Batman V. Superman: Dawn Of Justice

[Jester]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

And people say Clark's glasses are a terrible disguise. This is exactly why they're brilliant - we see what we want to see.

It's gotta be the fact that superhero costumes are so form fitting...a well tailored suit can hide a lot, I guess.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

This guy get's it.

Purse Grabber doesn't. He wan't's Bruce Wayne with Kryptonian powers. It comes down to taste, and what you want to see.

Superman, this is not. Sorry Leo, I really don't agree with your vision of who Superman is.

Again. Chris Reeve is NOT Superman either. He happened to wear the suit well and have a charming delivery, with the benefit of a bombastic soundtrack. That's about it.

The Superman in these films is the character as he's been portrayed to some degree in EVERY version EXCEPT the Reeve movies. ONLY THEN did he come out of the box fully-formed and Perfect and Flawless the second he put on the cape. That's the version you like. That's Not Superman. Superman always struggles, learns, and grows as he goes along. That's what we're seeing this time. Not the perfect, infallible Godlike character some prefer, BUT, infinitely more faithful to the source.

The movies are doing the books. And that's fine. That's what they SHOULD do. Not cling desperately to the corpse of a series from 40 years ago that really hasn't aged all that well to begin with. When literally everything in these newer films is from the source material, then it's the people who don't appreciate it who have the problem, which is simply, they're staring at it from the wrong angle.

"I don't like what I'm seeing." Those are the characters. Those are the stories. The REAL ones, not the simple caricatures of the Reeve films. If you don't like the films, then you also simply do not much like the characters or the stories as presented in the source material. And that's pretty wacky. It's from the canon, I don't see why people are even arguing about it. All they did, was compress the sequence of events a little bit so the Zod stuff happened early on and not over a period of years. They didn't "change" or "misinterpret" anything, they just did what was in the comics. I can't believe people are mad about them actually following the script for a change.

But I get it. Most people who claim to be fans of Superman are really Just fans of the Reeve movies. And that's whatever. I just wouldn't go insisting that's the Be All and End All that trumps every other version when those movies have less than nothing to do with the stuff they were inspired by in the first place. Killer soundtrack, don't get me wrong. No resemblance at all to their own source material, however. But regardless, people are way too nostalgic and clingy about all of it. Reeve's movies are not the Definitive Superman interpretation any more than Keaton/Burton or Nolan/Bale's versions of Batman were. They were just One Version, and each version missed the mark as often as they hit.

The fact that they're making it a point to be faithful to the material they're adapting SHOULD be good enough, considering how much some people complain about other movies doing anything BUT. Everything they're doing is Fine! Jesus.
------------------------

Except the Pa Kent stuff, which was downright ludicrous. But people ARE misinterpreting what Martha's trying to tell Clark. The ENTIRE point of this Superman is that he's a hero BY CHOICE, not by birth or "destiny" or genetics, but because it's what HE wants to do. She's reminding him that the only obligation he has is to himself, to live his own life and be happy. And that's nothing new! That's there in the comics, in Lois & Clark, in just about every version where Ma Kent isn't dead, she gives him the occasional "Maybe you don't need to keep being Superman" speech. And he ALWAYS decides to just keep going, because it's what HE wants to do with his gifts.

It's just a Mom being protective of her son. People read way too much into things sometimes. Costner on the other hand was written terribly, no argument here. Everything about that was awful. He could'a been great in the role, but they made a huge mistake. See, with MoS they were trying to condense bits of both the Byrne origin from the "Man of Steel" comics, and other bits of the Byrne run, with stuff from Mark Waid's "Birthright" story. And some of it worked really well, but they directly took Pa Kent from Waid's story, which was a horrible choice, as that is the ONE and only time he's ever been written as such a douchebag in the comics. It was SO out of character that it ruins a lot of what it touches, absolutely. I'm not sure WHY they chose to use Waid's version of Pa over Byrne's, I honestly cannot say. What I assume, is that they took SO much from Byrne's version they felt obligated to take something more of Waid's than just the alien invasion angle, so they picked Pa and figured it wouldn't matter.

