• 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)

Anyone know why
they're going the Black Noir route with Ultraman? In the comic book "The Boys" the mysterious black clad character Black Noir is a clone of Homelander created by Vought Inc. and in DC Comics Ultraman is an alternate universe version of Superman. Here Ultraman is dressed all in black, obvioiusly borrowing from The Boys and Black Noir. I'm guessing he's a clone created by LexCorp and I'm also guessing that he may end up becoming Bizarro, who in the Byrne reboot, was a failed clone attempt.

Just seems like a weird take to me. Of course they also have The Engineer as a villain. In the comics she works on the side of heroes at least last time I read the character. They could've just used Brainiac instead of Engineer if they just needed "smart person who can breach The Fortress".
 
Watching part of MoS on FX. Forget killing Zod...one word spoken by Kevin Costner was so tone deaf to what the Superman narrative represents that it's probably turned enough people off to have doomed this entire enterprise to eventual failure.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't the word "maybe"?

Not everyone is into sacrificing their own child for the cause.

The problem is that it is such an "Elseworlds" version of the mythos, it turned a lot of people off. For the entire mainstream continuity of Superman, Pa Kent's humanity and virtue is what helped Clark grow into Superman. This is so much a part of continuity, that many alternate stories show how Superman might have turned out without Pa Kent's influence.
 
Anyone know why
they're going the Black Noir route with Ultraman? In the comic book "The Boys" the mysterious black clad character Black Noir is a clone of Homelander created by Vought Inc. and in DC Comics Ultraman is an alternate universe version of Superman. Here Ultraman is dressed all in black, obvioiusly borrowing from The Boys and Black Noir. I'm guessing he's a clone created by LexCorp and I'm also guessing that he may end up becoming Bizarro, who in the Byrne reboot, was a failed clone attempt.

Just seems like a weird take to me. Of course they also have The Engineer as a villain. In the comics she works on the side of heroes at least last time I read the character. They could've just used Brainiac instead of Engineer if they just needed "smart person who can breach The Fortress".
They haven't really talked about the spoiler at all, so it's hard to know what they're doing with that. As for The Engineer, I'd never heard of the character before they talked about her being in this, so I didn't even know she was a hero in the comics. I believe they're also going to be doing an Authority movie, so by the end she could change sides.
We already know that Luthor is blackmailing Metamorpho into working for him, so maybe he's doing to same thing to her.
 
The problem is that it is such an "Elseworlds" version of the mythos, it turned a lot of people off. For the entire mainstream continuity of Superman, Pa Kent's humanity and virtue is what helped Clark grow into Superman. This is so much a part of continuity, that many alternate stories show how Superman might have turned out without Pa Kent's influence.

In a way, that's what I like about it. No doubt, MoS's version of Jonathan Kent is the worst ever, but I kind of like the "Elseworlds" quality of it, the way the movie shows that Clark would still have become a hero despite his adoptive father's example. Which is actually what a lot of those Elseworlds stories show, that Kal-El would still have become a hero if he'd grown up in different circumstances. (It's generally just Lois's death that turns him evil in alternate realities.)

No, the real problem with Costner-Jonathan's sacrifice is that it was so ridiculously unnecessary, since Clark could've saved Jonathan by superspeed before anyone saw him. So its attempt to show Jonathan making a noble sacrifice for his son just ends up making him and Clark look like complete and absolute idiots.

The other, far bigger problem with that scene is the perpetuation of the myth that one should hide under an overpass in a tornado, which is actually the most dangerous possible place to be due to the way it concentrates the wind and debris. So this movie may have literally endangered people's lives, which is far more unforgivable than any bad writing, especially in a Superman movie. Even worse, Superman and Lois did an episode that repeated the same mistake, out of some kind of misguided homage to MoS.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top