The Zack Snyder DCEU Trilogy (Part 3)

 Before we proceed with our discussion, let me clarify something. There are two movies with the title Justice League: 

This is because while filming his version of the movie, Zack Snyder's daughter died a terrible death and he had to stop filming. The footage was given to Joss Whedon and he decided the movie was terrible, so he made some mutations before releasing his version in 2017.

However, this movie was universally hated, specially by Snyder fans who thought it didn't had the "depth" the other movies had. Whedon had attempted to make the movie more light hearted, colorful and funny, something the Snyder Bros didn't like, so they begged Warner Brothers to release the version of the movie made by Snyder, which is 4 hours long, R-rated and can be found in HBO MAX. 

In this post we are talking about both movies, because they are extremely similar and have pretty much the same plot. Snyder added more scenes, but we do not find them to be relevant to the plot so we will not talk about them. 

Josstice League and Zack Snyder's Justice League

The Whedon cut begins with some kids asking Superman what he likes about people, and Superman smiles awkwardly. He is probably thinking about the humanist subtext of this movies and how he is supposed to be a Jesus figure. 

Then we see Batman killing a parademon, an ugly entity that feeds on the fears of people, which leaves a drawing of three boxes in the wall with its remains. 

The Snyder Cut begins telling us the lore of this rather complex movie: 

Once upon a time, there was an evil space nazi who wanted to be omnipotent and was called Darkseid. 

Darkseid and his slave Steppenwolf conquered planets by terraforming them with 3 boxes, the mother boxes. This 3 boxes would join each other, make a "Unity" and terraform the entire planet, turning it into a hellscape for Darkseid to enjoy, while the people had their fears turn against them and became parademons. 

However, when he tried to do this on earth, the tribes of men, the atlanteans (ie., the tribe of Aquaman) and the amazonians (ie., the tribe of Wonder Woman), with some little help from pagan entities like Iupiter, Ares and Artemis, (yes, they are DC characters) defeated this Sauron wanna be and sent him crying back to space.

Despite the fact that earth contained the anti-life equation, a scary mathematical thing that would help him conquer the universe, Darkseid forgot about it and didn't return until the events of this movie. This happens only in the Snyder Cut.   

The Mommy boxes were separated and sent to each tribe to protect, but then the tribes separated from each other and the story was forgotten.

 But when Superman died, he cried really hard and this awakened the mommy boxes, which in turn called to Darkseid to come back for them. 

As the invasion gets prepared, we see Wonder Woman smashing a bunch of "reactionary terrorists" who want to blow up stuff. She defeats them, and when they ask her who she is, she replies "A Believer". A believer on what? Humanity? We will never know. 

What is sure is that this terrorists wanted to go "back to the dark ages, and the safety of holy fear". I suppose they were anglicans. If they wanted to refute the people who insisted on calling superman "a god", they didn't need to explode 4 blocks of London. If they were just tired of the degeneracy, why didn't they blow up Davos or Bohemian Grove instead of 4 random blocks? We will never know. 

Then, the rest of the Justice League gets assembled. We see Barry Allen aka Flash, an awkward kid who makes hilariously bad jokes, and his father is on jail because the feds insist he killed Flash's mother. 

Then we see Aquaman, a motorcycle bro who drinks and is angry with the atlanteans and his mother who abandoned him. 

Finally, we met Cyborg, a teenager whose sporting career got interrupted by a deadly car accident after which his dad turned him into a Cyborg and he is angry. 

This collection of angry people get summoned by Bruce Wayne and Wonder Woman, who warn them of the impending threat and prepare to stop Steppenwolf. However they fail to defeat Steppenwolf and as 2 out of three boxes are now in the power of the villain, they decide to elevate another character into the state of complete Jesus-Christ rip-off. 

We learn that somehow by putting Superman's corpse in a water tank and charging the mother box that is left, he will return to life. Why? Don't know. So Ezra Miller runs very fast, charges the box and Supie is back with us. 

After feeling threatened by Cyborg, Superman, out of his mind by the resurrection proceeds to attack the Justice League. However, Lois Lane appears and takes him to Kansas so he remembers who he was. 

The final battle is different in both movies. In Josstice League, Batman distracts the parademons with the Batmobile while Flash kills them and saves civilians. Cyborg connects himself to the boxes to destroy the "Unity", and Wonder Woman and Aquaman fight Steppenwolf. Superman comes later but he saves the day once again. Steppenwolf is defeated, and all is well.  

In the Snyder Cut, The Justice League distract the Parademons while Flash runs around in circles to get enough energy to charge Cyborg so he can disintegrate the boxes. Superman arrives late too but his participation is crucial to save the day. It is longer and more violent, and it does not have the hilariously bad jokes of he 2017 cut. 

The Resupesrrection 

Lex Luthor would say that "man" brought "god" back to life. The resupesrrection is probably the worst thing about the trilogy. From a religious perspective, because it completes the process of turning Superman into yet another Christ rip-off. This seeds were already planted in Man of Steel, but Justice League confirmed our concerns. 

In my opinion it is bad from a writing perspective too, because it takes away the weight of Kent's death in Batman V Superman, the best scene in the movie. Had Clark Kent remained 3 meters under the earth, his story would have still be moving, without giving to Ezra Miller the power to resurrect people. This would make the movies darker and less marketable, but it is not like if Warner Brothers cared about making money so they might as well give us better movies. 

