Looool turned on Henry quick. Hilarious how a few months ago Gal was the "snake" as they call it because she wouldn't post support until recently.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
DC Films Still Doesn’t Know What To Do With Superman (with a hot take in the end)
- Thread starter Naijaboy
- Start date
Looool turned on Henry quick. Hilarious how a few months ago Gal was the "snake" as they call it because she wouldn't post support until recently.
You do realise that Jesus Christ was also by biblical definition somewhat of an immigrant outsider right?
Joker and Aquaman were created within three years of Superman's debut.
I would love a happy optimistic Superman movie.
Make the impossible look mundane with a smile on his face.
Show that what makes him super is the MAN.
A good guy trying to do good for the world.
Make the impossible look mundane with a smile on his face.
Show that what makes him super is the MAN.
A good guy trying to do good for the world.
They couldn't even do that to Shazam, the one character who's more of a boy scout.
Seeing films with on them are clearly more interesting for viewers though.
I don't understand why people are comparing persecuted immigrants, a group almost defined politically by their lack of power, to the most powerful person in the world. It feels like people making this comparison are looking at this in the most skin-deep way.
From the article:
And who says he isn't funny? He's not Deadpool, but he can make jokes just fine. Yeesh.
Have we reached the point of people claiming the Superman is "significantly sillier" than Wonder Woman? There have been far more successful Superman adaptations than Wonder Woman ones, over the decades. Why is he suddenly such a problem?
And who says he isn't funny? He's not Deadpool, but he can make jokes just fine. Yeesh.
Given that Superman is one of pop culture's most enduring characters and one of the lynchpins of an entire genre of fantasy fiction, I figure the problem is more what DC has been doing with him in the DCEU.
Pa Kent chastises his son for saving a bus full of drowning children, lets himself die preventing himself from being saved, and then Superman turns Metropolis into a greasy smear. Heroism just isn't worth it.
Even if they turned in a Superman film with Dark Knight quality or Guardians of the Galaxy fun appeal I don't see it reaching the same box office heights as his contemporaries.
The problem is that he's too familiar and it leaves very little for audiences to get curious enough to go see.
OP
OP
In theory yes, but in the case of Man of Steel it's more of a paragon that can never hope to blend in with humanity, which is absolutely not the case in the Bible.
I guess if you want to cherry pick to promote your interpretation.
It's funny. Superman was QB1 on a Kansas state championship team, then becomes a successful journalist. In an era where Geeky is cool, Clark Kent should be cool.
It just annoys me when people say something is like (insert reference) and have a clearly demonstrated misunderstanding of what they are referencing.
The idea of Superman being "Christlike" is a fair comparison, but in the case of the DCCU it seems like they don't know anything about either of those two characters beyond that one likes to stretch his arms out wide
Yes, you got me, that's exactly what I want out of Superman. Pure, unrelenting, and deadly violence in every situation. It's just like in that classic episode of the Office when they're doing an HR team building exercise and Dwight is asked by the HR rep "What is your definition of a hero?" to which Dwight responds "A hero kills people, people that wish him harm. A hero is part human and part supernatural. A hero is born out of a childhood trauma or out of a disaster and must be avenged."
Absolutely nothing in between and nothing contemplative whatsoever. On top of that, regarding that particular dog-baby scenario, I would also want him to use his heat vision to zap the dog then break the fourth wall and look at the reader and say in a Hanna Barbera "dog person voice," "Ruh roh! Lois and the Humane Society aint gonna like this!" *Boom,* end of the book. Think J Michael Straczynski's "Superman Grounded" except less self important, even more of a jerk, while cracking weird jokes and being a really precious smart ass.
Last edited:
Oh hell could you imagine a film adaptation of Grounded? I'm almost thankful we got Snyder Superman now.
