• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

DC Cinematic Universe ( The James Gunn era)

What Snyder failed to do was create a basis for the character that we felt it would "hurt" him if he did. Like, if that happened after 3 seasons of SUpergirl or Flash, we could feel the emotion. But "no killing" didn't seem like a "rule" for CLark at that point.
This one of my biggest problems with him killing Zod, we had never seen him not kill a bad guy before, and so by having him kill his first major villain right off the bat, makes it feel like that will be his default, and if you're trying to stay at all true to the comics, it really shouldn't be.
(None of which is to suggest that all women prioritize romance, or that only women do. I myself am a dude, and Lois and Clark's relationship is my number-one-with-a-bullet most important thing in Superman stories.)
This is pretty much how I feel about Spider-Man and Mary Jane, which is why I'm so disappointed how feel recent versions have included the relationship. I think the Insomniac Games and Renew Your Vows are two of the only ones that really feature it heavily. At least most of recent versions of Superman have included some version of his realtionship with Lois.
BTW, apples-to-apples: This is the original teaser trailer for MoS, in 2012:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
God, no ad for Superman should ever feel this depressing.
That’s the one I watched after watching the new one. I find this one more compelling than the new one. Not that I think the new one is bad or uninteresting. The earlier one, to me, suggested I would get a version of the story that differed from most of the others (regardless of media). The new one suggests I will get a more classic and familiar take on Superman. Either approach is fine with me—I simply prefer something that challenges my expectations. The earlier trailer did that more effectively than the new one. Obviously that’s a personal preference. It’s not intended as a knock against the new trailer or the new movie. I’m quite looking forward to seeing it.
On the other I go the comics movie and watch comics TV shows to see the comics characters brought to life. Now I don't expect an exact recreation of the comics in every show and movie, but I at least expect enough familiar elements to feel like I'm watching the comics brought to life. That's one thing the MCU has excelled at, making some changes, but still bringing enough elements from the comics, that it still feels like the comics.
 
This one of my biggest problems with him killing Zod, we had never seen him not kill a bad guy before, and so by having him kill his first major villain right off the bat, makes it feel like that will be his default, and if you're trying to stay at all true to the comics, it really shouldn't be.

This is pretty much how I feel about Spider-Man and Mary Jane, which is why I'm so disappointed how feel recent versions have included the relationship. I think the Insomniac Games and Renew Your Vows are two of the only ones that really feature it heavily. At least most of recent versions of Superman have included some version of his realtionship with Lois.

God, no ad for Superman should ever feel this depressing.

On the other I go the comics movie and watch comics TV shows to see the comics characters brought to life. Now I don't expect an exact recreation of the comics in every show and movie, but I at least expect enough familiar elements to feel like I'm watching the comics brought to life. That's one thing the MCU has excelled at, making some changes, but still bringing enough elements from the comics, that it still feels like the comics.
I get that many people were disappointed with Man of Steel—I even understand why (mostly resonating with your own objections). And I certainly don’t dislike more traditional takes on the character, as seems to be the case with the new movie. However, what intrigued me about the teaser for Man of Steel, and what I so thoroughly enjoyed about the film itself, is that it was NOT a typical take on the character while still having the character keep much of his essential qualities (obviously not sufficiently for all viewers). I’m not interested in rehashing the debate, except to say this—many of the things I liked most were things most likely to raise complaints from others and I liked them precisely because they were “against the grain”. So while I look forward to the new version coming up, I am also quite happy I got the version of the story in Man of Steel. And as with any movie (or other art form), I never feel “owed” anything more than the experience. Satisfaction is never guaranteed (nor should it ever).

In any case, I do sincerely hope the new one gives everyone who didn’t enjoy Man of Steel the kind of satisfaction they were hoping for last time around. And for me, something at least as satisfying.
 
Last edited:
This one of my biggest problems with him killing Zod, we had never seen him not kill a bad guy before, and so by having him kill his first major villain right off the bat, makes it feel like that will be his default, and if you're trying to stay at all true to the comics, it really shouldn't be.

Doesn't he kill a terrorist in the next movie?
 
Took me a minute to figure out what you were talking about, but I assume you're referring to the early scene in BvS where Superman flies the guy holding Lois through a wall. Logically and "realistically," that probably would have killed him, but I never took it that way. Unless you specifically and unambiguously show me that Superman kills someone, I'm going to assume comic book rules and physics apply, and that Superman probably shielded him from a fatal impact with his body or something. (Not, I hope, to reopen this dreaded can of worms, but it's the same reason I never thought, and still don't believe, that Zod and company were killed at the end of Superman II.)

Actually, that scene is among those I like best in Snyder's films. I love the silent communication between Clark and Lois, and then the shot of her slowly relaxing her grip on the dude's arm, so Superman can sweep him away from her without carrying her along with him. Very cool.
 
I get that many people were disappointed with Man of Steel—I even under why (mostly resonating with your own objections). And I certainly don’t dislike more traditional takes on the character, as seems to be the case with the new movie. However, what intrigued me about the teaser for Man of Steel, and what I so thoroughly enjoyed about the film itself, is that it was NOT a typical take on the character while still having the character keep much of his essential qualities (obviously not sufficiently for all viewers). I’m not interested in rehashing the debate, except to say this—many of the things I liked most were things most likely to raise complaints from others and I liked them precisely because they were “against the grain”. So while I look forward to the new version coming up, I am also quite happy I got the version of the story in Man of Steel. And as with any movie (or other art form), I never feel “owed” anything more than the experience. Satisfaction is never guaranteed (nor should it ever).