Plus, it suggests that "man" is the one responsible and capable for resurrecting superman, which was symbollically linked to God in previous films. Such nonsense is what happens when you insist that "god" is anything that can resist a nuke. 

Darkseid Works Better as a Demiurg Figure than Captain Zod

In the first part of the articles we discussed an article that claimed Captain Zod was a demiurg. This was not the case with him, but with Darkseid it fits better. 

For this we will focus on the Snyder cut because in the Whedon cut Darkseid is mentioned only in passing and the Anti-Life equation is (pun intended) taken out of the equation. 

Unlike a proper Demiurg figure, like the Architect in The Matrix, Darkseid never created the universe. But if he gets access to the anti-life equation, he will get able to conquer the whole of existence AND the minds of its inhabitants. Is this not a power that only the One true God can have? 

While Darkseid in this movie is not a proper demiurg figure, he is an imperfect demiurg figure whose fight for godhood is improbable but not impossible. 

According to the reasoning behind the article that inspired this investigation; Darkseid would be the demiurg figure, an evil creator entity often associated with the God of the Old Testament, and Supie would be the antichrist figure. 

Antichrist-Superman would be a rather weak entity, and he would need a little help from his friends: the humans. 

While this theory makes sense, especially with the Snyder Cut, I would like to remark both the villain and the hero are imperfect analogies for the beings they are likely to represent. 

Conclusion

Personally I am rather offended by the Resupesrrection, and I think it is better if families and children don't see this movies, specially if they have no good knowledge of theology. 

Since this might have been a tough read for some of you, I would like to finish with a positive note by answering an interesting question for myself and yourself alike: 

How could this movies be improved? They are not entirely unredeemable. I like to imagine myself as a censor in control of remaking this movies in a way that would satisfy both the audiences and the religion.  

FIRSTLY; I would make the Jesus references less on the nose. This Clark Kent can follow the imitation of Christ, but without becoming a cheap imitation of Christ. We could even be self-aware: Clark knows that people think he is like Jesus but he never lets them go too far with the comparison. Considering that normies thought this references were cringe too, Warner has nothing to lose if they follow this thoughtline. 

After dying for people in Batman V Superman, he would never be able to come back. The permanence of his death would be tonaly consistent with the darkness of the movies, as well as avoiding the cringe Jesus analogy. It would also teach people that you can't have your cake and eat it too, something you usually don't see in Hollywood movies. 

SECONDLY; I would totally change the mentality of Lex Luthor. Instead of treating "god", "man" and "the devil" as action figures, he could be a person who has good intentions but wants to get there with evil actions, perhaps contrasting him with a Batman who is more cautious and doesn't want to kill a mostly good-willed Superman if there is a better way of protecting people from his unstability. 

The reason for this is that psychotic Luthor is broadly considered a bad villain by audiences, and that this warped worldview becomes an excuse to write blasphemies in the script. 

THIRDLY; I would make every superhero dress modestly, and I would get rid of Ares, Artemis and Iupiter.  

Good Riddance

Of course this would mean the remakes would be much different, and we will never get to do them, but I will not let this jam my creative juices and rewrite movies that already exist just to make a more positive article. Until next time. 

Independence Day and the Blue Beam Project

The 1997 movie Independence Day has a very interesting story to tell, and today we will analyze some of its messages. We will also get into hidden history and conspiracy theories, so get ready, block your seatbelts and prepare for this new interesting article. 

NPC People Love Aliens

The first half of the movie revolves about some different characters. We have a redneck who claims to have been abducted, a hacker protestor who loves the planet and dislikes people who is played by Jeff Goldblum, a funny black american who is on the military and is played by Will Smith and a president of the United States who actually cares about the United States. 

A series of massive spaceships approach the earth and it is unknown whether they come in peace or with the intention of destroying humanity. This ignorance doesn't prevent people from stacking below the doors of the spaceship and dancing excitedly below them, with the equivalent of "Refugees Welcome" cartels in their hands, begging E.T. to take them to their planet. 

When the establishment has found out the intentions of the spaceships, they warn people to leave, but they are so fascinated by the aliens that they never leave.

And the result? They get smothered by blue lasers and die. 

The moral is that you should not be a pijama person who gets so excited about something new or unexpected and forgets self preservation and situational awareness. Stay away from what the NPC masses do if you do not want to be like the people in this movie. 

América! Woo!

As the movie progressed, I realized it was propaganda for the American people, in favor of the government and military. 

For example, many of the battles are protagonized by very cool pilots riding very cool planes and fighting against evil psychic squid alien demons. The president isn't the Mascot of an evil deep state looking for excuses to abuse its own people and people from overseas, but a highly-likable character, a good father who deeply cares about people and blames himself for not stopping the first invasion.  

Let us not forget that this is the movie where america saves the entirety of the world from an alien invasion; for they are the ones who figure out how to destroy the aliens and their spaceships. The movie is full of patriotic scenes that I actually found hilarious. 

 They are also the ones who inspire the entire world to ignore their differences and get together to stop the greater menace; something that brings us to the next question. 

America bringing forth the New World Order? 

It seems that while for the people this is a fun popcorn movie with destruction, action, tender moments and Will Smith, for the establishment (at least, the establishment of 1997) the story is quite different.