The choice was there, but the look, writing, and performance were a wild swing and a miss.
that's the setup for most fantasies, though. what if a member of a powerless or persecuted group actually had all the power?
hilarious as this is, the dog analogy is still totally accurate. a big part of the appeal of Superman is that, because even something like a xenomorph can't threaten his life, he can find a better solution than we would ever expect from humans in the same position.
its not impossible to make a decent superman movie. Returns and Man of Steel did a few things right. but overall execution wasn't great for either. needs a good director tho.
for those who want a more inspiring take on it again they really should get somebody like Spielberg (the dream for this movie but it would never happen), Brad Bird etc.
or lean heavily into the parallels with him being immigrant and let an upcoming minority director take it on. or at least somebody smart enough to handle that concept without bungling it.
for those who want a more inspiring take on it again they really should get somebody like Spielberg (the dream for this movie but it would never happen), Brad Bird etc.
or lean heavily into the parallels with him being immigrant and let an upcoming minority director take it on. or at least somebody smart enough to handle that concept without bungling it.
TBH I believe that it's not that Superman is boring, it's just that Superman is about as explicit a rebuke against Nietzsche's proto-fascist Ubermensch as is possible -- and by Jewish writers witnessing normalized antisemitism and the rise of the Nazis inspired by it. Snyder is not a fascist, but he's very Randian, and as a result is far more sympathetic to the Nietzschean interpretation of Superman. And of course the studio executives prefer a narrative that allows them to be comfortable in their great wealth, which the Randian narrative is almost built to serve.
As a result you get a character who is unrecognizable to fans as Superman, isn't interesting as a deconstruction (as above I'd say is more of a reconstruction), and isn't relatable to casual audiences either due to being so nihilistic/solipsistic.
As a result you get a character who is unrecognizable to fans as Superman, isn't interesting as a deconstruction (as above I'd say is more of a reconstruction), and isn't relatable to casual audiences either due to being so nihilistic/solipsistic.
Superman isn't part of those groups though! Putting superman amongst those groups because he's an alien is wild. This is my whole point. He's an abled, straight, white man. He doesn't look different, or sound different, or have different customs or cultures, he doesn't eat different food. The great burden he has is that he has an array of amazing superpowers.
Exactly. Superman wouldn't need to kill the xenomorphs because he can do a million other things to solve the problem. It's not like the xenomorphs are evil, after all.
If we were talking about Predators, sure. They make a hobby out of hunting people for sport, which is evil. In fact I'm pretty sure Supes would travel to the Predator homeworld and tell them in no uncertain terms that either they stop their little games of cat and mouse or he will.
But xenomorphs are hunting because that's what they do to survive. It doesn't matter what they wer genetically designed to do because you're not defined by who made you and they're no more evil than a tiger or hyenas or any other predator here on Earth that was also genetically designed to hunt and kill.
Superman isn't supposed to be relevant or relatable. He's supposed to be inspiring. Gaiman is correct.
Jimmy Olsen is the one who's supposed to be relatable and relevant, because he's the audience surrogate. We're Supes' best friend and want to be like him, and look up to him. Says something that the first thing Snyder did with him is kill him. Cause he didn't understand shit about the character.
Execs don't get the relationship dynamic and focus on the wrong things.
Jimmy Olsen is the one who's supposed to be relatable and relevant, because he's the audience surrogate. We're Supes' best friend and want to be like him, and look up to him. Says something that the first thing Snyder did with him is kill him. Cause he didn't understand shit about the character.
Execs don't get the relationship dynamic and focus on the wrong things.
That's what they have been doing though? especially with Superman Returns, which was all about Clark feeling like he doesn't belong & doubling down on Luthor's hatred for him, y'all called it boring because he didn't punch people.
Superman fanbase is the worst, they don't know what they want.
Superman fanbase is the worst, they don't know what they want.
there are definitely people brought into the United States as young children who grew up totally assimilated and were normal Americans in every discernible way until ICE kicked in their door. I don't know why Superman would have to be disabled, queer or non-white to be used to express solidarity with immigrants
Fucking. A.
