelease production photos of what I'm getting at with all of this is that the text on props aren't necessarily Canon personally I don't consider printed materials with lower amid some placeholders to be a plot hole if they get caught on camera it's a production gaffe perhaps but it's not something significant the plot now keep that in mind when considering some of the leaks about Batman be Superman relating to some gravestones caught by intrepid scoopers the prop department knows that they have to populate that graveyard they know that the headstones in the markers need names and depending on what the shots call for they may or may not have the freedom to play with the names on the stones moreover the names are not in and of themselves this positive since is not an uncommon experience for people to share the same name for all that question that 70s show scrubs with children as they say using local papers are making a known for relatively cheap price Mexico from the prop made by a company called his breast that particular model and a change from the late 60s and always in the same pieces I want a warehouse bring down and house trying to okay compromise bill with president of TV shows like charmed and gluing have used it as well because while I always get newspaper literally anywhere in the future to Casper is one-sided showing more his father being murdered.
Still going to dam Coppermine housing bill that was probably realized that now probably right okay so that is a lot of disclaimers but it's because the following has the potential to upset some and I just want to make it clear that in context this is possibly noncanonical and incredibly fleeting so he turning to the bar we get a split second glimpse of the first few lines of the article on Lois his phone and I don't think we were ever intended to perceive it but here's what it reads Arctic adventure mystery man tall dark and handsome is overused in describing the perfect man unless the man happens to be perfect will also being tall dark and handsome so maybe you can understand why add so heavily disclaim these lines before frankly they're not great and their borderline terrible here Lois's article is about the first documented encounter with extraterrestrials which is of historic significance to all of humanity and it begins by fawning over Clark's good looks so far as I'm concerned those lines are noncanonical and they're not actually part of the plot or the story simply drafted by somebody in the prop department and in no way reflects the intentions of the thoughts of the filmmakers of the characters however if you desperately need apologetics for that I just say that it's only the first two opening lines of an entire article by a Pulitzer prize winner who may find some miraculous way to make that opening work with profound nature of her entire piece as bad as those two lines are we simply don't have the full context for all we know she doesn't 180 on that opening and then deconstructs it within the body of her article or maybe the first page of the screen is an intentional decoy to prevent casual snoopers from reading any further if I came across those first two lines I know I'd stop reading those are thin apologetics but it's for a nonexistent criticism like a set as far as I'm aware I'm the only person to comment on those lines so far and for good reason who else is crazy enough to pause and zoom on something that is legible only for a few frames onscreen only me who likes to chew my food and when you do that carefully sometimes you get an errant piece of inevitable seed or appease a grizzled not meant for consumption okay discuss this more than enough let's get back to the lines Lois who has gone from a reputable paper to Woodburn's creeping cancer of falsehoods gets that assessment thrown back and her face by Woodburn she seems to really need him in the situation but instead of playing nice or groveling after turning the article over Lois says I'll stand by my words and that shows her sense of integrity and spirit she's not to go back on her assessment or placate Woodburn's ego just to get what she wants and Woodburn backs down and later shows his spinelessness when he cells Lois out on national TV we talked earlier about body language and is a quick bit here that's a little fun Lois Downes her entire drink in one go and Woodburn reacts with a raised eyebrow but but get back to the why she would do this originally I approach this from the angle of journalistic integrity and as a leak and that meant tackling things like WikiLeaks Edward Snowden etc. under some sort of imperative to publish what is newsworthy and that's an interesting angle that will definitely explore eventually but I don't think it's the main consideration here trying to understand why a serious journalist like Lois would go against her editor and leak a story and then kill that story after meeting Clark gets into really sophisticated philosophical journalistic ethics if viewed purely under that journalism when's I pulled out that code of ethics from the Society of professional journalists and I looked through the comments in the cases as if I were Lois his defense attorney trying to articulate why she's better than a blogger however I realized that I needed to take a step back into put the journalism angle away for a bit just