As they prepare to fight against the evil psychic squid conquerors, the president clears his throat and gives as speech, suggesting people should forever ignore their "petty differences" because for one moment they had to unite and fight extraterrestrials. 

This theme is central to the movie: We see different americans all over the country uniting against the treat: the president, the crazy redneck, the military black american (presumably a reference to the so-called right wing) the protestor hacker who does science (a reference to the so-called left), the stripper, the rabbi and the female politician all play the role of representing different americans from all walks of life. 

Later, when America passes the cheat-code to other countries to defeat the aliens, we see countries that fought the United States somewhere in time. I recognized Japan, Russia and Britain. This movie was intended to tell Americans they would be responsible for uniting the whole world under the New World Order. 

Israel makes an appearance too, of course. They probably identify with the aliens a bit too much, as they love smashing buildings, people, and symbolic locations.

It also has a bit of religious ecumenism, for example, when the rabbi guy prays with people of all so-called faith traditions. 

The Blue Beam Project 

This consists on a possible false flag made by the establishment. By faking an alien invasion (presumably, using CGI, directed energy weapons and the media), they could send the people into a panic and force them to accept dictatorial mandates they would never consider otherwise. 

Consider for example, how much the US government tried to hide (or pretended to try to hide) information about UFOs, and extraterrestrials; but in 2021 they suddenly were showing off their footage and driving attention to the topic like if it were very important. 

The mexican government followed suit, of course, with some cheap imitation of a psychological operation.

Some people have suggested too, that some "alien abductions"  have actually been mind control experiments by the government who then blamed it on E.T. This distracts the population and prevents people who suffered the trauma from being taken seriously, because they remember it as an alien abduction and not a government experiment. 

An even scarier Blue Beam project could involve not only extraterrestrials, but interdimensional beings. The reason for this is that movies like Event Horizon and Hellraiser have already presented demons and/or ghost as entities from other dimensions, rather than biological beings from other planets. 

The idea that humans should unite is not bad in itself, it is just that I do not want it to happen by the hand of neocons, Israel or freemasons. Neither do we want it to happen by the hand of the people who would lie to us about an alien invasion. 

The Soulless Remake for Modern Audiences

In 2015 a "sequel" for Independence Day was released, albeit it kind of works like a remake. It is almost like if the directors had a checklist for things that worked in the original movie and just remade them for Independence Day Resurgence. 

+ Funny pilot gets inside Alien spaceship? Check

+ Psychic Alien Squid strangles a man and uses it to communicate its plans to the audience? Check

+ Massive destruction of well-known locations? Check 

+ The cheesy musical theme from the original movie? Check

+ New World Order Message? Check 

+ Ecumenism? Check

+ Area 51? Check

+ Angry military man who needs to sit down? Check

+ A character sacrifices himself to defeat the aliens? Check

Except that this time it falls flat and nobody cares. 

The only thing missing was the cheesy american patriotism that gave me so much cringe and made me laugh so hard. Perhaps the current establishment doesn't like America as much as they used to do.  

The movie actually seems to suggest President Whitner as some sort of antichrist or messianic world leader because after the invasion of the last movie, they reverse engineered the alien spaceships and used them to improve their technology. There had been no sign of wars or division since the last alien invasion, meaning President Whitner actually managed to unite the whole world and bring some sort of an utopia. 

Eventually he sacrifices himself. Will they resurrect him on a sequel soon?  

There is also a white sphere who speaks like a female and is a member of a different alien species. It is a transhumanist thing that transferred its conscience to a computer. She explains she is holding a "resistance" against the squid people and she might consider humans to join them. There is some cheap teasing for a sequel and the movie ends without shame or glory. 

Conclusion

Independence Day is a new world order movie that doesn't care if people accuse it of being propaganda. In fact, it is a masterpiece on propaganda, something that isn't hidden but doesn't prevent you from having fun. 

If you disagree with my interpretation of the movie, come and tell me your own opinion. Just make sure to avoid CGI deceptions anyways, whether they come from "the right" or "the left". 

The Zack Snyder DC Trilogy. (Part 2)

Superman and Batman are cultural symbols; however, despite their importance they had never been seen together in a major Hollywood production.

This changed in 2016, where Warner released Batman V Superman as part of the DCEU (DC extended universe). The hype for this movie was high, but once it came out many felt heavily disappointed. It was a dark and boring movie, well-filmed but insufficiently written, with some hilariously bad moments here and there. 

Last article we discussed whether Man of Steel, its predecessor, could be a movie about Antichrist vs the God of the Bible. However, today we will only focus on analysing some of the themes of this movie, specially those that are a continuation for the themes of Man of Steel:

Batman v Superman continues expanding on two of the messages of the last movie: Superman being a humanist "Jesus", and hope in humanity. Zack Snyder also wrote an allegory for God, man and the devil in this movie, which we will certainly analize here. However, before we get there, let me describe the movie: 

Batman vs Superman

After the events on Man of Steel public opinion on Superman is heavily divided. For example, we see some Mexicans treating Superman like if he were John Paul II while he looks uncomfortable. 

On the other hand, people still remember how Superman destroyed Metropolis and see him as a treat. This will retcon Supie's arc in Man of Steel where he learns to have "faith in humanity".

Snyder's Batman considers Supie to be a treat, especially since the dark knight was present in Metropolis during its destruction by Kal-El. 

