DC Cinematic Universe ( The James Gunn era)
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
Depends on the version were talking about. Some like the Reeves movies, there is an active hologram/ matrix full of Kryptonian knowledge, and an interactive program of his parents. Others he has basically nothing of Krypton, maybe a "Photo" of his parents.
Someone in another forum posted a theory that the reason Zaslav said "ten year plan" in his press release is that, starting in 2035, the first of the DC comics characters, starting with Dr. Occult, enters into the public domain and WB/DC need to get characters updated for the 21st century, so writers won't be able to use certain aspects of them.
Most of the characters have been updated countless times since the thirties and forties. One rarely sees the Superman from Action Comics #1. (and that's the version that goes PD in '38) And with the Earth-2 Superman from the 1960s some elements have been "recreated". I hope DC has copywrite on the E-2 elements.
I've previously come across people online claiming the latest DC Comics changes would be made to keep the characters out of public domain. Which is not at all how this works.
As @Nerys Myk correctly points out, the version of Superman that will become public domain in thirteen years is the version that was depicted in Action Comics #1, a very limited version of Superman. Elements that will still by protected under copyright are, among others, several of Superman's most iconic powers (first and foremost flight, but also super-senses and heat vision), the Daily Planet, Kryptonite, being raised by the Kents, Smallville, Perry White, Jimmy Olsen, Lex Luthor, the city of Metropolis, all the most-famous variants of the S-shield, Superman being a public figure working with government authorities, Supergirl, Krypto, the Fortress of Solitude, his home planet being called Krypton, his birth parents being Jor-El and Lara, and a whole lot more.
The version of the character that could be used under the public domain is very, very limited and lacks several of the key parts that a wider audience expects from Superman media.
As @Nerys Myk correctly points out, the version of Superman that will become public domain in thirteen years is the version that was depicted in Action Comics #1, a very limited version of Superman. Elements that will still by protected under copyright are, among others, several of Superman's most iconic powers (first and foremost flight, but also super-senses and heat vision), the Daily Planet, Kryptonite, being raised by the Kents, Smallville, Perry White, Jimmy Olsen, Lex Luthor, the city of Metropolis, all the most-famous variants of the S-shield, Superman being a public figure working with government authorities, Supergirl, Krypto, the Fortress of Solitude, his home planet being called Krypton, his birth parents being Jor-El and Lara, and a whole lot more.
The version of the character that could be used under the public domain is very, very limited and lacks several of the key parts that a wider audience expects from Superman media.
Forget Superman, I can finally write my Scoop Scanlon sex comedy.
It's slightly more complicated. The Fleischer Superman cartoons are in the public domain, because DC forgot to renew the copyright. That means that any aspect of Superman that was introduced in the cartoons, most notably flight, the opening narration and the Telephone booth, are fair game to use with the 1938 version of Superman when he becomes public domain.
The funny or sad part about this is the audience he's been speaking to for the last several years would ignore him completely if he looked just a little more Japanese.
Oh no, they love when minority people are on their side. That's what people like Candace Owens have build their whole career on.
"Yeah, Dave Rubin, you tell it like it is, you're one of them good ones."
"Great. Oh, by the way, my husband and I are planning to adopt."
"BURN IN HELL, YOU ****** PIECE OF ****!!1!"
Gunn says his Superman will kill if he absolutely has to in order to save another life. Is that going to cause any waves? He doesn't actually have a rule like Batman does though. Also, Tom Welling had quite the body count over 10 seasons.
www.ign.com
Would the Rebooted DCU's Superman Kill to Protect Somebody’s Life? James Gunn Says Yes — but It Would Be 'Hard for Him' - IGN
It’s one of the longest-running superhero debates: would Superman kill? Henry Cavill’s Superman did of course kill General Zod as a last resort in order to save lives in the DCEU. But would David Corenswet’s Superman do the same in the rebooted DCU?
Last edited:
I’m delighted you brought this up. It should lead to lots of thoughtful discussion and perspectives no one has had the opportunity to air before.
Rather, he said Superman "would probably do that." It's not a definitive statement, it's just a creator keeping his options open. But of course, the media and fandom are going to read way too much into it for the sake of manufactured controversy.
The thing with comparing it to Man of Steel, though, is that the problem there wasn't just that Superman killed Zod -- it was that Superman obeyed when Zod told him he had to kill him, which meant that the villain won the moral and philosophical conflict, making Superman look weak. Snyder's Clark was too passive a figure, rarely asserting any will of his own but just doing what various male authority figures told him to do. (He defied Jonathan's "don't save people" mentality to an extent, but not enough to save Jonathan himself from a pointless self-sacrifice.) I haven't even seen Gunn's movie yet, but I can believe that his Superman is confident and determined enough that he would've found a way to defeat Zod without killing him, rather than just submitting to the bad guy's formulation of reality. (Heck, given how comic-booky this Superman is, I'd be surprised if he didn't already have a Phantom Zone projector tucked away in the Fortress somewhere. Don't spoil me, though.)
Wasn't that usually the villains dying through mishaps, their own actions, or their own powers consuming them, though? I don't recall him intentionally killing.
Not while it remains a hypothetical.
Similar threads