about myself in her shoes Lois can and does speak and act for herself Lois answers the why and her actions make sense we take time to empathize with her and to listen to her when Woodburn asks Lois why she wants the story out there she says because I want my mystery man to know that I know the truth while let's break that down before when Lois reads her article to Perry she only calls Clark her rescuer and here she calls him a man not an alien not a being an extraterrestrial or infiltrator from Lois's perspective other than Clark's origins and powers everything he's done is human he got into the camp like a human what he spoke English he showed compassion he tried to calm her and he saved her life and let her go he wore normal human clothing he exuded human empathy he sided with her and set of the century and he revealed his face and his abilities to a journalist and again letter go all of this is easy to take for granted if you assume that Clark is good but if you look at this from Lois's perspective with what little she had to go on she can still reasonably consider Clark a benevolent rescuer it's with this mindset that she wants to get the story out there and is she says she wants her rescuer to know that I know the truth the emphasis is on Clark learning something about Lois not about the world learning about Clark given that the article seems favorable with Clark cast as a rescuer in means that she wants Clark to know that she knows that he's an alien but that she still perceives him as a rescuer in other words Lois is putting it out there that hears somebody who knows the truth but still accepts Clark is the very thing that Clark has wanted and hoped for and it in fact her plan to reach Clark works as we discussed in episode 11 by the very fact that Clark does indeed find her why does Lois want Clark to find a well the next time Lois and Clark meet they have this exchange pattern having Is eventually proving clearly from as a story my story going and this exchange brings into focus Lois his interests and her form of journalistic integrity Perry was concerned with the integrity and the reputation of the paper demanding reputable sources which Lois recognizes she knows what his interests are which is why she appeals to that by saying her sources dried up to killed story is not that she doesn't understand Perry is that her interests or priorities are slightly different her integrity is not about telling the story first but telling the complete story in a way that repays her rescuer in Lois his mind this story is inevitable and it's going to break on her own Clark can't stop helping people and there were witnesses at Ellesmere as she says it's going to come out eventually what Lois wants to do consistently journalistic ethics is to tell the complete story so that Clark's benevolence and humanity comes through and he isn't judged only as an alien when the inevitable story breaks however as her story is in the interest of helping her rescuer it also makes sense that she kills the story after talking with Clark but were getting ahead of ourselves and we'll talk about that when we get to it but when I'm impressed with is this is the mark of a seasoned journalist the imperative to publish newsworthy information is not unlimited the classic example is maintaining the secrecy or the confidence of troop movements and Lois doesn't automatically assume that the public's right to know from's the privacy of an individual she's able to use judgment and balance when to keep something confidential and when to publish broadly speaking journalists in the making usually mature and their ethics when they start they tend to have few ethical considerations and want to topple the establishment and make a name for themselves and they rush to publish then when they learn the code or to get a job or reputation with something to lose than they tend to become by the book people who follow the code but after they've built up body of experience they began to rely more on judgment the code is still there certainly but they aren't citing to it line inverse or following it to the letter the reporter relies more on their personal body of experience in interpreting their ethics here's Pulitzer prize winner journalist Carl Bernstein of the Watergate matter that we mentioned earlier spending two minutes to talk about how his experience shaped his view of journalistic ethics the most important ethical issues in the most difficult one for the human what because I reporter has enormous power to hurt and the best example I can give him with his is not a Watergate that but for want of one of the favored stories and armored that I really enjoyed doing was a huge take out on about a group of people who are part white part black part Indian their noses try racial isolate summarily a couple hundred thousand people organized and try racial isolate communities in his America in the particular group I wrote about called resorts they lived in southern Maryland and and they had never been able like most try racial isolate groups to to integrate with either the society at large with blacks or with white so the involved in their many of these communities the lowlands in Tennessee the Jackson white to New Jersey resorts in Maryland which comes from an expression that we sorts of people are different that you