The villain for this movie is a mentally-unwell version of Lex Luthor. He is an idiot atheist who is somehow convinced that Superman is some sort of symbol for god, whom he despises. This premise will allow Zack Snyder to tell us something. 

 He wants Superman to fight Batman, whom he sees as a representation of the best of mankind - presumably, not because he is virtuous but because he is powerful - . In short, Luthor read too much Nietzsche and wants "god" (superman) to fight "man" (batman), because he is mentally ill and this is what mentally ill people do in DC movies. 

To achieve his dream of treating "god" and "man" like action figures, Luthor kidnaps Superman's mother Martha Kent and tells Superman that if he doesn't bring him Batman's head, he will kill Martha. Therefore, the o-so-powerful Kal-El succumbs to the requests of a millionaire with psychosis and the battle begins. 

Superman keeps his stand, but Batman had planned this confrontation before. He brings a kryptonite lance and prepares to impale the alien man. 

However, Clark begs Wayne to "save Martha", and this is enough for Bruce to feel that Supie is worth sparing and even becomes his friend.

 You see, both character's mothers share the same name, and this is enough for Batsy to spare the man he desperately wanted to kill some seconds before. 

Later on, Batman saves Martha and Supie goes to confront Lex Luthor. However, all this time, Luthor was mixing his DNA with the corpse of Captain Zod to create an ugly orc thing called Doomsday, whom he claims to be "the devil". So in case you missed this, "man" could not defeat "god" because "save Martha", and therefore "the devil" has to kill "god". 

Supie and Batman are joined by Lois Lane and Wonder Woman to defeat this creature. Superman takes him to space and the americans nuke them. The monster survives the impact and Clark is left in space, seemingly dead. However, the sun shines on him, so he is reanimated and returns to fight. 

With the help of his friends and girlfriend Superman grabs the kryptonite lance that Batsy had manufactured and stabs Doomsday with it; but as the creature dies Superman himself gets stabbed in the chest. Since he was being weakened by the kryptonite lance, he perishes. 

Then we have a sad scene where the first krypto bro dies in front of his friends. This is actually a very moving scene: the idea of an alien thing dying for people who don't like him is not bad on itself.  

Let us not forget, however, that Zack Snyder managed to snuck in some stick crosses because he loves subtlety.  

Lex Luthor would think that "god" died "to the devil" for "man", in what is yet another similarity to Jesus. 

The movie ends with a reference to the upcoming sequel, with Bruce Wayne resenting himself for not giving a chance to Superman; Lex Luthor becoming the evil bald man he was meant to be; and a very long funeral sequence with Amazing Grace playing on the background. 

No, Zack Snyder, Superman is not God

First, let us correct Zack Snyder (and some DC fans out there) and his idea that Superman was some sort of "God". 

Superman is not eternal: he has a beginning and an end. Even if he is immortal, his existence does not transcend all limits. 

Superman is not omnipotent: the very fact that he had to talk about "Martha" to save his life from kryptonite proves this 

Superman is not the creator of the planet earth and let alone the universe, as well as both things visible and invisible. 

Superman is not the ruler of the Universe: he is just a very strong humanoid who flies and destroys things.  

In short, Zack Snyder is ignorant, and we invite anyone who would say Superman is a god to stop imitating him. 

However, this action-figure behavior on the part of Luthor offers some interesting questions. Is Zack Snyder suggesting that the he (Lex) hates God for sparing humanity? ¿Or that he hates humanity for sparing religion? 

Luthor is an atheist because his father was abusive. Since Batman spared Supes, Luthor decided to punish humanity by releasing Doomsday. Or, since Superman spared Batman, he punished him anyways by releasing Doomsday. 

It also suggests that Luthor's original plan consisted in "god" (superman) killing "man" (batman), and his concoction "the devil" (doomsday) would avenge "man", in a luciferian way. 

The "save Martha" moment is also relevant here because by having a mom, "god" has made a communion with man. Humanity realizes this and decides to spare religion, causing the devil to attack them both. 

To think that random individuals represent the relationship between God, humanity and satan is cringe  but this is likely what Zack Snyder wanted to display. 

The Sacrifice

Perhaps the only good scene is when Superman decides to die for people. However, we never really get to see Superman loving people in most of this trilogy. 

It is true that he destroyed the nazi kryptonians, but not without causing the equivalent of a dozen of 9-11 attacks in Metropolis. It is true he dies fighting Doomsday, but only after some people decided to show him respect and two people (one of whom had tried to kill him) showed him kindness and love, even if his reputation was in a bad place.    

It is much more likely that he decided to risk his life for the only 2 women who ever loved him: Martha and Lois. Understanding but not as moving as dying for people who distrust you because it is the right thing to do. 

Nevertheless, this would be a moving moment if it were not because of the possibility that this movies are about antichrist. 

The Theme of "Hope on Humanity" in this Movie

Unlike the normal adaptations of the Batman, this movie shows us a Batman who brutally kills people. This is a direct contrast with the character as we see on the majority of his media. 

The reasons Batman does not kill are plenty. The death of his parents is enough to traumatize him in such a way that he can't kill but wants to be a crime fighter anyway. Furthermore, he believes that everyone can be redeemed; which is true of most of his villains except Joker. 

Unlike his counterparts, "Batfleck" kills because he no longer believes this redemption is possible. He has lost "hope in humanity". 

He is desperate to kill Superman because he considers him as a treat. He thinks that since the alien has power, this power will corrupt him and only Batsy can stop him.  

