• Introducing Image Options for ResetEra 2.0! Check the left side navigation bar to show or hide images, avatars, covers, and embedded media. More details at the link.
  • Community Spotlight sign-ups are open once again for both Gaming and EtcetEra Hangout threads! If you want to shine a spotlight on your community, please register now.

DCEU Era |OT2| Thundercrack!

Erza won

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 29.0%
  • Oh hell yes

    Votes: 22 71.0%

  • Total voters
    31
Dec 6, 2017
1,632
I'm surprised folks are disagreeing. Snyder literally acknowledged this in Man of Steel a few times.



But as I've pointed out before, people rarely have an issue with a more emotional Superman, but you likely need to balance the more somber tone with something more lighthearted. That balance is key. Smallville ran for 10 years on teenage angst Clark Kent. Grant Morrison's Action Comics is well-loved, featuring a younger, more aggressive Superman.



But also still a man of the common folk.


Superman: American Alien has a more selfish Clark Kent, who is enjoying his powers on the way to becoming Superman.


So why do those takes work for many folks, and Snyder's did not? And it's not just "Superman mad".
Snyder’s Superman worked for many people. Otherwise, MoS and BvS wouldn’t have a fan base.
 
Dec 26, 2018
4,163
Huh? Doesn't the movie explicitly state that Superman didn't kill that warlord guy or any of his goons? I thought that was the whole point of lex hiring people to lie about the Africa incident after lex's men killed/torched all the bodies.
The dictator is never bought up again, so I assume he's dead. Lex plan never made any sense to begin with, it's not like the UN wasn't going to find the bullets.

Superman is Jesus in the DCU. Heh.

No wonder people threw a fit when Superman was portrayed as having flaws. BvS is Snyder’s The Last Temptation Christ.
Always has been, particularly in the live action movies. Snyder himself does this in various shots.

I agree Superman needed a more realistic depiction, but Snyder didn't deliver - he went in the compete opposite direction. Snyder's Superman having flaws isn't an issue, Superman is allowed not to be perfect. It was how he did things which Snyder did not see as flaws. Being a killer is not something Snyder thinks is a flaw for the character.

Snyder’s Superman worked for many people. Otherwise, MoS and BvS wouldn’t have a fan base.
This is true. However, it is also true he was a controversial figure in MOS, which went up to 11 with B vs S.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
5,310
Sure I guess you can say that. I still remain unconvinced seeing as how MoS was mostly well received when it came out and its reputation has only grown stronger over the years.
The Snyder take worked out swimmingly and the general audience loved it? So what is everyone whinging about then? Can't be a martyr for loving Snyder's take if everyone thought it was amazing!

Surely, this is why there's another Superman film on the near horizon.

Pick one. Either the general audiences loved that version of Superman, or they're all misguided for not getting what Synder was putting down. That's two different directions of thought.
 
Last edited:
Oct 26, 2017
4,330
The Snyder take worked out swimmingly and the general audience loved it? So what is everyone whinging about then? Can't be a martyr for loving Snyder's take if everyone thought it was amazing!

Surely, this is why there's another Superman film on the near horizon.
Harsh.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,107
France
Huh? Doesn't the movie explicitly state that Superman didn't kill that warlord guy or any of his goons?
Snyder cut the part where we see Superman breaking outside with a bloody warlord ragdoll in his hands, then throwing him kilometers away in the desert... but super speed + these 2 walls are enough to tell us that the guy is dead.



The best part ? Superman almost smiles in this scene, just when he decides to go for the killing.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,310
I don't want to be harsh, but you can't have a discussion if you can't agree on the foundations.

Using audience scores alone:

Man of Steel
RT: 75%, 3.9/5
IMDB: 7.1/10

Now, that's better than Suicide Squad or BvS, but below Aquaman and Wonder Woman. It's actually in line with Justice League, in terms of RT user score.

Justice League
RT: 73%, 3.9/5
IMDB: 6.5/10

This range is where some of Marvel's more controversial films land as well, like Thor: the Dark World or Iron Man 2. Audiences had issues with Superman in Man of Steel, but the blockbuster action, clean visual style, and starting narrative (audiences seem more forgiving with origin stories) meant they were willing to give Snyder leeway.

Problem is the sequel is Batman v Superman:

BvS
RT: 63%, 3.5/5
IMDB: 6.5/10

Yes, user scores have audiences disliking BvS more than or as much as Justice League. And Batman was seen as one of the better parts of the film. And look, that's fine. Audiences (and critics) weren't huge fans of Synder's Superman. You can look at the user scores, you can look at the box office drops if you want hard numbers. And hey, it happens. People disliked Bryan Singer's Superman even more and he thought he was just doing Reeves again.

