Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Had some time to digest this one as well, and I will saw that bottom line I enjoyed this more than Man of Steel. As someone who read comics years ago I was never a DC guy, I was mostly Marvel so I had the benefit of not being colored by my own expectations.

I also think that M'Kyuun and Golden Arms did a much better job articulating some of my issues than I could, so I'll just agree with them.

A few things that I don't recall seeing that did however make me upset;

At the end when Batman makes a statement about living up to what Superman represents. No, no no AND no. Batman and Superman share a healthy respect for one another, if not an outright friendship. To the best of my knowledge Batman does not "look" up to or aspire to any lofty goals of what Superman represents for humanity.

And who in the world ships an engagement ring in a regular bubble envelope with no protection. Yep, that was were my suspension of disbelief hit it's limit. Clark shipped Lois's engagement ring, without a box, in an envelope.

And finally, Wonder Woman kicked ass.

-b.

- It did feel a little weird that he said that like they were friends for a while or something. I took that part as bats realizing he let the rage consume him for too long. The manbat consumed him >,> his mansion blew up at some point, lost a Robin, and watch metropolis turn into rubble. He's seen some sh!t. He got too brutal and didn't see he was being manipulated until he was about to kill superman. Seeing that sups had come to him for help and he just wasn't listening, ultimately about to kill another mother's son. Lets not forget his visions of what drove sups into a tyrant and Flash's warning, He put it all together. So he decides to live by better ideals and not to beat Lex into hamburger meat or brand him. Now, should they have at least had a confrontation about how they handle criminals?, YES, but we didn't get that and the fight wasn't even about that anymore.

- Maybe Clark was so broke he got it off ebay and did not have original box and opted for cheapest shipping. lol

- Also didn't hate Lex like I thought I would. He was crazy, you see his ticks and twitches and had plan A and B set to go. At least this one didn't want real estate.

-Also love that batmobile!

* Eh, while i'm at it...

I really got the sense the JL stuff was so shoehorned in there. Maybe if it wasn't in there, it would flow a little better.

She totally kicked ass

Edited by Negotiator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had some time to digest this one as well, and I will say that bottom line I enjoyed this more than Man of Steel. As someone who read comics years ago I was never a DC guy, I was mostly Marvel so I had the benefit of not being colored by my own expectations.

I also think that M'Kyuun and Golden Arms did a much better job articulating some of my issues than I could, so I'll just agree with them.

A few things that I don't recall seeing that did however make me upset;

At the end when Batman makes a statement about living up to what Superman represents. No, no no AND no. Batman and Superman share a healthy respect for one another, if not an outright friendship. To the best of my knowledge Batman does not "look" up to or aspire to any lofty goals of what Superman represents for humanity.

And who in the world ships an engagement ring in a regular bubble envelope with no protection. Yep, that was were my suspension of disbelief hit it's limit. Clark shipped Lois's engagement ring, without a box, in an envelope.

And finally, Wonder Woman kicked ass.

-b.

*edit for grammar

:lol::lol: enjoyed your comment on the packaging!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with KB's spoiler statement. Two very different people whose backgrounds have colored their worldview, but maintain a mutual respect, neither greater nor lesser than the other.

Negotiator:

I respectfully disagree with your opinion concerning the JL material; on the contrary, I thought it was integrated well into the story, and also served as a plausible reason for Diana and Bruce to meet. If he hadn't been bugging Lex's server, Diana would likely not have noticed him. Her info within that data gave Bruce an idea of whom he was dealing with. That 1918 photo spoke volumes. That the other metahumans were contained within the data gave insight to Luthor Jr's future plans, as well as giving a sneak preview as to how they will be presented in future films. IMHO, I thought it served the greater story..

Wonder Woman was presented so well in this movie; can't wait to see her in her own movie.