When Superman says "Save Martha" this somehow makes Batman think that some people are worth sparing. I believe the "Save Martha" scene is more than just an hilariously bad plot point. It is there because by learning that Superman has a mom, Batman remembers that he became a crimefighter not because he hates killers, but because he wanted humanity to become the best version of itself, with Martha Wayne symbolizing the best of humanity. It is poorly written but, I think this is what Snyder was looking for.

As  Superman decides to die for people, Batman remembers the power of love and this incites him to have more hope, and probably hope in humanity.

Do you see the humanism? Do you see?  

Conclusion

Batman V Superman is the movie in which Zack Snyder's cringe analogy for Christ continues as Superman dies to Doomsday for humanity. 

It is also the movie in which Lex Luthor is mentally ill and thinks that Superman is "god", Batman is "man" and Doomsday is "the devil". 

It is also the movie in which Batman remembers humanity is redeemable and spares the alien who destroyed Metropolis because Superman's mother is named like his late mother.

However, just because this movie is hilariously bad doesn't mean it didn't have a thought process behind it, and we are happy to analyze it for you. 

Unlike Man of Steel, I don't actually believe this movie could be interpreted in a different manner to what has been written, but maybe I am wrong. Feed my your insights in the comments below. 

SUPERMAN IS NOT MOSES

 While researching about the Zack Snyder Trilogy, I come across a video that explained that Superman shouldn't be a Jesus rip-off. This video was released by the channel Pillar of Garbage, and this name is quite accurate to the mess I found. 

Pillar of Garbage is a filo-jewish critical theorist channel that discusses entertainment products. Therefore, the reason they opposed to the ridiculous Hollywood tendency to make Superman into a Jesus rip-off wasn't based on respect for the Christ but on whiny woke nonsense. 

Garbage explained that turning Superman into an allegory for Jesus deleted the "jewish roots" of the character. The creator for the character, Jerry Siegel, wanted Superman to stand up for the oppressed. He claimed Siegel and Schuster wanted to make some sort of communist hero with strong political inclinations, but after the cold war the establishment chose to make him more agreeable to the mostly-protestant masses of America and the non-communist.  

He disrespected Jesus Christ, in typical jewish fashion and then said that Superman (at least originally) was not, or should not be, a symbol for Jesus, but for Moses.   

However, to say that Superman is Moses is ignorant and stupid. While many Superman writers have gone too far to turn the kryptonian into a fake messias, no such thing has ever been done with Moses. 

Whoever says that Superman is Moses is ignorant of both Moses and Superman.  

Superman's most consistent value is humanism, and his motivation is love of humanity. This love comes from the gratitude he feels for Jonathan and Martha Kent. In contrast, the motivation of Moses is love for God, and it is only through his love of God that he loves the Hebrews. 

Such difference should be sufficient, because means that Moses and Superman have a different religion and they see the world in starkly contrasting ways. 

However, there is more. 

Moses is the liberator of his own people, the hebrews. However, how can Superman be a liberator of his people if the kryptonians are dead? Their civilization is gone. Krypton had its chance. 

Someone would argue that the people of Superman are not the kryptonians but the humans, whom he loves intensely because they adopted him as his own. If we translate this to Moses, wouldn't it mean that he would love the Egyptians because they adopted him for a while? 

It is clear that Moses experience with those who adopted him is different from Clark Kent.

Pillar of Garbage seems to think that Jesus only acted out of self-interest but Moses acted out of a desire to the right thing because it is the right thing to do. Such nonsense is what comes across as media commentary in this days. As if Moses didn't act because God made the burning bush miracle and presented himself as the commander of all things, the king of the universe and the slavemaster of the galaxies. 

His whole religion is centered around one principal commandment: You Will Love God above all things and follow his rules, not "you will do the right thing because the right thing is good and the not-right thing is bad because your conscience". It is the God who decides what is right or wrong, not the general consensus of the majority of mankind, and it is not your heart.  

Pillar of Garbage seems to think Moses is some sort of worldly liberator, unlike Jesus. This is not the case. Moses was a prophet, a slave of God who incites other people to be slaves of God too. This is different from Superman who comes to preach no religion. Moses's mission is imposed from beyond and supernatural, while Superman has no mission but he took the personal choice to use his powers for the material benefit of the people. 

What I understood is that Jews hate Jesus so much that when one of their products gets compared to the Messias, they immediately deny this, blame capitalism and proceed to say their product is closer to someone they actually like: Moses. To think this idea is defended by anyone is disturbing and should humiliate anyone who has an exceedingly high idea of human intelligence. 

The Zack Snyder DCEU Trilogy (Part One)

The DC Extended Universe (DCEU) is a collection of movies inspired by the characters of DC Comics. Most of this movies are not very good and the DCEU itself had a very troublesome history. They didn't know how to please audiences and constantly changed from dark, desaturated and depressing movies to corny and funny flicks that attempted to attract children. 

In 2022-23, the DCEU died with the movies Flash and Black Adam. A new version of the DCEU will be rebooted in 2025 with a Superman movie. 

Today we are going to focus on the movies that belong to the DCEU (short for DC Extended Universe). We will give special treatment to the ones that were directed by Zack Snyder. 

Man of Steel

This movies give special attention to Superman, as Zack Snyder's adaptation of this character offers quite a lot to discuss. 

