Justice League official "Zack Snyder" cut on HBO Max

[DigificWriter]

Can you give some specifics?

* Inherent altruism: We see from the Arrowverse Superman's appearances that he is driven by an inherent inclination towards helping people, which is a quality that the DCEU Superman shares as well

* Nurture-driven compassion and moral certitude: A large part of Superman's character in general is the compassion and sense of moral certitude that Jonathan and Martha Kent instilled in him, which is one of the qualities that absolutely drives the characterization and actions of both the Arrowverse and DCEU iterations of the character

* Great power and great responsibility: This is more prominently a hallmark of the DCEU Superman, but one of the things that absolutely defines Superman is his belief that he must do something beneficial with the gifts he's been given. This is the one area where the Arrowverse and DCEU versions of the character slightly diverge in that the DCEU version of the character tried to suppress this belief for a time, but ultimately embraced it (which actually gives him something in common with the Arrowverse's version of Supergirl, who went on a similar 'hero's journey')

In every iteration of the character prior to Man of Steel, the manner in which these defining characteristics manifested themselves felt alienating, bland, and uninteresting because there wasn't any real dimension to them; Man of Steel added that dimension, and the Arrowverse followed suit with its version of the character, largely by initially setting his characterization up in relation to the characterization of his cousin, Supergirl

 

[theenglish]

I like those reasons. Despite my Witcher joke, I very much like Cavill in the role and, in many ways, Man of Steel portrayed a Superman similar to what we've had in the comics for decades now. My problems with both his Snyder movies had nothing to do with the way the character was written or portrayed. Hell, even Save Martha!, would have worked if we had seen more of Clark/Superman investigating and psychologically profiling Batman/Bruce Wayne prior to that scene.

 

[The Realist]

In every iteration of the character prior to Man of Steel, the manner in which these defining characteristics manifested themselves felt alienating, bland, and uninteresting because there wasn't any real dimension to them

Again, how much acquaintance do you actually have with earlier iterations of the character? If it's more than I think, then you're entitled to this opinion, however much I disagree with it. If it's as limited as I believe, you're just parroting talking points by Snyder and his adherents, that Snyderman is somehow more dimensional than previous versions (spoiler: he isn't, just more frowny and joyless).

 

[theenglish]

Again, how much acquaintance do you actually have with earlier iterations of the character? If it's more than I think, then you're entitled to this opinion, however much I disagree with it. If it's as limited as I believe, you're just parroting talking points by Snyder and his adherents, that Synderman is somehow more dimensional than previous versions (spoiler: he isn't, just more frowny and joyless).

To be fair, those are his opinions--he can feel that Routh, Reeve, Reeves and whoever else are bland and uninteresting. I don't have to feel that way and neither do you. I just asked him to give some specific examples to defend his opinion and he gave some good ones, which is more than a lot of people do when asked that question.

 

[The Realist]

To be fair, those are his opinions--he can feel that Routh, Reeve, Reeves and whoever else are bland and uninteresting. I don't have to feel that way and neither do you.

And I said as much -- read my second sentence again. But if I'm not mistaken, he's said in the past that Man of Steel was his introduction to Superman, and that he's seen little of prior versions. If I'm right about that, and if that's still the case, I'm not sure how he can keep claiming Snyderman represents a revolutionary improvement, compared to earlier portrayals he hasn't seen.

 

[DigificWriter]

Yes, my observations on the DCEU Superman can be classified as opinions, but they are not mine alone and are backed up by individuals who are far more experienced with Superman as a character, including a member (or former member) of this board, @Enterpriserules.

Also, a point of clarification: Man of Steel was not my first exposure to the character of Superman and I do not believe that I have ever represented it as being such, as I had previously watched Superman Returns, portions of Smallville, much of Lois and Clark, and much of Superman The Animated Series, and once owned a trading card set representing the comic storyline(s) The Death and Return of Superman.

What MoS did do for me was to make me a fan of the character in a way that those earlier associations with him had not by, as I have noted, making him feel relatable and three-dimensional, thus allowing me to connect with him in a way that I previously hadn't.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Batman 1989 is a very good Batman movie directed by Tim Burton. Batman Returns is a very good Tim Burton movie that happens to occasionally have Batman in it.

To paraphrase Agent Coulson, "people tend to confuse the words 'different' and 'bad'".

