• 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!

Warner bros announce superhero films through 2020

Going back to old conversations...I think Superman is one of the MOSt ACCESSIBLE characters and should be portrayed as such. Christopher Reeve and team did that despite the flaws.

I think Henry Cavill has the acting chops for it but Zack Snyder was the wrong one to bring it out. For a new Batman -- maybe? But Superman needed someone with a better sense of who Superman is and what he means to the public.

Now what exactly did GEOFF JOHNS do wrong that pushed him out of the way. It seems like he actually knows what he is doing in translating comics to live media. From his Legion of Superheroes episode in Smallville to working on Wonder WOman (Patty Jenkins gave him high praise, which seemed sincere), it seems like Johns is one who could help pull it together without resorting to a gimmick like the Infinity Stones.
 
He also was at least involved in the development and pilot of The Flash TV show too.
I don't understand why they don't just give him more creative control of the movies. It sounded like that was what they going to be doing during the lead up to Justice League, but now it seems like they're cutting back on just how involved he'll be.
 
crookeddy said:
Superman 2 would have been the best Superman movie had the Donner Cut been the official release.
Click to expand...

Beh, there are major characterization problems with that movie no matter who was in charge.

IE, Superman hardly being heroic at all throughout the whole thing.
 
Ovation said:
Not to mention killing Zod and the other Kryptonians. :whistle:
Click to expand...
Not sure how serious you are, but Superman kills nobody in that movie. This disingenuous argument has been going around for the past few years in an attempt to defend Man of Steel's murderously ill-conceived ending. The fallacy is its attempt to apply real-world physics and logic to a fanciful situation and context, not to mention willfully ignoring the clear tone and intent of the scene. Those light-hearted moments of victory in Superman II are played as slapstick cartoon comedy, and Zod and company are no more dead than Wile E. Coyote is when he falls off a cliff.
 
The real problems with Superman II isn't the campy way they disposed of Zod and co, it's with how the lead acts:

1) He gives up his powers to be with his deranged stalker, when Superman III and even Quest for Peace would give us far superior love interests than Kidder's Lois.
2) He then realizes he wants his powers back, half because of the Kryptonians and half because he realizes he just doesn't like being weak (so he didn't think it through).
3) The sadistic way he defeats the Kryptonians. It's done in a whimsy way but that doesn't make it less sadistic.
4) After all is said and done he goes back to beat up that Redneck Trucker for personal revenge.
5) He then violates Lois' mind because apparently he can't trust her with everything.

Our hero, ladies and gentlemen.
 
Jax said:
Doesn't the Donner version have the stupid reverse time gimmick again.
Click to expand...

Well, the so-called "Richard Donner cut" is actually the Michael Thau cut in consultation with Donner, and its reuse of the time-reversal ending is its biggest failing. The two-part movie was originally going to end with that sequence, but they decided to move it to the end of the first film fairly early in the process -- which is pretty obvious, since it must have been filmed before Donner was let go midway through production on S2. So if Donner had completed S2, it would've had a different ending. So if the intent of the "Donner Cut" was to approximate what Donner's S2 would've been like if he'd been allowed to finish it, then it shouldn't have ended that way. Personally, I would've ended it just after Superman flies away and leaves Lois on the balcony, with her memories intact. Since Lois's part in S3 is so small, it doesn't really create a contradiction -- indeed, her jealousy of Clark and Lana at the end makes more sense if she knows Clark is Superman. It does contradict The Quest for Peace, of course, but who cares? And it contradicts Returns, but that's not strictly in the same continuity anyway, since it moves things up 20-25 years.
 
The Realist said:
Not sure how serious you are, but Superman kills nobody in that movie.
Click to expand...

Supra kills Zod in Superman 2.

More importantly, Superman killed Zod and two other Kryptonians in the comic book back in the late 80s. He did it with premeditation, to solve a problem.

Anyone who didn't do what Superman did at that moment in Man of Steel would have been criminally irresponsible and the cause of countless deaths.

Just being, you know, a realist.:p
 
Serveaux said:
Anyone who didn't do what Superman did at that moment in Man of Steel would have been criminally irresponsible and the cause of countless deaths.
Click to expand...
Superman was already responsible for thousands of death in MoS, since he was punching Zod through buildings full of people.
 
Serveaux said:
Supra kills Zod in Superman 2.
Click to expand...
This is transparently false for the reasons stated, and beneath your rhetorical skills to contend otherwise.
More importantly, Superman killed Zod and two other Kryptonians in the comic book back in the late 80s. He did it with premeditation, to solve a problem.
Click to expand...
Equally, this is undeniably true, and as such I would not argue to the contrary.

For that matter, I bought a bunch of old Superman Family comics a while back, and was struck how in one minor and forgotten story in that run, Superman also killed the bad guy, and shrugged it off rather casually as regrettable but necessary.

So it's true that Superman killing Zod in MoS is not without precedent, for those who wish to defend it. It's just that Superman II ain't one of those precedents.
 
I think what perhaps gets people subconsciously is that MoS did a horrible job of developing a story as to why Clark would feel mental anguish over such an act.

If The Flash or Supergirl from DC TV were to be in a similar situation, at this stage od the show, the mentall anguish would have some oomph
 
Morpheus 02 said:
why Clark would feel mental anguish over such an act.
Click to expand...
How about, on his FIRST DAY ON THE JOB, he’s in a position where he has to take a life—something he’s probably never had to consider before, in any circumstance—AND that life is the only remaining (to his knowledge) life from his home planet (life that, until that day, he didn’t even know existed). I’d say that such facts would lead to an anguished state of mind for just about anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top