sorts of people I I wrote about this amazing community and in little bit I think that the children would be ostracized in school because they share their six core last names was a lot of intermarriage and children of the six core families where really ostracized in school and it really made me think of as as the number I think more than anything always had a consciousness of how you have the power to hurt someone and therefore your obligation to be fair to give people an opportunity to say hey is this really what happened and look at the consequences of what now could I have avoided I don't know what I could've done to avoid that heart but it was one of those things that made me very conscious and here's Jeff Jarvis former editor of the New York daily news and a professional journalist of over 40 years who now teaches journalism ethics and CUNY graduate school of journalism commenting on similar ideas a code of ethics to solve anything that might be a guy but at the end of the day individuals have to make their own ethical decisions every time they face a question or quandary I've had have had editors who stood by me and defended me when I is also really covering them also have editors who come after me and said oh you can do that because of his also might and don't hold was great deal with I think I've learned new ethics in the blogroll a lot is not as if there better but something that I reject the ethics of journalism level before I don't teach things that I would've gone back to the days when I was a full-time reporter black figure very important the Lord a new ethic of the correction on blogs if we make a mistake we always recross out we fess up we've met it was there if we don't let very quickly will lose credibility those are new ethics I've learned online that I think old media can learn from the same time there are ethics of the old world that live forever and oranges of fairness accuracy of ballots not objectivity but I think those are things that we can do a better job of helping to teach from old media really like that the filmmakers presented a Lois that does the real hard work is on the ground gathering interviews in person and doing the research work that takes time it takes travel it's expensive and costly more so then perhaps modern forms of Internet journalism however despite that cost and personal investment she has the experience and the maturity as a journalist to not put the story above people were to fail to listen to that still small voice that says what's right Lois is a bit of a rule breaker putting principles over fixed codes which puts her in good company with Jor-El Jonathan Clark and so on her role as herald an attempt to appeal to Perry has parallels with Jor-El trying to get the Council to accept the calamities to come it interesting that she gets entrusted with the plan and the torch is passed directly to Lois by Jor-El note Jor-El could've said go speak to the copy on the scout ship and he'll explain will definitely get into that when it comes up but I just want to briefly contrast Lois and Clark when it comes to journalism although Clark chose to work at the daily planet it's as a means to an end he describes it as keeping him aware of trouble and giving him the freedom to avoid being questioned so being a reporter is a way to help people however for Lois journalism is not just a means but the actual and coal in researching for this episode I found a lot of examples of Superman getting beat up for his lack of journalistic integrity and ethics and anyone familiar with the mythos won't have trouble raising some of the ethical dilemmas raised by how he's been pretrade in relation to his job but generally Lois is held up as an exemplar of the profession with Clark a little less so that said here's a short segment from studio 360 on Superman as a journalist and Clark Kent of course is a mild-mannered reporter is called to his editor-in-chief respect as slapping. Is 40 years this is Superman in his day job would be a firefighter or an emergency room physician something more heroic than a reporter studio 360 Derek John had the same thought there is no getting around it Superman's day job does seem odd today and him alone just ask Stephen Cole bear now is his lifelong affected against doubtlessly really is a disguise himself as the one thing far this hero a journalist how there was a time when the Clark Kent to the world were justice Roca Superman and besides there were practical considerations to bring your flexible schedule you can run into you go closet regular fly off save the world Tom Henderson is a columnist at the Lewiston Tribune Lewiston Idaho can you have long unexplained absences bridges what I like about my real job Henderson's been known to dress up as Clark Kent for Halloween and still by the latest issue it is local comic book store his favorite clips adorn his office wall under the heading everything I need to know about journalism I went from Superman Superman that I always like his I don't want to exclude your situation my library see a lot of tragedy I watch fringe talk about do my job at all Mary humanity but I do a because I believe I can help because I believe the press serves public Clark Kent was invented because Jerry wanted in journalist Thomas Andre conducted an interview with Jerry Siegel back in the 