That was a big mistake. It would be terrific if another movie had at least one flashback with Pa being more even-handed and supportive than we saw him in MoS. That could retroactively fix a lot.

[plastroncafe]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

What do you think of the Wonder Woman movie being set around WW2?

I think it could be cool, if for no other reason than the costuming, but...it'll have to do quite a bit to keep from being compared to DC's Peggy Carter.

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

And people say Clark's glasses are a terrible disguise. This is exactly why they're brilliant - we see what we want to see.

I used to make a whole lot of fun of Clark's disguise...until people stopped recognizing me when I didn't happen to be wearing my glasses.

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by plastroncafe

I used to make a whole lot of fun of Clark's disguise...until people stopped recognizing me when I didn't happen to be wearing my glasses.

It's happened to me more than once. Same when I've gotten a hair cut. Unless you're looking for it, you'd be blind to it.

My boy Trey looks a hell of a lot like Obama. It's super cray-cray. I've known him half my life. They're even close in age, though Trey is younger and looks older. My man even has a mole near his nose.

Guess what I've never thought? Trey is Obama's secret identity. I've never thought it because, I don't assume Obama has a secret identity.

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Again. Chris Reeve is NOT Superman either. He happened to wear the suit well and have a charming delivery, with the benefit of a bombastic soundtrack. That's about it.

The Superman in these films is the character as he's been portrayed to some degree in EVERY version EXCEPT the Reeve movies. ONLY THEN did he come out of the box fully-formed and Perfect and Flawless the second he put on the cape. That's the version you like. That's Not Superman.

...........



Did you read the article I put up? Also, what? And again, hunh?

Reeve wasn't perfect, but MOS, and BVS aren't even close. He's bending the story to fit a narrative he wants to tell, which is a what if story. It's Snyder trying to turn Superman into an alien invasion film. It's all about fear, and mistrust, and darkness. I watched the SDCC Pannel, and Snyder himself said if you look hard enough you can "justify anything".

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

I cannot believe the streak of agreeing with Leo is still alive.

Someone said something like don't you think Kal went somewhere private to test his powers. Yes, he did, we saw it in the movie, he tried to fly and fell into a mountain. We saw him learning. The only flying we then see him do after that are basically straight lines. He fights FOUR people of equal strength on a street in a small town. I am seriously doubting anyone who has been in an actual fight in real life can honestly think Superman would have the ability to fight Zod who can do the EXACT things he can, and also save buildings and people while not allowing Zod to go somewhere else and cause destruction or killing him. Superman saves as many people as he can. Someone posted a link to the tanker being thrown at him, and he jumps over it. He's been "Superman" for about 24 hours at this point. In retrospect, I'm sure he'll use his powers to stop it. He does not become the smartest, and safest fighter just because he puts on the suit. There is a learning curve. Superman can't do EVERYTHING. If you think he can, then you don't like Superman.

Regarding Pa Kent. I'm not married to the source material, so I don't mind when they make their own path. Pa was telling Clark as a kid...the world isn't ready yet. And Pa wasn't sure if Clark was going to use his powers for good or evil at that point. He was also being protective of Clark, knowing if he was exposed, people would try and kill him or use him as a test subject. Now...he did NOT die to save a dog. Way to miss the point. There is a theme in the movie of "A good death is it's own reward". Meaning a noble death. Pa is teaching Clark to be selfless. He runs into the tornado to save people. He saves a small child. He then hands the child to Clark and tells him to make sure every one is safe. He would rather risk his life than risk Clark being exposed. In Pa's mind Clark isn't ready as evidence of that argument they had just minutes prior. No it's not the greatest path that could have been taken, but it was an interesting one in my opinion. And certainly not stupid.