Snyder saw Superman as some sort of Jesus Christ figure. (or, should I say, rip-off). A savior from another world, a lover of humanity who uses his power to save everyone.  

Man of steel is a rather dark adaptation for the kryptonian. Instead of the charming boy-scout character most people knew from the comics, movies and television shows, here Superman barely ever smiles and behaves grimly, even suggesting some degree of madness. 

The reason this movie catched my attention is rooted on an article I read on a lefebvrist website long ago. This article was written by a protestant minister and claimed that Man of Steel was a movie in which Superman would be the Antichrist and his enemy, Captain Zod, the God of the Bible, who would be of course portrayed in a negative way. 

So, was this article entirely incorrect or did it had something to offer to the discussion?. In this article I will attempt to find out the answers to 3 questions: Is Man of Steel about Antichrist? Is Captain Zod a parody of God? How far did Zack Snyder go to bring parallels between Jesus and Superman?  

Synopsis

First we have to resume what happens in this movies. Therefore, let me begin: 

Man of Steel begins in the planet Krypton, which is about to explode because the kryptonians used its core to fuel themselves. Superman's father, Jor-el, chastises the kryptonians for their stupidity and warns them of their impending doom. 

Kryptonian society is decaying too. For starters, their children are fabricated; motherhood and fatherhood do not exist. This isn't the case with Kal-El, the future Clark Kent; whose birth is natural. His father infuses within him the genetic codex of his species and prepares to send him off, while his mom suggests he will be treated as an outcast and executed. 

But Jor-El insists he will actually be appreciated "he will be treated as a god" and off he goes. 

General Zod, who is our generic space-nazi villain attempts to take control over the planet and preserve only the best Kryptonians. After killing Jor-El he and his followers are defeated and sent to the phantom zone in capsules. He warns Supie's mom he will find the codex & baby as Kal travels its way through the galaxies and krypton explodes. 

Kal-el is found by Martha and Jonathan Kent. The later doesn't want his adoptive son to save people because he is afraid the government will find him and do things to him. That's reasonable, but he takes this fears to the extreme. He is smothered by a tornado for refusing his son's help, and even suggests he should just let people die before risking being recognized. 

Later on, the young Clark Kent dedicates himself to save people while hiding at the same time, following his desire to save people while honoring Jonathan's desire for anonymity. 

He has an identity crisis until he finds the Fortress of Solitude, where an AI version of his dad - "his consciousness" - tells him the story of Krypton and simultaneously asks him to be a guidance for humanity and chose his own path. 

While this two seem to be contradictory statements, I think that Jor-el wants his son to teach people to chose freedom, and to incite others to chose freedom by his example. 

Pay attention to his words:

"You will give the people of Earth an ideal to strive towards. They will race behind you, they will stumble, they will fall. But in time, they will join you in the sun, Kal. In time, you will help them accomplish wonders"

Why would they join him in the sun? Does Jor-El worship Apollo?  

Just as Kent and Lois Lane are starting to fall in love, Captain Zod arrives to earth and informs the whole of humanity about his existence. Zod says he knows there is a kryptonian on the planet and wants him to present himself to their spaceship or else he will punish humans. 

Kal-EL starts doubting whether he should trust the American government to capture him and present him before Zod, betraying Jonathan's sacrifice. Clark could fly all the way to the spaceship and present himself; he could also look for advice to NPC Jor-El, but instead he goes to the worst place you could possibly go for advice: a novus ordo church. 

The novus ordo priest gives him generic advice about "trusting your gut". He also says that sometimes you have to give a "leap of faith", which based on the context of a movie he is talking about faith in humanity. Only after "the leap of faith", Superman will be able to see if people are worth trusting. 

After this he offers himself up to be captured by America and extradited to Zod. 

After extracting the codex from Superman, Zod explains to Supie that he will terraform the earth so he and his fellow space nazis get to inhabit the planet. He is making a "new krypton" and will use the codex to perpetuate the species. 

However, terraforming the planet will kill all humans, so Superman decides to push his limits and defeats the space nazis. While fighting with Zod, he destroys half of Metropolis. Superman also exterminates kryptonian eggs, meaning the species will be extinct once he dies. 

At the end of the movie he promises the American establishment that he doesn't hate them but will work independently. He chooses to hide himself behind a pair of glasses and live as a reporter for the Daily Planet.

Jesus, Superman & The Antichrist

We begin the discussions by pointing out the similarities.

 Someone from the skies is sent and decides to use his power to save people. He hides from them and lives as a misunderstood outsider, but is forced to reveal himself. After he is captured and taken from earth, people are saved from something evil. 

The part when he goes to the church is like the prayer in Gethsemane because the evil of humanity overwhelms a doubting Superman. 

Even the over the top destruction of Metropolis we see in Man of Steel - which was criticized by classic superman fans - makes sense from this perspective: let us remember what happened to Jerusalem after rejecting the Messias.  

In fact, something that Zack Snyder understood about the Messias is that the Messias is saving people who reject and ostracize their Savior. In other Superman products this isn't the case.  

On top of this all, there are many scenes where the framing suggests this similarities to the viewer. For example, as Superman returns to earth from the nazi spaceship he positions himself like if he were crucified.

 When he decides to offer himself up he stands in front of an image of Christ. In fact, Clark is 33 during the main events of the movie.

