Michael B. Jordan as the Man Of Steel?

[TREK_GOD_1]

Sorry, I know there is a nostalgia for Batman 89, but I saw this in the theatres. Although I've grown to appreciate its positive qualities over time the worst thing about the movie for me was easily Keaton. He didn't look or act like he was capable of changing a tire, let alone being Batman.His Batsuit was horrible, designed to compensate for the actor's physical stature, that created a type of Batman that relied heavily on technology rather than his innate physiology. As Bruce Wayne, Keaton just missed the mark as well.

Well observed.

You have Burton to thank for that horrible miscasting. I recall the 1989 NBC interview where he said he wanted Batman to be (in his words) a "techno-geek" instead of (again, in his words) the "square-jawed hero." Wrong for Batman from the start. As is the norm for most Burton films, his own insecurities/obsessions were dumped on the polar opposite of the kinds of weird and/or misfit characters that populate his movies.
Casting a short, blading, unathletic, and gravely voiced comedic actor to play one of the greatest and most physically defined (and occasionally dashing) superheroes ever created was bull, and beyond disappointing. Val Kilmer has ever been my cup of tea, but he made a superior Wayne/Batman--by leaps and bounds--over the dumpy mess that was Keaton.

Thankfully no one will ever go in that direction for a Batman movie ever again.

 

[BillJ]

Sorry, I know there is a nostalgia for Batman 89, but I saw this in the theatres.

I was there too. Enjoyed the film quite a bit, and have every time I've rewatched it over the last thirty years. Damn, has it really been thirty years?

Thankfully no one will ever go in that direction for a Batman movie ever again.

Yep. Now all we get is the dour, constipated Batman. They've definitely sucked the fun out of the character since Batman Begins.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I

Yep. Now all we get is the dour, constipated Batman. They've definitely sucked the fun out of the character since Batman Begins.

Batman is serious, not a short, blading clown, and was never meant to be that, which is why the character had his greatest movie adaptations in this century, as opposed to the mess that Burton's Batman.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Jordan’s Johnny was one of the better parts of the film.

 

[gblews]

It doesn't have to have anything to do with racism, some of us are just traditionalists. Heck, I was pissed when the new Galactica changed Col. Tigh to a white guy, and that's a muuuuch lesser 'established" character than Supes or Bond.

When you hold out that a fictional character whose race is inconsequential and irrelevant to the character's identity must forever be presented as the race in which the character was originally presented, that is most certainly racism whether you choose to call it "traditionalism" or whatever.

The results of that kind of thinking are the same as the results from simply announcing that "none but white actors will ever play Superman." Would anyone doubt that THAT was racism? Yet that is what you are advocating whether you use the aforementioned language or call it "traditionalism."

 

[Awesome Possum]

Batman is serious, not a short, blading clown, and was never meant to be that, which is why the character had his greatest movie adaptations in this century, as opposed to the mess that Burton's Batman.

TAS, which had a movie, was better and truer to the character than any live-action attempt. The Dark Knight trilogy is a pale imitation of it and Snyder's garbage is the absolute worst. There's more to the character than physical build. He does have a character beyond the muscles and gadgets.

 

[theenglish]

I agree about TAS. I am looking forward to the new Batman film, hoping that it actually shows us Detective Batman for a change.

I would also love this version of Superman to go forward. Using the established alternate Earth character is the perfect way to introduce the character, setting up a possible future crossover with the Earth 1 character. Thinking about the discussion about whether his skin color should play a role in the story, it will regardless of how the story is written. It all depends on whether it will be dealt with overtly in the script. That is, a world where Superman's race is not an issue becomes as much a political statement as if it were the focus point of the story.

 

[Awesome Possum]

None of the live-action movies really captured Batman's heart. Deep down he is that child who lost his parents in an alley. He knows that pain and doesn't want anyone else to have to experience it.

 

[Gov Kodos]

I was there too. Enjoyed the film quite a bit, and have every time I've rewatched it over the last thirty years. Damn, has it really been thirty years?



Yep. Now all we get is the dour, constipated Batman. They've definitely sucked the fun out of the character since Batman Begins.

Really, you have Miller's The Dark Knight Returns to truly thank for the fun sucking Grim Bat.

 

[The Realist]

Really, you have Miller's The Dark Knight Returns to truly thank for the fun sucking Grim Bat.

Probably true. Now mind you, TDKR is a masterpiece, but DC took all the wrong lessons from its success, doubling and tripling down on GRIMDARK Batman. Which is the most superficial reading of TDKR, ignoring its uniquely mythic essence, its sly humor ("Watch ... watch your language, son"), and the fact that not every comic book writer (or movie scenarist) is Frank Miller in his prime.

 

[Gov Kodos]

Probably true. Now mind you, TDKR is a masterpiece, but DC took all the wrong lessons from its success, doubling and tripling down on GRIMDARK Batman. Which is the most superficial reading of TDKR, ignoring its uniquely mythic essence, its sly humor ("Watch ... watch your language, son"), and the fact that not every comic book writer (or movie scenarist) is Frank Miller in his prime.

