@TREK_GOD_1 who exactly are those people who are such Snyder haters on this board, that they hate the whole thing and want to start over completely from scratch??
Read through this thread. Over and over again, various members have made it quite clear that they want the DCU to be wiped clean in favor of a reboot having nothing to do with the existing continuity.
But it is a rinse and repeat move.
You mean superheroes who find themselves in conflict with other superheroes only happens one time. Never..
ever has there been repeat fights in the comics between Iron Man and Thor, Thor and the Hulk, in the damn near bi-monthly Silver Age fights between the Hulk and the Fantastic Four, the F.F. vs the Sub-Mariner, and yes, Batman vs Superman. Hell, in the MCU, Captain America had a brief fight with Stark in AoU and eventually, another fight happened in
Civil War. Typical comic book plots spanning generations, so Batman fighting Superman (under drastically different circumstances in a projected future) is not "rinse and repeat"--unless over 80 years of comic book superhero fights were / are also "rinse and repeat".
And narratively, Superman’s death in the 2nd movie was meaningless, as we all knew he would be back for more (as opposed to Spock, who had several years leading up to him dying in his second movie).
Eh? One, as
Star Trek eventually became a movie, there was not some tight production continuity, as TOS had been off the air for a decade, so there was no natural flow from TV series into the 1st movie. Two, the "how and why" ideas behind Spock dying in TWOK is well-covered, but the moment he died--as powerful as that scene and its aftermath were--the tracking shot over the jungle on Genesis, ending on Spock's coffin most certainly was placed there to tell audiences his return was a possibility, and in just two years...he returned, as most ST fans expected him to. In 1984, some fans and critics said exactly what you're saying now: Spock's return made the death and
meaning of his sacrifice pointless. They--and you--are incorrect.
The WB management, both past and present, remind me of Sony and how they have handled Spiderman. In their case, they might have let Raimi do his own vision for Spidey at first, which connected to fans past and created many new ones. But by the 3rd one, Sony execs had shown their greed, and driven off the director, and subsequently, the star. So they destroyed momentum that had been created.
Drop the Venom arc and
Spider-Man 3's Peter/Mary Jane issues (which were bubbling over before he was possessed) along with the Harry revenge plot were in line with the strong attention to character development seen in the previous two entries.
It was obvious to a number of us that the new Spiderman was done mostly to keep the profit-making license, and NOT with a love for the character or fandom. So that’s why it bombed by the 2nd ASM.
Well, pointing out any flaws of the Garfield Spider-Man movies is just too easy. S-M was miscast, who the Hell knows what Emma Stone was doing in those films, and Foxx was a classic example of a celebrity who had no clue how to act like a villain (stunt) cast
as a villain.
The thing is Zaslav has some good points… mainly about how Superman OUUGHT to be the premier live action hero (even beyond Marvel) , as well as how the various forms (TV & movies) really need to be brought together.
No, they do not. The majority of DC's (read: Berlanti's) TV output was sub-par and low-rent. There's such as class difference in production, story and talent the DC movies have over the TV shows that they are the filmed embodiment of oil and water. Its not revealing anything new to point that out, and how many a DC movie fan has a low opinion of the TV series.
or a few establishing scenes and Montage in Captain AMerica The First Avenger for us to embrace Steve Rogers as not just a superhero but a leader of people)
Context is everything here: Clark had far greater challenges leading to his becoming Superman. He was aware he was not human, so he had natural psychological barriers to fully integrating into an often hostile society; unlike Rogers, he was not going to be accepted by all, but feared because of his existence. Additionally, Rogers--
wearing a patriotic costume during WW2 and rescuing a company of prisoners--was easy for soldiers to accept. He posed no threat. Drop the Hulk in Cap's place, and the reaction would be entirely different.
In their respective universes, Superman was not sold to a public looking for that image. Cap was, and the public felt safe with an image they were already conditioned to accept. On the far opposite end,
aliens--no matter how they appear--are an entirely different matter, and would face a fear-charged and/or hostile reaction.
A real world example of this occurred when part of the United States spiraled into a panic when they believed The Mercury Theatre on the Air's radio adaptation of
The War of the Worlds was a real news broadcast. There were no
"Let's hear it for Captain America!"-like cheers and welcoming arms.
The reaction was fear--not simply due to the idea of an invasion,
but what was believed to be invading. The point being that fear and anger was the natural reaction, as it would be if a Kryptonian with otherworldly powers was revealed to be living among humanity, hence the logic of
Man of Steel's character arc for Kal-El to be one which included the risk of being exposed to a modern-day public with no experience with aliens before.
Eventually some of the population would accept him (others worshiped him), but the fear remained, and MoS' direct effect of this fear easily sailed into BvS.
regarding The Rock & black Adam – I think he was doing his wrestling hype of it. It didn’t “save” or resurrect the DCFU, but also didn’t kill it. A solid entry, but I don’t see it revolutionizing anything. I would love to see Black Adam vs. Superman – but he also needs to go against the Shazam family.
Black Adam v Superman--as a film spectacle--sort of pulls the teeth out of a fight with the comedic Shazam family. There were reasons Johnson did not want Black Adam to make his debut in a Shazam movie as originally planned, and I believe
Shazam's
kind of adaptation would have placed Black Adam in a category other than the self-assured, darker force he appears to be in his own film.