70s and Sherry Road a one-act play in high school called fighting journalist is Jerry was very interested in progressive causes a thought established there is also preceding there is the need to the desire to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable the boys high school crush on journalism was a product of their era both worked in the high school rag the torch and Schuster use the hot papers of the newsboy for the Toronto daily Star in fact Clark Kent was at the daily Star originally by the time he joined the daily planet America's Free Press is proving itself by the doing at the moment is Adm. is not Superman is willing to sort of putting something the line like to get the story carries over into the comic book image is Richard Ness is the author of the book from headline Hunter to Superman's daily planet was just like any other newspaper always had the hard-bitten editor was yelling at everybody is is is is is Moses you always had to copy boy wanted to be, reporter revitalized guys are likely to get you don't go deeper you always had the tough female reporter whose word held her own against the guys are telling Lois was the spitting image of a supporter towards you Lane who is the lead in a bunch of screwball comedies in the early 30s shows a similar lot like Rosalyn Russell and 1940s his girl Friday is in Superman from 1978 Margot Kidder as Lois Lane was just as brassy she was also living in a country still reeling from Watergate here is the reason he is as truth justice and only nine years later in Superman for the press look just as bad as the politicians the daily planet had a new rubric Murdoch like owner turn it into a sleazy tabloid is slightly that's all, and less sensational papers go ironically the same your Christopher Reeve made his last appearance as Clark Kent but another journalist in a movie called streetsmart based on true events people is in New York reporter who sort of makes things up and manipulates a story so that was like he's shedding the last vestiges of that Clark Kent image and in that movie no expectation to little unsettling to the voice of the mild-mannered reporter admits of fabricating stories but for Tom Henderson the Idaho colonists Clark Kent was never so squeaky clean purity is making the news is reporting from a basic ethical fair I don't think you would pass muster with society profession journals code of ethics is often writes about real Superman and very glowing terms is one of those things you have to accept within the ecosystem of comics on the flight you much of a real world standard Superman flies around love

I was Nowadays the only journalist in their underwear bloggers Clark Kent he's always stuck in the past with his pencil and notebook why is that maybe we don't want to face up 20 might look like today someone less mild-mannered dialogue while he is watching us that I truth justice and the American way the code of Superman is a Dakota the United States is your 360 on their child first aren't I think I've rambled on long enough Man of Steel answers insight commentary is a proud member of the Superman podcast network so here are some promos for the network shows that I suggest you check out if you want to extend your enjoyment of the Superman mythos got it together from the far reaches of beings that are assembled and that's what got dedicated to the bust greatest superhero is safe a Superman like featuring Superman: a the DC comics crisis Superman podcast is Superman this you will podcast is Superman forever and about what you are you are you will podcast KL from Superman homepage.com is John Wilson really help you are leaving my present bride your retailer Michael they start to Sam result is the original Mario is given by an highlighted I gave Younis and how has Gotti they because that what the thanks so much soliciting I just love discussing the stuff and if you been sticking with me hopefully you do to I'm genuinely grateful for each and every listener and hope you'll join us Man of Steel answers.com that way if you have a question you want answered or insight you want to share commentary to make your post in the comments for your like-minded apologist to see or you can email me at mosaic@ManofSteelofSteelanswers.com if you like what you heard please review the show on iTunes and subscribed this is Dr. awkward your DC cinematic universe apologist signing off CNX of answers sitting there that hasn't exactly gotten that were somewhat what happened in the last three decades it's very complicated and it can't be separated from the rest of the culture you can't separate journalistic culture from the rest of popular culture journalism they get pieces in their good journalism is popular culture but it's popular culture that stretches informs its readers rather than that which descends to the lowest common denominator I think I've used in his speeches ever since and and I believe that where we don't divorce what we do from the rest of the culture when you have a culture in human which hard complex truth is no longer the clothing the realm wars the value and I think that's what what we've see so when we determine good that Marla Maples is bigger news than Nelson Mandela not in just a New York Post headline but in Newsday and on the NBC 010 in New York that is a triumph of idiot culture of answers