In both cases, something about the take didn't work. My thing is always—put yourself aside for a moment—why didn't it work? Like, I didn't think Venom was a good film, but I can also see why it worked for the general audience. It's not because they're stupid; they paid money and wanted to be entertained. Hardy's performance is entertaining. To the tune of $855 million. Likewise, I like The Last Jedi, but I understand why it's a downer film for the holiday season when left with the general audience.

In terms of these superhero films, you're looking for something that can entertain and deliver whatever deeper themes are at play. That's the successful benchmark in the genre. Instead of being like, "Oh, they missed this line or that bit" ask yourself what about the composition lead to that feeling? Because as someone who reviews games for a living, generally what happens is folks don't like a thing, and then they go searching for the reason "why". They're unable to articulate it, so they go find the person that will explain their dissatisfaction in a way that makes the most sense, and then they'll go with that. doesn't mean that's necessarily the problem they had, but it's close enough.
 
Oct 26, 2017
289
What's the record on how many pages we've gone without discussing Snyder's mark on the DCEU? I dont feel like it is much.

Both sides of the argument lean heavily on confirmation bias. I'm guilty of it myself despite how reasonable I try to be. It's an endless debate where neither side will ever really come to terms. I'm at least a little thankful the discourse in this thread stays somewhat civil, ignoring the rare extremist on either side of the coin.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,350
Snyder cut the part where we see Superman breaking outside with a bloody warlord ragdoll in his hands, then throwing him kilometers away in the desert... but super speed + these 2 walls are enough to tell us that the guy is dead.



The best part ? Superman almost smiles in this scene, just when he decides to go for the killing.
In a comic book movie, a person never dies unless it's explicitly stated or shown that they do. You can't go by real world physics with stuff like that gif.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,350
Yeah, he could be leading with his fist while holding the guy close :)
I had thought about that, but, realistically, one tiny rock from that collapse is all it would take to kill that guy going at that speed. But again, this is a comic book movie, not a documentary or historical fiction.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,310
In a comic book movie, a person never dies unless it's explicitly stated or shown that they do. You can't go by real world physics with stuff like that gif.
Yep. No body, no kill. Otherwise Cap murdered a ton of dudes in the beginning of Winter Soldier, because no one is surviving that shield to the face.
 
Oct 26, 2017
6,882
Whether he’s dead or not, it should be clear Superman is smiling to Lois to tell her to relax. The gif leaves out Lois lowering her hands.

You know, one thing BvS absolutely got right is the idea of people projecting their own ideas onto Superman. One of the sillier posts from back on gaf claimed in shot of Superman hovering over a flooded area, one where you can’t see his face, he’s scowling and pissed off about having to save people. Dudes project their own cynicism onto these moments. Or vice versa. And to be fair, it can be argued it’s for a lack of strong and explicit characterization. But it’s still kinda funny to see some reads on some scenes. Like, dudes having deep empathy for the asshole in the bar groping the bartender.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,107
France
I have no problem with Cap punching his way through soldiers, sending them in the air, that's what he does and it's comicbookish.
I have no problem with Batman absolutely destroying goons in the warehouse, driving their faces through the ground and walls, that's what he does and it's comicbookish.
With the warlord, sorry, but Supes can manage the situation in a lot of different, non lethal, ways. Pushing puny humans full speed through walls, that's not what Superman does. I'm not a fan of Batman iron-branding bad guys either.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,670
Not to touch on having empathy for the dictator who had a gun to a reporter's head... the poor fella.
Like, dudes having deep empathy for the asshole in the bar groping the bartender.
Yep. It's weird.

With the warlord, sorry, but Supes can manage the situation in a lot of different, non lethal, ways.
Superman's powers are lethal to humans. In the DCU, he's not as fast as Flash despite of what Whedon tried to characterize.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,107
France
He could palm the guy in the wall 2 meters away and stop at Lois side, no need to be Flash fast.
He chooses to crush him dirty, not even a clean laser eyes shot to the forehead.
 
Dec 26, 2018
4,163
Superman's powers are lethal to humans. In the DCU, he's not as fast as Flash despite of what Whedon tried to characterize.
In various media a common technique is lighting the gun his heat vision to make the villain drop it. He didn't have the experience to do that in MOS, he should have here. You're right, Superman's powers are lethal to humans which is why he's not supposed to deliberately use them to kill people. Being Superman he can train to wield them safely, or not lethally - like all super-heroes do. This was not an option for those movies since Snyder was not interesting in telling that sort of story with Superman.