Since comparisons to the Marvel movies are unavoidable, I'm glad that DC aren't copying them, but taking a darker, grittier path with their films. Even the DC animated films have been darker and more mature than the Marvel films, both live action and animated, at least the ones that I've seen. I very much enjoy the levity within the Marvel films...they've done an excellent job overall with writing the various characters, and it works really well. To that end, if DC were to copy that, esp with Affleck's experienced and jaded Batman (who by this point has lost a great deal in terms of friends and property), I just don't think it would come off as believable... or desirable. If one wants to see more light-hearted DC fare, watch the Keaton/Reeves movies, the old '66 Batman show, the Wonder Woman show , or Arrow, Flash, and Supergirl. There's a bit of cheek in these shows, but all are enjoyable in their own rights. However in the current films, with Batman poised to be front and center in an eventual Justice League, I think Snyder's set the right atmosphere. I just disagree with superheroes taking lives when its their obligation to save them, often at personal cost.

I've been pondering MoS and BvS for about an hour or so since I originally posted, and I recall criticisms of Costner's Jonathan Kent. I believe they took issue with his advice to suppress and hide what he can do to live a normal 'human' life. This sentiment was echoed by Martha in BvS, and I think its a relevant conversation, esp from a parent. By putting himself out there, he invites not just praise, but also the darker intentions of humanity, and those things are demonstrated in this movie. Clark would be no less a hero if he just joined the Smallville Volunteer Fire Dept, keeping a low profile, but still saving lives. I like the dynamic he has with the Kents in MoS and BvS: from a parent's POV, it's realistic, and I'm sure the parents of firemen, law enforcement, and military folks all around the world can sympathize. Although he's nigh-indestructible, he still shares many of the same vulnerabilities with us Earthlings, and I'm glad we see him leaning on Lois and his mom. It gives him common ground with the rest of us.

Edited by M'Kyuun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end when Batman makes a statement about living up to what Superman represents. No, no no AND no. Batman and Superman share a healthy respect for one another, if not an outright friendship. To the best of my knowledge Batman does not "look" up to or aspire to any lofty goals of what Superman represents for humanity.

I don't think they were at that point, yet.

(Spoiler-ish)

In the movie, they haven't really met so this conflict the 2 have from the comics over the past 25 years seems to fit that narrative. The respect they have for each other develops over time. In the Batman-Superman movie from the Timm-verse, Batman throws a unaware Superman because Superman disagrees with how Batman interrogates a suspect. Then by the Justice League cartoon, they're more candid with each other. In this movie, they're playing with that motif that the 2 are still at the point where they don't trust one another and this film is suppose be that point where they meet and learn to trust one another.

Bruce saw what Supes could be if he was unrestrained in MoS. That uneasy feeling he has leads to those Injustice-dreams and the Flash-cameo where Flash is telling Bats. The movie is saying, "At this time, Bats doesn't trust Supes. Here's the story where he learns that he can trust Superman."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what was with the superman nazis in the trailer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ M'kyuun

good point!

Maybe I just didn't like aquaman and cyborg's videos. Flash's was pretty cool. Do we know if this is Barry or Wally? He might be the one to lighten up the tone next movie. I did get excited to see other JL members.

Just watched the intv with zac about going into JL and he really wanted batman to form the group and needed superman out of the way for it.

http://collider.com/batman-v-superman-ending-justice-league/

so what was with the superman nazis in the trailer?

It looks like parademons helped capture batman, so superman must have been on darkseid's side ;) and humans chose who they want to align with.

Edited by Negotiator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I just didn't like aquaman and cyborg's videos. Flash's was pretty cool. Do we know if this is Barry or Wally? He might be the one to lighten up the tone next movie. I did get excited to see other JL members.

It will be Barry. And yes, Synder has mentioned "multiverse" in some of his interviews. It's also funny they mention that because an Atlantean is Jay Garrick's friend in The Flash-series. Take that as you will.

It looks like parademons helped capture batman, so superman must have been on darkseid's side ;) and humans chose who they want to align with.

It was also a subtle to the Injustice-Gods Among Us-video game. The troops in that game bear a resemblance to the troops in this movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

intv with zac about going into JL and he really wanted batman to form the group and needed superman out of the way for it.

And yes, Synder has mentioned "multiverse" in some of his interviews.

Further proof that Zac Snyder knows only superhero style and nothing at all about superhero substance.

A multiverse? Really? You can't even make the ONE good superhero movie, to say nothing of a universe, and you're thinking about a MULTIVERSE? Lord lord lord, what Warner Bros. continue to see in you is beyond me.

He could not have screwed up Batman and Superman more than he did here, in their eponymous film. I'm not even a FAN of DC and I could tell how badly Snyder fraked up.