The DCEU films handled by Snyder are equally as valid as anything else, and, contrary to 'popular opinion', do actually treat their characters with respect... particularly Superman, who was the blandest of bland characters before Snyder and David S. Goyer treated him like an actual person with Man of Steel

At long last, in the Snyder Superman there is a character who acts like an alien would trying to find himself in a world of aliens (from his perspective), and help out of the goodness of his heart without overstepping boundaries or wanting anyone looking at him as a false god (which fueled DCEU Luthor's hatred). That is how a Superman should be presented, not that grinning uncle / camp counselor of decades past which made him one of the most unbelievable, lifeless comic characters in print--until DC realized he needed to be treated as a fleshed out person, not "Grinning Daddy at the Park" which the most diehard of DC comic readers eventually dismissed. Unfortunately, several adaptations failed to learn DC's lesson and unearthed that Weisinger influenced nonsense--but that has been wiped away, thankfully.

* Inherent altruism: We see from the Arrowverse Superman's appearances that he is driven by an inherent inclination towards helping people, which is a quality that the DCEU Superman shares as well

* Nurture-driven compassion and moral certitude: A large part of Superman's character in general is the compassion and sense of moral certitude that Jonathan and Martha Kent instilled in him, which is one of the qualities that absolutely drives the characterization and actions of both the Arrowverse and DCEU iterations of the character

This is so clearly presented in Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice.He has learn those lessons, but realize there's a potential cost to it all (in how humans view him). That kind of logical, relaistic portrayal is not possible if he was that "Grinning Daddy at the Park" out of the gates for no reason at all--like other live action Superman adaptations.

* Great power and great responsibility: This is more prominently a hallmark of the DCEU Superman, but one of the things that absolutely defines Superman is his belief that he must do something beneficial with the gifts he's been given.

Very solid point.

In every iteration of the character prior to Man of Steel, the manner in which these defining characteristics manifested themselves felt alienating, bland, and uninteresting because there wasn't any real dimension to them; Man of Steel added that dimension

...and more than justified why he (in Dawn of Justice) would see Batman as a violent terrorist who forces his "authority" and resources on the public rather than a crimefighter answering a need, but through a belief in fair-mindedness. Clark had to learn what power and responsibility meant through trial and error--and how to understand that he was not free to wield power on those who did not ask him to do so. Again, a strong Superman characterization does not come out the gates as some ridiculous, lauded daddy-protector, but one who is always aware that he has a place in the world, one where he cannot act on whims, but with the lives and will of people as a priority.

 

[DigificWriter]

My favorite aspect of BvS' story is one that so many critics glossed over in their headlong flip-flopping of opinion on the film: Clark indulges a single moment of selfishness (trying to rescue Lois first and foremost), and it costs him and the human world significantly.

The fact that Lex is aware enough of how Clark would react to Lois being in danger to be able to use it as a key cog in his plan to set up the showdown between him (Clark) and Bruce is one of the things that I love most about the DCEU version of the character and is a direct rebuttal of the notion that he's too much like The Joker.

 

[The Realist]

Also, a point of clarification: Man of Steel was not my first exposure to the character of Superman and I do not believe that I have ever represented it as being such, as I had previously watched Superman Returns, portions of Smallville, much of Lois and Clark, and much of Superman The Animated Series, and once owned a trading card set representing the comic storyline(s) The Death and Return of Superman.

I stand corrected. That's still a very limited acquaintance with the character's decades of screen history -- and not having seen Superman '78, in particular, is a HUGE hole in your knowledge of that history -- but it's more than I remembered.

... grinning uncle / camp counselor ... "Grinning Daddy at the Park" ... "Grinning Daddy at the Park" ... daddy-protector ...

As Ovation might say: Yawn.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

As Ovation might say: Yawn.

Yes, yawn to people who are so triggered by an individual's right to his opinion, yet hypocritically post their own (flames included) about this subject over and over again.

 

[Enterpriserules]

Yes, my observations on the DCEU Superman can be classified as opinions, but they are not mine alone and are backed up by individuals who are far more experienced with Superman as a character, including a member (or former member) of this board, @Enterpriserules.

Also, a point of clarification: Man of Steel was not my first exposure to the character of Superman and I do not believe that I have ever represented it as being such, as I had previously watched Superman Returns, portions of Smallville, much of Lois and Clark, and much of Superman The Animated Series, and once owned a trading card set representing the comic storyline(s) The Death and Return of Superman.

What MoS did do for me was to make me a fan of the character in a way that those earlier associations with him had not by, as I have noted, making him feel relatable and three-dimensional, thus allowing me to connect with him in a way that I previously hadn't.