Yep. No body, no kill. Otherwise Cap murdered a ton of dudes in the beginning of Winter Soldier, because no one is surviving that shield to the face.
Isn't common in live action renditions, this goes double with films that embrace the "realism" aspect. Cap is fine with killing people n the movies, and in the comics, too. This varies on the writer and the era, he was a traditional non-killer for decades post-WWII in the comics, until Brubaker. Cap isn't Daredevil or Spider-man, either. He will definitely kill when there is no other option.

Whether he’s dead or not, it should be clear Superman is smiling to Lois to tell her to relax. The gif leaves out Lois lowering her hands.

You know, one thing BvS absolutely got right is the idea of people projecting their own ideas onto Superman. One of the sillier posts from back on gaf claimed in shot of Superman hovering over a flooded area, one where you can’t see his face, he’s scowling and pissed off about having to save people. Dudes project their own cynicism onto these moments. Or vice versa. And to be fair, it can be argued it’s for a lack of strong and explicit characterization. But it’s still kinda funny to see some reads on some scenes. Like, dudes having deep empathy for the asshole in the bar groping the bartender.
Which is another factor in how Superman is viewed, to people who dislike Snyder's Superman her reaction implies they've been doing this repeatedly. Not the saving her part, murdering criminals who hold her hostage.

While you're right that people do project their own thoughts on Superman, they aren't doing this in a vacuum - the context extends to both this Superman from MOS, and from depictions in all media and the comics themselves. Superman is not like this in any of them. Snyder's direction with those scenes is not what I'd call a welcoming super-hero, either. He's sullen and morose, like he's Batman in a mood, and that's not the only scene in the movies where this Superman is angry and lashing out or isolating himself, Superman can do all those things but Snyder's is defined by those activities. It never appears like he likes what he's doing. He never seems content to explain his opinions, except to Lois and his parents. One which was fine telling he needn't rescue drowning kids or that he owes humanity nothing to help them with his powers. We're supposed to take on faith he's exactly like traditional Superman when he's anything but, that was the point in this take on Superman. That he's not the one we grew up with.

https://screenrant.com/man-steel-interview-zack-snyder/

It’s a more serious version of Superman. It’s not like a heart attack. We took the mythology seriously. We take him as a character seriously. I believe the movie would appeal to anyone. I think that you’re going to see a Superman you’ve never seen before. We approached it as though no other films had been made. He’s the king-daddy. Honestly that’s why I wanted to do it. I’m interested in Superman because he’s the father of all superheroes. He’s this amazing ambassador for all superheroes. What was it about him that cracked the code that made pop culture embrace this other mythology? What we‘ve made as a film not only examines that but is also an amazing adventure story. It’s been an honor to work on. As a comic book fan, Superman is like the Rosetta Stone of all superheroes. I wanted to be sure the movie treated it respectfully.”
Which he did accomplish.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
6,670
You think Superman has time to fire his heat vision and make the gun hot enough before the guy can (accidentally) fire it? There are enough examples in movies without superheroes where people are used as a shield and held at gun point that it's too risky to go for a snipe. Lois means the world to him. You think he wants to risk that?
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,107
France
He starts the same way, and stops when he chestbumps the guy ? Maybe just slides his hand between the gun and Lois head ?
If he's able to reach the guy before he fires, as it is shown, then he just chose to pulverize him
 
Nov 15, 2017
1,324
I think we're closer to a female superhero team up movie than we are to the next Justice League.

Wonder Woman + Harley Quinn + Mera + Batgirl would be TOO good.
Why choose? Would not be surprised if the next Justice League had more female members.

Mera is definitely gonna be there.
 

Yams

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,870
Snyder cut the part where we see Superman breaking outside with a bloody warlord ragdoll in his hands, then throwing him kilometers away in the desert... but super speed + these 2 walls are enough to tell us that the guy is dead.



The best part ? Superman almost smiles in this scene, just when he decides to go for the killing.
Movies don’t work on real world rules. No body no death is a rule in most visual storytelling
 

a916

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,160
Not sure what ATT expected... you think Netflix makes money on all it's shows? It's the entire service that is supposed to be of value.

Snyder cut the part where we see Superman breaking outside with a bloody warlord ragdoll in his hands, then throwing him kilometers away in the desert... but super speed + these 2 walls are enough to tell us that the guy is dead.



The best part ? Superman almost smiles in this scene, just when he decides to go for the killing.
If they wanted to explain this away, they could just show the dictator and assume Superman broke the wall with his fist or something or arms as he pushed him through.

People assume he's dead because it fits their narrative that Snyder doesn't get Superman and Superman is wreckless.
 