Say what you will about Nolan's Batman, at least he understood that/why Batman DOES NOT KILL ARE YOU frakkING KIDDING ME ZAC YOU PUBESCENT CHILD.

He did such a thorough job that I don't want the sequels to be better. I want to see him direct the whole thing into the ground. Let's see this beautiful train wreck through to its whimpering, self-destructive conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The early returns for this weekend are estimated at $170million despite the bad publicity. Hopefully they learn from previous mistakes going forward with this franchise, because if those numbers are correct there's no stopping the upcoming projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Variety is reporting a possible drop off in the second week due to fairly lukewarm "cinema score" (not likely, though since overseas markets lap up these big budget CG spectacles up). How important is this score anyway? I doubt it ruined Bayformers from racking hundreds of millions...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said before it's estimated at 170 mill, so next weekend everyone who was on the fence will get that left out of the conversation feeling and a good number of those will check it out.

If I had free tickets I would watch it, but with all the talk so far, I can't justify paying to see it. That doesn't meen I'm not curios about it, and if I don't see it in theaters I'll either wait till video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen a lot of people on social media using that 170 mil gross as a barometer of the film's greatness, and that naysayers are elitists trolls :(

Sigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After watching it, I'm having a hard time understanding why reviewers were so critical about it. Sure, Superman still has problems with collateral damage and Batman's sanity went downhill the way Frank Miller intended (maybe just like Frank Miller himself ended up), but what the hell? My biggest problem was Jesse Eisenberg, who was probably the scrawniest Lex Luthor you could find in the .com era.

He should have been the "White Portuguese." :lol:

Edited by Einherjar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen a lot of people on social media using that 170 mil gross as a barometer of the film's greatness, and that naysayers are elitists trolls :(

Sigh.

The Transformers films have grossed 3.76 Billion dollars. THREE POINT SEVEN SIX BILLION DOLLARS.

Profitability does not equal quality.

Edited by anime52k8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Profitability does not equal quality.

How many people understand that small nugget of wisdom? That being said...

In one small sense, it does: Studio execs look at profitability as a measure of the quality/popularity of a property and decide to keep pumping out more and more crap... because movie audiences love lapping up crap.

Disclaimer: I'm in no way intimating that BvS is crap... will have to see it to make that personal assessment. My post is a general response to a general statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally got to see this film today. While it's not as bad as its Rotten Tomatoes rating, it's still a severely flawed film. Here are some of the issues I've noticed:

1. Multiple subplots. Perhaps the biggest problem with this film is the amount of subplots crammed in during the first 90 minutes. Many of them such as LexCorp's secret file seem forced while others such as LexCorp funding terrorists make no sense in the film. I mean, really? You send arms to African terrorists just to see how far Supes would go to save Lois?

2. Plot conveniences. Another issue is the amount of conveniences given to the protagonists. The most notable being the one thing that brings both Batman and Superman together: Martha. Yes, both Bats and Supes' mothers are named Martha. Also, DC needs to draw a definitive map of their cities, because having both Metropolis and Gotham City border each other is too much of a convenience.

3. Henry Cavill as Clark Kent. Until now, I'm still not sold on Cavill's performance as Supes' alter ego. While he's improving as Superman, his portrayal of Clark does not convince us that Supes and Clark are supposed to be two completely different people. He clashes with Perry White as frequently as Lois does. And his first confrontation with Bruce at the gala should've already raised a red flag for Bruce if it didn't already.

4. Jesse Eisenberg as Alex Luthor. For the rest of this rant, the character will be referred to as "Alex", as he's an insult to Lex Luthor. He's not the criminal genius that Gene Hackman was; instead, he comes off as a Jim Carrey impersonator. I don't know if it was intentional or not, but he blew his lines throughout the entire film. Oh yeah, that snot at the end - that'll leave a lasting impression.

5. Leatherback Jr. a.k.a. Doomsday. The film's portrayal of Doomsday is merely a ripoff of that one Kaiju from Pacific Rim that emits EMP shockwaves. I was expecting Gipsy Danger to jump in and empty the clip on him. No pulse.

6. The overall cinematography. Why on Earth is this film so visually dark? As with most of Zack Snyder's films, this one drowns in layers of sepia and soft tones that may easily trigger manic depression.