That's a good summation of things. As to Burton's Batman, Keaton made me a believer after being skeptical of a comedian playing Batman.

 

[Forbin]

When you hold out that a fictional character whose race is inconsequential and irrelevant to the character's identity must forever be presented as the race in which the character was originally presented, that is most certainly racism whether you choose to call it "traditionalism" or whatever.

The results of that kind of thinking are the same as the results from simply announcing that "none but white actors will ever play Superman." Would anyone doubt that THAT was racism? Yet that is what you are advocating whether you use the aforementioned language or call it "traditionalism."

So you'd think me racist for being upset that Col Tigh was changed from a black actor in the original BSG to a white actor in the new BSG?

 

[BillJ]

So you'd think me racist for being upset that Col Tigh was changed from a black actor in the original BSG to a white actor in the new BSG?

You weren't upset that they turned him into a drunk with a floozy of a wife? What about tradition?

 

[Professor Zoom]

Batman is serious, not a short, blading clown, and was never meant to be that, which is why the character had his greatest movie adaptations in this century, as opposed to the mess that Burton's Batman.

Adam West has one word for you: Pow.

 

[ichab]

So you'd think me racist for being upset that Col Tigh was changed from a black actor in the original BSG to a white actor in the new BSG?

No kidding..I suppose recasting Lavendar Brown in The Half Blood Prince as a white woman after she had already been played by a black actress in Prisoner of Azkhaban is perfectly fine since it was never specifically stated in the book what her color was. While we are at it, let's remake Shaft with a hispanic or Japanese guy. There's no rule that says it HAS to be played by a black actor right?. Get real.

 

[Awesome Possum]

No kidding..I suppose recasting Lavendar Brown in The Half Blood Prince as a white woman after she had already been played by a black actress in Prisoner of Azkhaban is perfectly fine since it was never specifically stated in the book what her color was. While we are at it, let's remake Shaft with a hispanic or Japanese guy. There's no rule that says it HAS to be played by a black actor right?. Get real.

Lavender Brown and Col. Tigh aren’t iconic characters beloved for generations, they’re barely even characters in the source material. Changing their race doesn’t really matter, although it is still kind of shitty. BSG at least had a fairly diverse cast and changed the races and genders of multiple legacy characters and created new ones.

But getting upset over the idea of a black Superman is racist no matter how you try to frame or justify it. Superman is an alien who was raised on Earth, he could be any race and it would make almost no change in the mythos. Same goes for a lot of other superheroes like Spider-Man for example. He’s just some kid from Queens who lives with his aunt. There are very few characters who could be argued as being justified in being white like Steve Rogers as Captain America due to the era of his origin being racist and maybe Batman assuming you’re going for the idea that the Waynes are old money with a long history. But even then the right story could change that with little change to who they are at their core.

 

[UssGlenn]

The key element to Superman's backstory is his small town Kansas farm upbringing. That's a state that even today is 83% white. A Superman that has to deal with racial discrimination in his childhood is an interesting concept, and probably a story one worth telling, but lets not pretend it's not an entirely different approach to the character.

 

[Awesome Possum]

The key element to Superman's backstory is his small town Kansas farm upbringing. That's a state that even today is 83% white. A Superman that has to deal with racial discrimination in his childhood is an interesting concept, and probably a story one worth telling, but lets not pretend it's not an entirely different approach to the character.

A child growing up at the turn of century when he would have when created would be very different than a child who grew up in the 80s/90s as he would today.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The key element to Superman's backstory is his small town Kansas farm upbringing. That's a state that even today is 83% white. A Superman that has to deal with racial discrimination in his childhood is an interesting concept, and probably a story one worth telling, but lets not pretend it's not an entirely different approach to the character.

The Kansas thing is a rather late addition to the mythos. Smallville can and has been in many locations.
"Today's" Superman would be a child of 1990s. A man who came of age at the start of the Obama administration.

 

[ichab]

Lavender Brown and Col. Tigh aren’t iconic characters beloved for generations, they’re barely even characters in the source material.

And? Why does it have to be iconic characters that are race swapped? Also curious why you didn't mention Shaft. That is a pretty iconic character. I wonder why?

Changing their race doesn’t really matter, although it is still kind of shitty. BSG at least had a fairly diverse cast and changed the races and genders of multiple legacy characters and created new ones.

But why change them at all?If it already had a diverse cast,what purpose are you serving?

But getting upset over the idea of a black Superman is racist no matter how you try to frame or justify it.

First, I'm not upset. Not sure where you got that from.We were having a civilized discussion with no malice of any kind towards one another. Something that you clearly struggle with.

Second, saying that a character who has been depicted as white for the entire 70 years of his existence should stay white is not racist. Saying that a character who was specifically depicted in novels as resembling white people should stay white is not racist. If you want a black person with superman powers, no big deal. You could easily say that Jor-El wasn't the only parent on Krypton who sent his children off world. Problem solved. If you want a non white character as cool as James Bond, showcase other MI6 agents. Again, simple. There is no reason to change a character to that degree just for diversity sake. It doesn't accomplish anything except alienating that franchise's base and it hurts the movie before it has been released.