Penguin

The Mushroom Kingdom Knight
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,367
New York

He's saying it'll get rolled into the WB app. Sigh. This is what happens when you don't have a world wide release.
It was always going to roll into Warner media

And honestly 700k is more than I expected

But yeah it has so many handicaps

Only one country
Not on premium devices like consoles
Limited selection
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,310
DC Universe needed to have Marvel Unlimited-level comic offerings, plus those shows.

But even then, that's too limited for premium content production. A full Warner Media app is where all that stuff should be. It was a nice shot, but a sub for streaming video feels like it needs to be network-based, but brand-based.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,748
I want to sub and I can’t even because it’s not in my country. I have to get around it with VPN but I shouldn’t have to.

And then there are those that pirate but don’t pay because it’s another service to subscribe to. Fuck pirates.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,070
Bothell WA
I got the art book for Aquaman yesterday, but it's kind of a disappointment. Like, none of those images posted above are in the book. They only show very final concept art from the characters which is what they ended up looking like in the movie. There's no costume studies in it at all, which is what I love about the Marvel books.
 

a916

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,160
DC Universe needed to have Marvel Unlimited-level comic offerings, plus those shows.

But even then, that's too limited for premium content production. A full Warner Media app is where all that stuff should be. It was a nice shot, but a sub for streaming video feels like it needs to be network-based, but brand-based.
It's bad enough that every network want's their own streaming services (I really only think Disney and Netflix have the IPs to battle)... but WB really thought the DC license could carry one by itself?
 
Dec 6, 2017
1,632
The Snyder take worked out swimmingly and the general audience loved it? So what is everyone whinging about then? Can't be a martyr for loving Snyder's take if everyone thought it was amazing!

Surely, this is why there's another Superman film on the near horizon.

Pick one. Either the general audiences loved that version of Superman, or they're all misguided for not getting what Synder was putting down. That's two different directions of thought.
MoS came out, made money, and then sequels got greenlit. The Blu-ray was a hit and BvS was in line to break all sorts of records. Is that not a sign of interest? Or are we going to pretend like MoS was always reviled?

But whatever. Like Icon said earlier, there’s enough info out there to support either side. I don’t really care if something as nebulous as the “general audience” is on my side or not. I don’t like MoS and BvS cuz I’m a contrarian or anything.
 
Oct 25, 2017
382
Batman v Superman is a great movie because of how people can interpret and project their own feelings onto how Superman acts...much like how that's the apparent case with the people in world of the film, questioning if he is or can always do the right thing.

There was a MOSIAC (Man of Steel Insight Answers Commentary) podcast I listen to and one of the episodes discussed the effects of Zero G and how Superman may have used that to safely incapacitate the warlord holding Lois at gunpoint. Basically, Superman went so fast the warlord went unconscious due to lack of oxygen, with Supes headbutting the walls to take the full brunt of the impact.
 
Dec 26, 2018
4,163
You think Superman has time to fire his heat vision and make the gun hot enough before the guy can (accidentally) fire it? There are enough examples in movies without superheroes where people are used as a shield and held at gun point that it's too risky to go for a snipe. Lois means the world to him. You think he wants to risk that?
It's a comic book movie, people would let it slide. That's how they expect Superman to act.

He starts the same way, and stops when he chestbumps the guy ? Maybe just slides his hand between the gun and Lois head ?
If he's able to reach the guy before he fires, as it is shown, then he just chose to pulverize him
Snyder could have done this, as well. Snyder could have spent days figuring out the logistics for this to work or be comic book plausible but he didn't because he wanted Superman to kill people.

If they wanted to explain this away, they could just show the dictator and assume Superman broke the wall with his fist or something or arms as he pushed him through.

People assume he's dead because it fits their narrative that Snyder doesn't get Superman and Superman is wreckless.
Why would Superman go through a wall, let alone two, if he wasn't trying to kill the dictator? He knows how fragile humans are. Why didn't he stop before he got to the first wall? What purpose other than murder is there for him to do that? As a first action this is a terrible example to get audiences who are skeptical of his Superman to win them over.

People assume that because that's how Snyder frames his Superman in that fashion. Snyder did not set up his Superman with that credibility in MOS, making that his first scene was not trying to win them over that they could trust this guy. There are moments in the films where he does good rescues and had he done that all the time it'd be less of an issue but that is never focused on as a primary insight into how this Superman acts. Snyder's Superman is reckless.


This is not the Superman who is from MOS or B vs S.
 
Nov 13, 2017
3,755
With Birds of Prey so soon, the actors staring to sport their new looks, I'm expecting some costumes soon of Canary, Huntress, and the new Harley.
I'm so excited for this. The Suicide Squad set photos and teasers were A+ and executed perfectly.

Question for everyone: if I use a VPN to change my country to Canada, and log in to Netflix, will Titans show up for streaming?