That being said, the first two acts will need at least two cans of energy drink. The third act will satisfy those who came in to watch a fight.

As for performances, Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman can't really be gauged here due to her rather minuscule screen time. Ben Affleck is a more intimidating Batman than Christian Bale, though he's overall just below Bale and Michael Keaton. But in the end, they all pale compared to Michael Shannon's phenomenal performance.

Prior to watching the film, I listened to the score by Hans Zimmer and Junkie XL. At first, I thought the score would drown the whole film, but it wasn't the case. There's still the Superman theme from Man of Steel and Wonder Woman's theme has shades of Tyler Bates' score from 300, but disappointingly, there's nothing remotely iconic about the themes used for Batman here.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice may be quite a misstep, but far from falling to the levels of Steel, Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, and Batman & Robin as one of the worst DC Superhero film ever made.

Edited by areaseven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, DC needs to draw a definitive map of their cities, because having both Metropolis and Gotham City border each other is too much of a convenience.

kind of makes sense to me actually, Metropolis and Gotham are supposed to be the nice and shitty neighborhoods of New York respectively so they might as well be physically right next to each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for ranking, here's how I see all of the DC movies:

Top DC Movies

1. Batman Begins (2005)

2. The Dark Knight (2008)

3. Superman (1978)

4. Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut (1980/2006)

5. The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

6. A History of Violence (2005)

7. Batman (1989)

8. Superman II (1980)

9. Batman Returns (1992)

10. Watchmen (2009)

11. V for Vendetta (2006)

12. Batman: The Movie (1966)

13. Batman Forever (1995)

14. Man of Steel (2013)

15. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

16. Superman Returns (2006)

17. Superman III (1983)

18. Green Lantern (2009)

19. Supergirl (1984)

20. Catwoman (2004)

21. Jonah Hex (2010)

22. Batman & Robin (1997)

23. Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987)

24. Steel (1997)

Best Batman

Christian Bale (The Dark Knight Trilogy)

Honorable Mention: Michael Keaton (Batman / Batman Returns)

Worst Batman

George Clooney (Batman & Robin)

Best Bruce Wayne

Michael Keaton (Batman / Batman Returns)

Honorable Mention: Christian Bale (The Dark Knight Trilogy)

Worst Bruce Wayne

George Clooney (Batman & Robin)

Best Alfred

Michael Caine (The Dark Knight Trilogy)

Honorable Mention: Jeremy Irons (The DC Extended Universe)

Worst Alfred

None

Best Batman Villain

Jack Nicholson as The Joker (Batman) (tie)

Heath Ledger as The Joker (The Dark Knight) (tie)

Honorable Mention: Liam Neeson as Henri Ducard/Ra's al Ghul (Batman Begins)

Worst Batman Villain

Jeep Swenson as Bane (Batman & Robin)

Best Superman

Christopher Reeve (Superman I-IV)

Worst Superman

Brandon Routh (Superman Returns)

Best Clark Kent

Christopher Reeve (Superman I-IV)

Worst Clark Kent

Henry Cavill (The DC Extended Universe)

Best Lois Lane

Margot Kidder (Superman I-IV)

Honorable Mention: Amy Adams (The DC Extended Universe)

Worst Lois Lane

Kate Bosworth (Superman Returns)

Best Lex Luthor

Gene Hackman (Superman I-IV)

Worst Lex Luthor

Jesse Eisenberg (The DC Extended Universe)

Best Superman Villain

Terence Stamp as General Zod (Superman I-II)

Worst Superman Villain

Mark Pillow (voiced by Gene Hackman) as Nuclear Man (Superman IV: The Quest for Peace)

Best non-Batman/Superman Hero

Jackie Earle Haley as Walter Kovacs / Rorschach (Watchmen)

Honorable Mention: Hugo Weaving as V (V for Vendetta)

Worst non-Batman/Superman Hero

Shaquille O'Neal as John Henry Irons/Steel (Steel)

Dishonorable Mention: Halle Berry as Patience Phillips/Catwoman (Catwoman)

Best non-Batman/Superman Villain

Matthew Goode as Adrian Veidt / Ozymandias (Watchmen)

Worst non-Batman/Superman Villain

Parallax (Green Lantern)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the people I work around have seen the movie and are all having excited conversations, but when I ask if I should spend the money on a ticket nobody gives me a yes or no answer. Instead I get "ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh".