I take retellings of the story of Jesus quite personal, because while there is nothing wrong with writing a character who imitates Jesus, both should be sufficiently distinct to avoid cringe and/or blasphemous comparisons and avoid adapting the story of Christ in an irreverent or ridiculous manner. 

I believe Snyder went too far but still retained many important differences. People were waiting for the messias, while nobody expected Kal-el. Kal-el had a natural birth instead of a virgin birth, he was not sent by God, but by a creature, and his mission stays within tangible things. 

Kal-el does not come to preach an ancient religion, but generic "chose fweedom" and "trust humanity" messages he stole from Jor-el and a novus ordo priest. 

All of this leads to the next question:

Is Man of Steel an Antichrist Figure? 

My opinion is that this version of Superman is an imperfect antichrist figure, an imperfect antichrist analogy. Let me defend my position: 

Antchrist is someone who pretends to be Jesus to deceive the masses into accepting a false religion. Antichrist refers to an individual who will do this in the strongest manner, close to the end of times. 

Man of Steel is an antichrist figure in the sense that he is some sort of faith-in-humanity and freedom messias. This was the intention of Jor-el who sent him, and eventually he agreed to do this. 

I believe Kal-El is sufficiently similar to Jesus to pretend to be Him (at least, in an allegorical manner), but their doctrinal differences are sufficient to set them both apart. In Man of Steel, this doctrines position Superman as a humanist-antichrist. 

There are 3 reasons why this is imperfect: 

1: Kal-El isn't specifically similar to the antichrist as described in Scriptures. Had he been, he would have been jewish, would have explicitly claimed to be Jesus and would have asked people to worship him. 

2: Snyder wanted to give us a humanist hero but then proceeds to make him destroy an entire city, participating in the equivalent of multiple 9/11 attacks. 

3: The movie is riddled with disjointed oideas, and there might be a legitimate way of interpreting this movie in a way contrary to what I believe. 

Is Captain Zod a Demiurg? 

The writer for the aforementioned article argued that Captain Zod was a figure for the Demiurg, the evil creator from the gnostic religion. The gnostics believed the Demiurg stole power to create a world almost as evil at itself, which is the one in which we live in. 

The reason this is important is that some people interpret the Demiurg to be our God, the God of the Old Testament. This article claimed that Zod was the demiurg, who came from the heavens, and had a confrontation with Supie who would either be satan or antichrist. 

The problem with this article is that Zod is not a good figure for a demiurg. He never claims to be divine, but most importantly, he never participated in creating the world. Unlike accurate demiurg figures in fiction (like The Celestials in The Eternals or The Architect in The Matrix), he is not the creator of the world we live in. He is not even able of achieving omnipotence. 

Unlike the God of the Old Testament, Zod doesn't judge people based on a judgement of their character but on the power of their species. He doesn't come to impose a law and physical limitations, he just comes to destroy because he was programmed to perpetuate Kryptonians since he was conceived. 

A real parody of the God of the Old Testament would be King Magnifico, from the Disney movie Wish. Unlike Zod, he actually pretends to be a good person and look for the interests of his own people. However, his real motivation is power and he seeks to prevent the protagonist from becoming like him. This is similar to God punishing humans for attempting to be like him; the Tower of Babel and the Garden of Eden being prime examples. Zod is nothing like this. 

He is just a space nazi who hates people and wants a planet for himself and his fellow space nazis. Rather than representing God, Zod represents those racial supremacists who conspire against freedom and refuse to take the "leap of faith" in humanity that we are told Superman did.

Conclusion 

It is likely that Zack Snyder wanted to tell his own analogy for the history of Jesus. Since Zack Snyder is not a fundamentalist, he reinterpreted and deformed the Messias to his own liking, making an imperfect antichrist figure. On the other hand, Zod is not a parody of God but yet another cinematic Hitler for the protagonist to kill. 

I do not want to do a temerarious judgement of this directors, and this might just be one of many internet theories. However, I consider the evidence is sufficient for this theory to be worth pointing out.

If anyone disagrees with this interpretation on the movie, let him post his arguments and we will listen to him. 

You can find more information on IMDB. 

Was I Too Harsh with the Kung Fu Panda movie (2011)?

 On 2021 I wrote an article called "Millstones in the Road: The Be Yourself Message". It has multiple views, and in that article I talked about the 1st  Kung Fu Panda movie. I said the following: 

"Kung Fu Panda. In the first movie, Po the panda discovers that the message of the "dragon scroll” (which gives power to those who possess it) is... nothing! He asks his adoptive father, a goose, what he thinks the message on the dragon scroll is, and the goose tells him that it does not matter if the scroll contains nothing, if he believes there is something special about him, he will thrive. At the end of the movie, Po shows that the dragon scroll is his reflection. You have your powers by yourself. You are cool just the way you are. How profound.

It is interesting to notice that, although his companions have trained hard all their life, Po is the one chosen as the “dragon warrior” - in my opinion, this is in part because he has more personality and is more unique than the others, (he is truly himself). He trusts in his own "inner strength" unlike the Five, who feel the need to prove their strength all the time."

However, upon further studying, I realised this paragraphs are not entirely accurate, and therefore, the movie does not teach the be-yourself message as hard as I previously thought. 

The reason for this is that the movie is pretty much nuanced and subtle in many of the things it is trying to say. There is nothing wrong with correcting ourselves, so in this article we will take a detailed look to this movie and see the extent of the be yourself message (if this is one of the messages of the movie), as well as other interesting thoughts.