In any case, I do sincerely hope the new one gives everyone who didn’t enjoy Man of Steel the kind of satisfaction they were hoping for last time around. And for me, something at least as satisfying.
I don't mind the idea of doing an alternative take on characters onscreen, but for me when a character hasn't been in a movie in decades, it would have be nice to get a more traditional version before we veered off into an alternative take. That's why I'm fine with The Batman, which is a bit more of an alternative take on the character, since we've had a pretty consistent stream of more traditional takes on the character for a while now.
 
Took me a minute to figure out what you were talking about, but I assume you're referring to the early scene in BvS where Superman flies the guy holding Lois through a wall. Logically and "realistically," that probably would have killed him, but I never took it that way. Unless you specifically and unambiguously show me that Superman kills someone, I'm going to assume comic book rules and physics apply, and that Superman probably shielded him from a fatal impact with his body or something. (Not, I hope, to reopen this dreaded can of worms, but it's the same reason I never thought, and still don't believe, that Zod and company were killed at the end of Superman II.)

Actually, that scene is among those I like best in Snyder's films. I love the silent communication between Clark and Lois, and then the shot of her slowly relaxing her grip on the dude's arm, so Superman can sweep him away from her without carrying her along with him. Very cool.
I just can't fully convince myself that the physics make sense... but as you said, comic book physics apply.
 
Actually, that scene is among those I like best in Snyder's films. I love the silent communication between Clark and Lois, and then the shot of her slowly relaxing her grip on the dude's arm, so Superman can sweep him away from her without carrying her along with him. Very cool.

I agree. It was a great scene--I had always thought he killed the guy though.
 
I don't mind the idea of doing an alternative take on characters onscreen, but for me when a character hasn't been in a movie in decades, it would have be nice to get a more traditional version before we veered off into an alternative take. That's why I'm fine with The Batman, which is a bit more of an alternative take on the character, since we've had a pretty consistent stream of more traditional takes on the character for a while now.
It came somewhat later, but you got your wish. To me, I had already watched Adventures of Superman, the four Reeve movies, Lois and Clark, and Superman Returns. I was more than ready for something different. All a matter of perspective. I'm certainly not trying to persuade people they should share my view of Man of Steel. The filmmakers took a chance (which I favour in any artistic endeavour, commercial or otherwise), it worked for me, but not for others. C'est la vie.
 
Same here, I'm just try to explain how I feel, not intending to start an argument or anything like that.
 
I may be a Snyderverse fan, but I'm also a fan of the Arrowverse series, "Superman & Lois". But I haven't liked a movie that James Gunn did since 2014's "Guardians of the Galaxy".

Interesting.

This one of my biggest problems with him killing Zod, we had never seen him not kill a bad guy before, and so by having him kill his first major villain right off the bat, makes it feel like that will be his default

Not to anyone who actually watched the film. He did not have a choice in that last second. There was no debating Zod, the latter proving how uncompromising a murderer is, so he had to be stopped once and for all, yet Superman, to anyone who watched the film, fell to his knees, yelling out in anguish that it came to that.

The scene was clear and did not in any way suggest killing was his so-called "default". One action does make anything a "default" position by any rational estimation.


and if you're trying to stay at all true to the comics, it really shouldn't be.

Oh? Which comics are you referring to, because for anyone who read several generations of the character knows there was no one way Superman was presented. To even suggest it was one way is simply pushing a lie.
 
Wait, wait, wait ... so some people think it's awesome that Superman killed Zod in Man of Steel, but other people think it sucks? Having never visited the Internet in the last 11 years, I was completely unaware of this. We should definitely talk about it for the next several pages.
 
I don't mind the idea of doing an alternative take on characters onscreen, but for me when a character hasn't been in a movie in decades, it would have be nice to get a more traditional version before we veered off into an alternative take.

It hadn't been decades, Superman Returns was only seven years old.
 
I don't know whether this is true or not. It's just interesting IMO that it's become a thing.

1734965330473.png
 
Same here, I'm just try to explain how I feel, not intending to start an argument or anything like that.
I'll carry one on, if not start it: Clark killing Zod, as exemplary of the tone of MoS, most likely cost Warners many millions of dollars in ticket sales and ultimately doomed the so-called Snyderverse.

The studio placed enormous confidence in Snyder. Despite unhappiness with MoS's performance, they gave him a second chance. Bringing in their much more popular movie superhero, Batman, in an effort to boost interest in the Superman sequel, Batman v Superman opened well but again disappointed on ROI. By the time of Justice League, their faith was greatly diminished and he was put on a very short leash, which did not improve anything.

You know what superhero movies made more money than MoS, during the time of Snyder's creative influence? The ones he had a hand in but didn't write or direct - Aquaman and Wonder Woman.

The notion that Warners somehow was unfair to Zack Snyder and sandbagged him is crap. They gave him hundreds of millions of dollars worth of backing, and his movies didn't live up to expectations that he fully understood and signed onto.
 
Last edited:
A man is waiting in line to buy a MoS ticket.

He is approached by another man.

"Hey, did you know Superman kills Zod in this movie?"

"Figures. Same thing happened in Superman 2, after all."

"This is worse, somehow."

"Why?"

They stare at each other.

"No, you're right. I'm going home to rethink my life."

"Why don't you try the new Star Trek movie instead?"

"Good idea! At least I can be confident no idiotic decision-making went into that one."
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top