I decide not to push for a yes or no, but instead have fun with watching face contortions.🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The early returns for this weekend are estimated at $170million despite the bad publicity. Hopefully they learn from previous mistakes going forward with this franchise, because if those numbers are correct there's no stopping the upcoming projects.

That's exactly the point, though. The films will male money no matter who you put at the helm. So why not put someone there who can actually direct a film? The built-in financial viability of these films will last for at least a while, so there's no harm in building some good PR in the meantime so that future projects can have easier paths to success. And eventually they won't be able to sell these on brand name alone, so they should be giving people a reason to support them after that security blanket is gone. That's partly why I still watch Marvel films despite a sense of superhero fatigue. I know they'll make for at least passingly good entertainment.

But really, the faith DC/WB has put in Snyder is mind-boggling. Yes, it survived Batman and Robin, but this movie is way, way beyond Batman and Robin. It's enough that I can safely say I won't watch another DC superhero movie again. Given what they did to this, I can only imagine what they're doing to Sandman, the one DC superhero film I WANT to see. (And with Joseph Gordon-Levitt leaving over creative differences, I can reason out what those differences were.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they were at that point, yet.

(Spoiler-ish)

In the movie, they haven't really met so this conflict the 2 have from the comics over the past 25 years seems to fit that narrative. The respect they have for each other develops over time. In the Batman-Superman movie from the Timm-verse, Batman throws a unaware Superman because Superman disagrees with how Batman interrogates a suspect. Then by the Justice League cartoon, they're more candid with each other. In this movie, they're playing with that motif that the 2 are still at the point where they don't trust one another and this film is suppose be that point where they meet and learn to trust one another.

Bruce saw what Supes could be if he was unrestrained in MoS. That uneasy feeling he has leads to those Injustice-dreams and the Flash-cameo where Flash is telling Bats. The movie is saying, "At this time, Bats doesn't trust Supes. Here's the story where he learns that he can trust Superman."

My issue isn't with them forming that relationship, it's with

Batman has, to the best of my knowledge, never been in awe of Superman. Especially not to the point where he's saying that he (Batman) needs to do better to live up to what Superman represents for the betterment of humanity. Now maybe he did during the Death of Superman storyline, but I didn't read those books.

But I agree, it will, or damn well better, develop over time. That's such a huge part of *who they are as characters.

-b.

*edit

Edited by Kanedas Bike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, just watched the movie, and I'd give it a solid "meh". It has good moments, but it can't seem to decide whether to over-explain everything for an audience that doesn't read comic books, or load it with comic references that not many people (even some legitimate comic nerds) are going to get.

However, whatever I feel about Zack Snyder, he is in a rather unenviable position. The Nolan trilogy attempted to make a series of Batman movies that were just great movies, and he didn't have to care about how his take would fit in a DC universe. BVS is coming after the audience has realized that it is possible to have a superhero film that also happens to just be a good film - but now that DC realizes that there is money to be made hand over fist this movie has to be a big screen comic-book that sets up a franchise - that's too much happening in one film for even a great director to juggle in a compressed time. Much less a guy that paints a great, dark, stylized image, but doesn't seem to know what to do with the story it's depicting.

Honestly though - I think simply having a warm, smiling, "human" superman would have gone a long way - he can still be darker, he can still be doubt-ridden and complicated, but it seems like Snyder is trying to turn Superman and Lex Luthor into Batman and Joker. I don't think it's a spoiler to say that this superman poses and broods when he rescues someone (and we don't even see him do that enough) whereas Christopher Reeve's version comforted and cheered the people he rescued - it felt like he did it because he enjoyed it and because he cared, not because it was a burden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, just watched the movie, and I'd give it a solid "meh". It has good moments, but it can't seem to decide whether to over-explain everything for an audience that doesn't read comic books, or load it with comic references that not many people (even some legitimate comic nerds) are going to get.