Thanks for the shout out! I did a whole episode of The 602 Club on Superman and we talked at length about the DCEU version and why he works but what people might not respond to him.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

In every iteration of the character prior to Man of Steel, the manner in which these defining characteristics manifested themselves felt alienating, bland, and uninteresting because there wasn't any real dimension to them; Man of Steel added that dimension

That's a subjective opinion and one that I disagree with. But then, I'm less interested in Superman as an emotional character. For me, the key component is holding up Superman as a piece of wish fulfillment. In the real world, we don't have a superpowered being who can save everyone. For me, the joy of a Superman story comes from seeing a world where there is someone out that who can save everyone. The failure of Man of Steel is that, despite Superman's best efforts, a huge portion of Metropolis has been reduced to a fine powder, with a likely death toll in the hundreds of thousands. And yet this is the big win at the end?

That's not to say that there can't be a Superman with emotional depth. To their credit, Man of Steel & Batman v. Superman do provide that. But that's a secondary concern, IMO. Superman Returns gave us a Superman who had emotional depth and saved everyone. The Christopher Reeve movies don't have a lot of emotional depth (and what little there is doesn't make much sense) but that's mostly a function of how those movies are structured, with a larger emphasis on comedy shtick from Lex Luthor's gang or the more bumbling Clark Kent alter ego.

My favorite aspect of BvS' story is one that so many critics glossed over in their headlong flip-flopping of opinion on the film: Clark indulges a single moment of selfishness (trying to rescue Lois first and foremost), and it costs him and the human world significantly.

Which never totally made sense to me. So a tinpot African dictatorship can't get its shit together. How is that Superman's fault?

not having seen Superman '78, in particular, is a HUGE hole in your knowledge of that history

Agreed. I doubt that it would change his opinion. But given how definitive the 1978 movie is to so many people, it's nearly impossible to talk about Superman on film without some first-hand familiarity with it.

 

[The Realist]

^ Agreed with most of that, but can't concur that the "Christopher Reeve movies don't have a lot of emotional depth." Jonathan's death and its immediate aftermath ("All those powers, and I couldn't even save him") ... Clark's farewell to Martha in the field ... and most especially, Reeve's performance following Lois's death, a succession of pitch-perfect and profoundly emotional moments: the little whimper he gives as her head flops as he's lowering her to the ground; the series of silent long shots as he grieves over her body; and finally the tearful whispers of "no no no no," building to that scream of rage and purpose as he takes flight ... yeah, it's all emotional as fuck.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

The 1978 movie is weird. The early parts with Krypton & Smallville are serious to the point of solemnity. But then there's a major tonal whiplash when you get to all of the wacky antics during the Metropolis scenes. Then, when you get to Lois' death, it suddenly turns super serious again. Which, I suppose, makes it that much more of an effective sucker punch in the gut.

And, yeah, Reeve's performance there is the best superhero performance in any single scene ever! Underscored by some of the best work in John Williams' career!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Just magnifique!

I guess, when I said "emotional depth," what I really meant was "emotional complexity." There's not a lot of ambivalence to Christopher Reeve's Superman and no real sense of underlying alienation. That does lead to a character that's not as thoroughly emotionally fleshed out as some of the later versions.

Still, Christopher Reeve's performance is flawless & definitive in ways that are hard to explain to someone that hasn't seen the 1978 movie.

 

[The Realist]

^ Once again, agree more than not. But I have little wish for Superman to be alienated or ambivalent -- that way lies Snyderman. If that's the price of what you're calling "emotional complexity," the price is too high.

I also have no problem with the way Superman '78 juggles tones and genres. Yes, it's sometimes a drama, sometimes a comedy; it's also a romance, a sci-fi epic, and an action-adventure spectacle. I don't find any of those aspects to conflict with the others -- on the contrary, their combination makes the film a multi-course entertainment feast.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

I guess, when a movie juggles tones, it's usually customary to frequently cross cut between the different ingredients, not divide them up into 3 distinct sections. Kinda reminds me of The Book of Henry. The 1st part is so twee & precocious that it's almost Wes Anderson-esque. The 2nd part is Terms of Endearment. The 3rd part is "How to Commit the Perfect Murder."

 

[Captaindemotion]

I didn’t see this coming https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...oker-in-zack-snyders-justice-league-exclusive

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

So it's less of a "cut" and really a full on remake.

 

[Mudd]

This thing really sounds like a clusterfuck.

 

[Noname Given]

So it's less of a "cut" and really a full on remake.

Well, maybe they can reshoot Henry Cavill's scenes too an not have to worry about CGIing out the mustache. Plus you could add Zack Levi and get a SHAZAM! nod in there now too.