Another great quote from Gaiman that I'm probably butchering is that in a hundred years, it may not be via printed comic books, but maybe on some kind of high tech sensory device that beams the images in our brains, he's still gonna matter to little kids who are gonna want to know what Superman is doing every month.
I think the problem is Metropolis. It's supposed to be the city of the fucking future, literally inspired by the black and white classic that was revolutionary among scifi fans when Seigal and Shuster came up with the character. And the city is just how it's supposed to be in all the animated series, thus, he and the absurdly overpowered and fantastical villains he faces doesn't seem so off and out of place like they do in cut and paste greenscreen composites of modern American cities.
He's only complicated when Warner Bros. tries to do anything but a faithful adaptation. The further and further they've gotten from the original Donner vision that doesn't try to get overly cute with Superman's presentation, the more people want him to fuck off.
OP
OP
Yeah, that puts it well. I have a love/hate relationship with Man of Steel. While it looks incredible, Snyder focuses too much on the 'super' aspect of Kal-El.
Yeah and if Superman's childhood was filled with trauma from superhero ice kicking in the door, then that would be relevant, but it's not. Superman doesn't represent or relate to those people at all. Again, this just feels like a really skin deep look at the issue. Superman doesn't suffer from any of the shit immigrants have to suffer through, I don't know why we should point to him as an avatar for immigrants.
I'm not saying that Superman has to be disabled, queer or non-white to express solidarity with immigrants. I'm pointing out that in no way is he a marginalised person or someone who represents a marginalised person.
We probably would not have gotten Snyder Superman if we didn't spend the last 40 years talking about how Superman and his ideals were washed out.
But Superman Returns is a bad call because he's a creepy fucking stalker in that one.
Superman's issue is that people would be terrified of him. Ironically enough, Batman's idea in Batman vs Superman isn't that far off what most leaders of the world would think about Superman if he were real - that if there's even the slightest chance he could turn on humans, they absolutely can't risk it and have to kill him first.
So you'd have this dichotomy where, to the normal people he saves on a daily basis, Superman is viewed as a hero but to the people in power he'd be a threat they can't ignore. Except what can they do? He's impervious to literally anything humanity can throw at him and if you piss him off he could raze the world.
Which means Superman's biggest struggle isn't against another superhuman being, but convincing humanity that he isn't a threat to it.
right, that's the fantasy aspect
Black Panther isn't representative of African or African-American experiences, it's an afrofuturist fantasy (told by African-Americans). the Black Panther film has an angle on the relation of power to marginalized Black communities, but the main character is a superpowered monarch of a sci-fi utopia
it would be weird if people working for a movie studio claimed they couldn't think of an angle to make Black Panther interesting, and it's weird that people are making that claim about Superman
Many words on why Superman is still great and relevant.
I don't disagree with anything you've said, but I don't really know how anything you've said comments on what I was saying.
Black Panther is using fantasy to comment on Africa and black people. It is about Africa and black people at it's basest concept. Superman doesn't have anything to do with actual immigrants or issues facing immigrants. I don't know how these are similar.
Because WB/DC has the rights :p
Seriously though, they should adapt:
It's not that hard though.
Man of Steel was fine. It performed about par for it's time of release. Just continue where they left off with Cavill's Superman. The groundwork is already there.
There's no need to look back at the events of BvS or Justice League. Aquaman barely touches on it, follows a basic Marvel-like superhero movie template and grossed a billion.
Man of Steel was fine. It performed about par for it's time of release. Just continue where they left off with Cavill's Superman. The groundwork is already there.
There's no need to look back at the events of BvS or Justice League. Aquaman barely touches on it, follows a basic Marvel-like superhero movie template and grossed a billion.
this "basest concept" perception is absolutely a product of seeing characters through the lens of the stories that authors have most frequently chosen in the past to tell with them. why is a superpowered African king of a sci-fi utopia intrinsically "about Africa and black people" and a superpowered alien from space who came to America as a baby and grew up to stand for truth, justice, and the American way not intrinsically "about immigrants"?
the tweet in the OP is calling this out as blinkered thinking