However, whatever I feel about Zack Snyder, he is in a rather unenviable position. The Nolan trilogy attempted to make a series of Batman movies that were just great movies, and he didn't have to care about how his take would fit in a DC universe. BVS is coming after the audience has realized that it is possible to have a superhero film that also happens to just be a good film - but now that DC realizes that there is money to be made hand over fist this movie has to be a big screen comic-book that sets up a franchise - that's too much happening in one film for even a great director to juggle in a compressed time. Much less a guy that paints a great, dark, stylized image, but doesn't seem to know what to do with the story it's depicting.

Honestly though - I think simply having a warm, smiling, "human" superman would have gone a long way - he can still be darker, he can still be doubt-ridden and complicated, but it seems like Snyder is trying to turn Superman and Lex Luthor into Batman and Joker. I don't think it's a spoiler to say that this superman poses and broods when he rescues someone (and we don't even see him do that enough) whereas Christopher Reeve's version comforted and cheered the people he rescued - it felt like he did it because he enjoyed it and because he cared, not because it was a burden.

Indeed.

My tolerance for movies in general is pretty high, and that includes Dawn of Justice, but they (Snyder, Goyer, whoever) are missing very important character traits for both Superman and Batman.

Wonder Woman was handled just fine for the amount of screen time she was given and Lex isn't as bad as people are saying, but he's not as charismatic as would have been appropriate - had they copied the animated Lex it would have been awesome. But his mix of crazy, genius, charisma and manipulation is slanted a little too much towards the crazy side.

IMO

There's still time for DC to right their ship, no need to copy Marvel - just hit on what makes these characters icons to begin with. It really should be easy at this point but the filmmakers are making it look so difficult.

-b.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't understand Snyder's obsession with

turning Supes into a Jesus allegory. That deleted scene only (incomprehensibly and unnecessarily) adds to it. Is that thing supposed to be something comics fans would recognize? (I didn't get the Injustice reference in the middle of the movie, either. Had to have that one explained to me afterwards.)

also doomsday lol

EDIT:

Wonder Woman was handled just fine for the amount of screen time she was given

I agree. I wonder how much of that is directly BECAUSE of the little amount of screen time she was given. I suspect that, were this instead envisioned as her origin story, she would be as insufferable as all the other characters (through no fault of their own).

Edited by kajnrig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly though - I think simply having a warm, smiling, "human" superman would have gone a long way - he can still be darker, he can still be doubt-ridden and complicated, but it seems like Snyder is trying to turn Superman and Lex Luthor into Batman and Joker. I don't think it's a spoiler to say that this superman poses and broods when he rescues someone (and we don't even see him do that enough) whereas Christopher Reeve's version comforted and cheered the people he rescued - it felt like he did it because he enjoyed it and because he cared, not because it was a burden.

I'd have to agree with the above. And personally I find this MoS/BvS version of Superman as rather unlikeable. Which is sad because I should be rooting hard for Superman.

I almost wanted Batman to finish him with the Krytonite spear. Perhaps the reborn version of Superman will be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't understand Snyder's obsession with turning Supes into a Jesus allegory.

Not really Snyder's fault, but many people can't talk about Supes without bringing up religion. After all, the whole issue of Supes being a Christ figure practically started with the 1978 film. Go back further into the original comic books and you'll see a lot of Judaism references such as Kal-El being based on the Hebrew word for "Voice of God".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Christopher Reeves Version of Superman would never work within the context of the events from Man of Steel and our modern sensibilities. Cavil's superman is still coming to terms with his role in the world. Martha's talk on his role and the internal monologue that he has both elaborate on this. A smiling and grinning Superman would register as phony and delusional within a world that both Marvel's at his presence at the same time fears him. Clark is learning on the fly how to navigate those tricky waters. Jonathan Kent warned him that the world might not be ready for his presence and his demeanor echoes that same caution. He is also still learning who is worthy of his trust. The congressional hearing sequence is such a great scene, because he comes into it with a Silver age (innocence frame of mind) and it blows up in his face for that lack of sophistication/caution. Reeves silver age portrayal was right for a silver age. We live in a modern age where moviegoers are more sophisticated and are more skeptical of those in power. We've learned to be distrustful of people in power that come across as holier than thou due too many instances of abuse of power.