I just don't see anyway Superman could have stopped Zod in that situation. Yeah you can take it all the way back and say they shouldn't have written them into that position, but too bad. It happened. He was not proud of doing it.

And about the podcast, I'll try and find it. It was 2 years ago that I listened to it, and I randomly found it while in a Youtube vortex the weekend the movie was released.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Again. Chris Reeve is NOT Superman either. He happened to wear the suit well and have a charming delivery, with the benefit of a bombastic soundtrack. That's about it.

The Superman in these films is the character as he's been portrayed to some degree in EVERY version EXCEPT the Reeve movies. ONLY THEN did he come out of the box fully-formed and Perfect and Flawless the second he put on the cape. That's the version you like. That's Not Superman. Superman always struggles, learns, and grows as he goes along. That's what we're seeing this time. Not the perfect, infallible Godlike character some prefer, BUT, infinitely more faithful to the source.

The movies are doing the books. And that's fine. That's what they SHOULD do. Not cling desperately to the corpse of a series from 40 years ago that really hasn't aged all that well to begin with. When literally everything in these newer films is from the source material, then it's the people who don't appreciate it who have the problem, which is simply, they're staring at it from the wrong angle.

"I don't like what I'm seeing." Those are the characters. Those are the stories. The REAL ones, not the simple caricatures of the Reeve films. If you don't like the films, then you also simply do not much like the characters or the stories as presented in the source material. And that's pretty wacky. It's from the canon, I don't see why people are even arguing about it. All they did, was compress the sequence of events a little bit so the Zod stuff happened early on and not over a period of years. They didn't "change" or "misinterpret" anything, they just did what was in the comics. I can't believe people are mad about them actually following the script for a change.

But I get it. Most people who claim to be fans of Superman are really Just fans of the Reeve movies. And that's whatever. I just wouldn't go insisting that's the Be All and End All that trumps every other version when those movies have less than nothing to do with the stuff they were inspired by in the first place. Killer soundtrack, don't get me wrong. No resemblance at all to their own source material, however. But regardless, people are way too nostalgic and clingy about all of it. Reeve's movies are not the Definitive Superman interpretation any more than Keaton/Burton or Nolan/Bale's versions of Batman were. They were just One Version, and each version missed the mark as often as they hit.

The fact that they're making it a point to be faithful to the material they're adapting SHOULD be good enough, considering how much some people complain about other movies doing anything BUT. Everything they're doing is Fine! Jesus.

Exactly! I mean, I get where the hate is coming from. I myself would have preferred a Superman in a less bleak world where he spends as much time saving people as Superman as he does fighting and doing his whole Clark Kent dance at the Daily Planet but what a lot of people forget is that Man of Steel was just an origin story. He's not in that point in his life yet but despite not being "recognizable" as the Superman we all know and love, he was still true to his character. A lot of people don't realize it but Man of Steel really did justice to his character. Because of Man of Steel, more people know who Superman really is and no longer see him as that boring overpowered superhero who never struggles. Sure, plenty of those people still exist, but not as many since the release of Man of Steel.

Originally Posted by Purse Grabbin Puke

I just don't see anyway Superman could have stopped Zod in that situation. Yeah you can take it all the way back and say they shouldn't have written them into that position, but too bad. It happened. He was not proud of doing it.

Not to mention Zod's goal was genocide. The situation may have been a dumb one, especially because the family was just standing there instead of running because they were certainly not cornered. But in the long run, how is Superman going to stop Zod? Is he going to throw him in jail? He's too powerful to be contained and the more they go on fighting the more people are going to die. Taking the fight elsewhere isn't going to stop Zod from trying to take lives. There was no choice but to kill Zod.