Oogway's Choice

The first issue we had is that Po had been chosen despite the fact that he is a soyboy, instead of the furious five who have trained hard for most of their lives. It seemed to work like a diversity hire. 

However, later we learn Oogway actually had a reason to choose the panda. The 3rd movie explains that pandas have a special connection with chi energy (a pagan life-force energy the chinese believe in). Furthermore, his bodily fat protects him from a special punch Tai Lung had learned while in prison. Therefore, he is not exactly a diversity hire.

The be yourself message is not found on the fact that he is a diversity hire. However, Oogway should have explained this to the furious five to avoid problems and increase their patience for the panda. For this fact alone we should hesitate to call this tortoise "wise". 

On the other hand, if Po uses his personality to do Kung Fu better, I can't accuse him of merely "being himself", like Disney princesses. Yes, Kung Fu panda is a pagan franchise, but just because you are a pagan does not mean you have the be yourself message. 

Po and the Furious Five 

Po is loud and extravagant so his personality is more noticeable than that of the others, but they do have a personality - it is just that it is subtler in its expression. 

Tigress, for example, is a cold but kind, highly disciplined warrior who is deeply concerned about everyone. She is angry with Po because he is immature and acts like if everything is a joke. 

However, the other furious five are rather childish and immature too. Monkey is a jokester, crane and mantis follow him along. Saying that Po is himself while the others deny themselves, is an understatement, because the only character with gravitas is Tigress. 

The movie that did contrast a character who is herself against other (mostly) self-denying characters is Turning Red. Mei Lee the giant red panda girl learns that her mom wasn't allowed to be herself (pretty much like her right now) and that made her sad, so when the opportunity comes to let herself be seen, mommy transforms into pandazilla and nearly causes millions of deaths. This 2 movies were made with a different mindset. 

Po's Immaturity and Obesity

The thing that does have a dose of the be yourself message is perhaps the fact that we never see Po overcome his tendency to gluttony. It would be nice to see him struggling with his nearly unstoppable binging urges and improve himself. 

As regarding his immaturity: Yes, eventually the soyboyish behavior Po exhibits gets exhausting. However, it seems that this dumbness actually serves a purpose and is more than just Po "being himself". His annoying chatter distracts his enemies into thinking he can't defeat them, only to surprise them with his kung fu skills and smart battle strategies. 

It would be nice for the writers to further improve his character in this respect too, perhaps by having him say smarter things when he is chatting with the antagonists.  However, it seems that Dreamworks has prevented Po from growing further. KFP 2 was a sufficiently mature, gritty story, but with the next 2 sequels they tried to be more comedic and as such, Po will be permanently stuck into having an adolescent brain. 

The Phrase that Made me Feel Sad. 

The scene that has the least of the be yourself message is one where Po tries to escape the jade palace. Shifu asks him why he stayed for so long only to leave now. Po says the following: 

"Every time you throw a brick into my head, or said I smelled, it hurt, but it hurted less than just being me". 

This phrase already transcends most be yourself movies. Here we have a character that instead of just wanting to be accepted "as he is", wants to be something more than just a soyboy panda. He doesn't want to have self-esteem just because he exists; he actually wants to earn it by becoming a hero. 

I had missed this phrase before, and this phrase alone motivated me to write this article. There may be some be-yourself message in the other Kung Fu Panda movies, but it does not seem anymore to me that the movie was written with this intention. 

The Special Noodle Soup

The special noodle soup we referred to before may be more a rather clumsy analogy for self-confidence, kinda like the feather in Dumbo that makes the baby elephant think he can fly. Self-confidence is a feature of the be yourself message (being yourself means trusting yourself enough to do your own thing). 

However, Po actually lacked confidence, which is necessary when one is capable of doing something. (1) His consciousness of being a soyboy panda allows him to practice some degree of humility, unlike Tai Lung, but his humility had been contaminated with pusillanimity, which means he stays static doing nothing because he is afraid of failure. Training and receiving an honorary title allows Po to overcome some part of this problem and defeat the enemy. 

1) Just remember that confidence in God is necessary, confidence in oneself is not necessary.

The bad thing about this is that it teaches Po to source his confidence from phantasms. The secret ingredient doesn't exist, but it matters because people believe on it? This is some stupid fortune cookie lore.

Furthermore, Po had already trained when he talked to Mr. Ping, so he didn't need to bust his confidence by somehow convincing himself the dragon scroll had something on it that is very special but does not exist. 

And there, there is the mirror thing. Po explains to Tai Lung that he didn't understood why the scroll was empty, but then he realized it was a mirror. 

So, did Po need to train to improve himself or was he special all this time because reasons? Based on the seeming contradiction between this mirror and the phrase Po gifted us before, it seems that this movie focuses more on gaining confidence through honorary titles, training and the appreciation of a teacher. The message that you should be yourself is there but it weaker than initially thought.

Therefore, yes, I think I was too harsh with Kung Fu Panda. This does not mean I would recommend the movie, it merely means that I made a mistake and I have to repair it.  

This is because if you want to condemn anything in popular culture, you need to know what you are talking about, or else your condemnations will be useless. I ask forgiveness if this failure harmed anyone, and let this stand as a reminder that correcting oneself is necessary, as well as treating other things fairly and avoid misrepresenting them-

Memes July 2024