It's time of the year again, where people just can't figure out how to put Superman in film, this time courtesy of Forbes:
Now I understand the criticism about how ambitious the storyline would have to be to make it work... but you only need to look at the other movies that have come out to refute those claims. Wonder Woman had a fairly faithful adaptation to a origin story, Shazam! managed to be overly outlandish yet succeed. Even Aquaman managed to go all out in comic book lore, becoming one of the better parts of that movie. Still, I couldn't help but frown at the age-old idea of Superman being a bland old boy scout. And then I came about this tweet:
And it all became clear. There before the executives was a clearly defined way to being Superman back into the fold. Hell, it's not even an old concept: Supergirl played with it last season.
But it now became clear of the real reason they can't go through with it: performing this take on Superman would incur the wrath of anti-SJWs and conservatives in general. Yet it might be the only was to bring enough buzz to the movie to make a profit. Stop trying to compare him to a Christ-like figure. Just make him a man who just wants to do good for a planet that's foreign to him and let everyone else connect the dots.
My advice? Go for it. Better yet, just copy Birthright and call it your own.
It's interesting that Superman, a character instinctively associated with the word "superhero," is proving difficult to adapt to film in the age of superhero saturation. Is the character's godlike powers and righteous attitude really too alienating for modern audiences?
That's usually the argument against Superman, but it doesn't really explain his sudden absence from the big screen. After all, Wonder Woman, Shazam, and Captain America are incredibly popular, and all share that childlike earnestness, the boundless optimism that defines Superman. So, why isn't the Man of Steel thriving among his fellow do-gooders?
And that's the thing about Superman; he's not cool. He's not funny. He's not edgy. Unlike Captain America, he was never one of us. Like Wonder Woman, he is meant to be a beacon of hope in a dreary world. But he's significantly sillier than Wonder Woman, just as silly as Thor and Shazam, but unable to pull off the irony.
Now I understand the criticism about how ambitious the storyline would have to be to make it work... but you only need to look at the other movies that have come out to refute those claims. Wonder Woman had a fairly faithful adaptation to a origin story, Shazam! managed to be overly outlandish yet succeed. Even Aquaman managed to go all out in comic book lore, becoming one of the better parts of that movie. Still, I couldn't help but frown at the age-old idea of Superman being a bland old boy scout. And then I came about this tweet:
And it all became clear. There before the executives was a clearly defined way to being Superman back into the fold. Hell, it's not even an old concept: Supergirl played with it last season.
But it now became clear of the real reason they can't go through with it: performing this take on Superman would incur the wrath of anti-SJWs and conservatives in general. Yet it might be the only was to bring enough buzz to the movie to make a profit. Stop trying to compare him to a Christ-like figure. Just make him a man who just wants to do good for a planet that's foreign to him and let everyone else connect the dots.
My advice? Go for it. Better yet, just copy Birthright and call it your own.