He did it again in Superman 2: The Donner Cut!
DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
He did it again in Superman 2: The Donner Cut!
One of the few good parts of that movie.
And more recent portrayals of the character, keeping Batman constantly in moviegoing audience's minds for decades. When Man of Steel came out, there'd only been one live-action Superman movie in the previous 26 years, and that was basically a very expensive fan film for the earlier movies. So there were fresher and more abundant images of Batman to parody.
Anyway, I wouldn't call BvS's Batman a deconstruction -- merely a superficial copy of Frank Miller's deconstruction.
It's basically a 3-part story -- Krypton, Smallville, Metropolis -- in which each part has its own distinct style and tone. Anyway, I agree that it's a flawed film storywise. It's torn between the legacy of Silver Age goofiness and the attempt to embrace verisimilitude, so it can't quite make up its mind about its own identity.
But the FX work was pretty impressive for its day, with some innovative tech used for the flying sequences. (Mainly a front projection system called Zoptic. They couldn't use standard bluescreen mattes because Superman's costume is blue. They tried to get around that in Superman IV by putting him in a different-colored costume and using color filters to make it look blue, I think, but that had the effect of turning the yellow parts white.)
(Granted, the Bible's kinda like that too... Man, this space-Jesus allegory really does write itself!)
The Bible is more of an anthology than a novel anyway...
Ugh, you just reminded me of how terribly written Kidder's Lois was. What Superman saw in that nutbag stalker I'll never know.
...but its not realistic. Having the villain go to jail or always survive cuts half of reality away from storytelling potential, because there's no getting away from it: sometimes villains leave no other choice than to be killed. In Return of the Jedi, Vader did not just attempt to stop Palpatine (from electrocuting Luke) by using whatever power he had left to just hurt him enough to subdue him. He could have called Luke's lightsaber to him and cut off Palpatine's arms. He did not exercise any other option save for the one that was necessary--a finishing (killing) move to end the problem forever.
In Infinity War, despite Thor not getting it right (sequels, folks!), he did attempt to kill Thanos, not reason with him, or assume there would a way to subdue him. No matter how Endgame tries to work out the defeat of Thanos, in the film in question, Thor saw only one way to deal with him, which was the right approach. Life does not always give characters pleasant options. Its not pretty, or welcome, but it is necessary form time to time.
This is another problem with Snyder's comments. He seems to think he's saying something insightful, but he's just rehashing an old argument that the comics have been refuting for ages. Heck, it's been 18 years since "What's So Funny About Truth, Justice, and the American Way?" was published. They're far ahead of him.
The Vulture was a good example of someone who was much more a villain than a supervillain although there was still some sense of course he'll escape and be back not too much later.
TDK was pretty weird in that the Joker openly proclaims he will return but Batman thinks he won't, jail will hold him, and then the sequel doesn't mention him-other than therefore implying he wasn't a problem for the 8 years (most viewers knowing and accepting the character wasn't mentioned because of Nolan being respectful to the late Ledger). Maybe I'm projecting but are Loki and/or Thor really that popular? IMO Loki being so recurring does take away from both characters.
Necessary does not mean preferable. I simply stated my own personal preference-that is all. I am quite aware of the necessity, both from a storytelling and real life perspective. Please do not conflate my personal preference as disapproval.
Of COURSE there are SOME times when it needs to happen.
But as a fan of Black Lightning, you know how great it is when the hero does NOT kill, especially one who has a personal belief to NOT kill. It made the season finale of BL good for me (though the battle itself felt a little lacking), as Jefferson was especially able to teach Jennifer .
Now, they of course set it up so Tobias WILL return...but it is also set up so that if the actor suddenly gets a lot of gigs (and he deserves to), he COULD leave.. and we have that "happy" ending NOT resulting in death (which for me is, pardon the pun, overkill, as it seems like the ONLY solution to fighting a villain, in most movies these days).
This also depends on the hero,and the medium . Killing someone by a hero who has a belief NOT to, would be best served in a TV show, where the emotional and other consequences can be explored.
But a hero like WOlverine… killing the bad guy is "appropriate" whereas for others (like many of the DC superheroes), not so much (hence our continual outrage.
Daredevil the show or movie?
The Marvel heroes have been killing people going all the way back to Iron Man.
The conversation is specifically about movies, so...
Yeah, I find it ironic that the supposedly "darker" Netflix Marvel heroes have more of a code against killing than the "lighter" movie characters. Although it's good that more recent leads like Ant-Man and Doctor Strange have expressly stated policies against killing, while Spider-Man even goes out of his way to save his enemy.
Hiddleston's Loki is quite popular and has his very own fanbase.
The other good part is the whole rest of the movie.
Agreed in that Loki is annoying, but he's a borderline conflicted villain people love to hate. In Iron Man's case, as a comic character, his last period of consistently strong storytelling was the 1980s, so the movie adaptation catching on wit 2008 audiences was certainly unexpected.
Now, if someone ever asked who is the most loved MCU character, Loki and Iron Man would not make that list, or at least not the top spot.
Pre-Black Panther and talking about the general audience, rather than comics fans, I think its pretty much a lock that Iron Man would be the top spot and Loki would at the very least give Cap a run for second place (though it's sometimes hard to tell how much of Loki's ominpresence is a genuine broad fanbase and how much is your typical internet obsessive 'he's so hawt' fan cult). Loki's fan base is a much 'bad boy anti-hero' based as it is 'villain you love to hate' based, and Downey's performance topped almost every list I saw of people's favorite parts of the MCU in phase 1 and 2.
Jai Courtney's Captain Boomerang will return in James Gunn's Suicide Squad movie!
So, sequel, soft reboot, hard reboot, seems like the Semantic Wars will continue.
So, sequel, soft reboot, hard reboot, seems like the Semantic Wars will continue.