Of all of the iconic comic characters, Superman has always struggled with the average reader in being relatable. Its difficult to relate to a perfect god. Having a version of the character that is still finding his way in the world makes him more accessible to most moviegoers and comic readers. He doesn't have all of the answers so his more human and less godlike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wall of griping, so feel free to skip if you like. Responses to areaseven and Golden Arms herein.

Not really Snyder's fault, but many people can't talk about Supes without bringing up religion. After all, the whole issue of Supes being a Christ figure practically started with the 1978 film. Go back further into the original comic books and you'll see a lot of Judaism references such as Kal-El being based on the Hebrew word for "Voice of God".

Really? Well, that's... interesting is one word. Unoriginal is another. The Supes = Jesus thing, not the Kal-el = "voice of God" thing, that's neat.

Of all of the iconic comic characters, Superman has always struggled with the average reader in being relatable. Its difficult to relate to a perfect god.

Having a version of the character that is still finding his way in the world makes him more accessible to most moviegoers and comic readers.

Superman isn't a perfect god. He's Good. Capital-G Good. A perfect god can't be defeated, can't be overcome, can't in any way be thwarted. Good can.

(Perhaps you'd endorse Neil Gaiman taking a swing at the next Superman movie. I certainly would. He went into his Sandman series with the precise goal of making readers relate to a perfect god. He had also heard, in the late 80s-early 90s, the shtick that Superman isn't relatable, and so he sought out to make an omnipotent, omniscient being who was relatable. And that's partly how the Sandman comics as we know them developed.)

Is modern Superman more accessible? I don't think so. He's still just as alien (pun intended) as he always was, still as unattainable. Now he's just perpetually joyless, too. He does not enjoy saving people. He doesn't like the thing that he volunteers to do. And what's more, he has neither a reason to do so in the first place nor a reason stopping him from hanging up his cape and living the rest of his life in anonymity. His Uncle Ben never gave him a character-defining lesson in altruism. Quite the opposite, in fact. And it was a sentiment shared by his Aunt May, no less. His parental figures have done all they can to teach him that the world is not worth saving, and yet he--no, the STORY acts as if they said the exact opposite.

One could argue that he does what he does because of an innate sense of righteousness, and one would hit upon a revelation: THAT'S the story here. THAT'S this Superman's relatability factor: a rejection of his mother and father in favor of paving his own way in the world with his own principles.

But as it is, he's just... nothing. He's a character waiting to happen, ironically more unrelatable now than he ever was during the 70s-80s.

EDIT:

A thought comes to mind. You know what DID do Christ imagery really well? Spider-Man 2. Remember when Spider-Man finally stops the train and saves everybody and they do that really cheesy bit with carrying him into the train? Yeah. That's exactly the amount of Jesus allegory that Superman needs. Heck, that's exactly the MOVIE that Superman needs. A Superman in the style of the first Spider-Man (and/or the second) would have made for a great, great movie.

Edited by kajnrig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's exactly the point, though. The films will male money no matter who you put at the helm. So why not put someone there who can actually direct a film? The built-in financial viability of these films will last for at least a while, so there's no harm in building some good PR in the meantime so that future projects can have easier paths to success. And eventually they won't be able to sell these on brand name alone, so they should be giving people a reason to support them after that security blanket is gone. That's partly why I still watch Marvel films despite a sense of superhero fatigue. I know they'll make for at least passingly good entertainment.

But really, the faith DC/WB has put in Snyder is mind-boggling. Yes, it survived Batman and Robin, but this movie is way, way beyond Batman and Robin. It's enough that I can safely say I won't watch another DC superhero movie again. Given what they did to this, I can only imagine what they're doing to Sandman, the one DC superhero film I WANT to see. (And with Joseph Gordon-Levitt leaving over creative differences, I can reason out what those differences were.)

Didn't they cancel the sandman movie saying it couldn't be filmed recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't they cancel the sandman movie saying it couldn't be filmed recently.

I don't know anything about that. The last I heard was just that Gordon-Levitt was leaving. It's possible and probable that they did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that no one here has mentioned how Batfleck's version of Bruce Wayne is the most involved in his day job. In comparison, Michael Keaton and George Clooney never stepped foot in their own corporate offices while Val Kilmer only visited one of his labs where Jim Carrey worked and Christian Bale spent his office time dozing off. For this one, Batfleck actually cares about all of his employees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...