PLEASE READ BEFORE COMMENTING: If your comment is concerning the FICTIONAL SITUATIONS WHICH CAUSE FICTIONAL DECISIONS TO BE MADE BY FICTIONAL CHARACTERS, then you're not responding to what I'm saying.
So in other words, if you're going to say something like "OF COURSE THE CITY WAS DESTROYED, THEY HAVE SUPERPOWERS" or "CLARK COULDN'T GET HIM AWAY FROM THE CITY," you're not addressing my point in the video. You're talking about the fictional choices in a fictional event.
In the video, I'm talking about the necessity for destruction on that scale in a film about Superman, which I feel was gratuitous and unnecessary. I'm very pro-violence and destruction in movies; this rant isn't against that, It's against using it in a way I feel is lame or doesn't fit the story.
My issue isn't with the specific content of the fictional stories, but the nature of the stories being told. People seem to be really misunderstanding this.
If you're saying anything about "the choices Superman made/didn't make," you're not talking about what I said in the video.