[Slade]

Originally Posted by Turo602

Not to mention Zod's goal was genocide. The situation may have been a dumb one, especially because the family was just standing there instead of running because they were certainly not cornered. But in the long run, how is Superman going to stop Zod? Is he going to throw him in jail? He's too powerful to be contained and the more they go on fighting the more people are going to die. Taking the fight elsewhere isn't going to stop Zod from trying to take lives. There was no choice but to kill Zod.

I've been saying this since I saw the movie. What are all these options he actually had that people are saying? Cover his eyes? Okay, and then what? The heat vision just burns through Kal's hand, or maybe it goes off into different directions, could still hit the family. Far as I can tell, there was nothing else.

I know it was written that way as well, which is some people's problem with the it and that makes total sense. I think it should have been written differently as well, but it wasn't.

[Candy Kappa]

Well, depending on which cut off Superman 2, Reeve Superman also kills Zod, a depowered Zod. At least MoS Superman had a good reason to end him.

[Autbot_Benz]

though I do like Man Of Steel Superman I found this pic and it made me snicker a bit

[ZariusTwo]

Marvel's Tom Brevroot on the trailer (aka "Hey, look, it's Marvel being idiots again")

It’s a Superman film in which Superman is impotent, and needs to be told by other people to do something, anything (or even nothing) while being depressed and upset that he’s stronger than anybody, can fly and is bulletproof. This is so not Superman that if you put a different letter on his chest, nobody would recognize him.

I don’t have any great interest in this particular iteration of SUICIDE SQUAD, but I felt like that trailer at least captured the tone and the flavor of the property well–it felt like a SUICIDE SQUAD film to me. Not so with BvS.

Cynical, joyless, dark, pseudo-serious twaddle.

And don’t even get me started on Bruce Wayne running into the 9-11 footage. That played not as a moment of heroism so much as him being crabby that Superman dinged his personal building.

http://brevoortformspring.tumblr.com...-the-bvs#notes

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Candy Kappa

Well, depending on which cut off Superman 2, Reeve Superman also kills Zod, a depowered Zod. At least MoS Superman had a good reason to end him.

Exactly! What a crock of sh*t that was. I KNOW, in the TV version and in the script he just chucked him in a hole and then "sometime later" pulled him out, to be taken away by the "Arctic Police". Like, 5 people know about or ever saw that. To everyone else, "the real, iconic, never-to-be-surpassed One True Superman" just chucked a human being down a crevasse and laughed about it. THAT's the guy everyone is mentally married to. Same guy who throws cellophane S shields at people who shoot laser beams outta their face. "That'll learn 'em!"

Zod always has to die. That's the only way Zod's story can end, as he is quite literally Superman's opposite number. The details change in each telling, but at least since the 80s, it always ends with Zod dead by Clark's hand. Once again, they just smushed a few versions of the story into One. It's why I wasn't 100% on board with Zod being the first villain; I wasn't and am not a huge fan of having Superman's "first" movie end with him killing someone, and as soon as I heard "Zod" I knew how it was going to end. But, it's part of the larger story they're telling and I've made peace with it. It wasn't a choice I would've made but it is one that makes sense in the grand scheme of things, and they're not the first ones to tell that story.

I'll agree, though, the editing of the whole thing and the build-up did not completely sell the moment (and cutting away to a Joke Moment immediately after was plain awful). The story of the movie is fine, but I'll agree that the editing was not very good, and I assume that's why they wanted to have all the footage for BvS in the can a year in advance, so they can finsih it "properly" this time. People often forget, a huge amount of MoS was done in a rush because of the Siegel lawsuit. They didn't have a choice, they had to have X amount done by a certain date. On the whole, the visuals of the new film look much, much better than what we saw last time.

Zarius: Sounds like he's describing Every Marvel "Hero" instead, right? At least the comic book versions, which are infinitely more navel-gazing and less proactive than their MCU counterparts.

Nah, it's just the character. He does NOT always somehow "just know" the right thing to do, or decide to constantly impose his will on others. Tons of stuff in the books where he'll confer with Ma or Pa or Lois or Bruce or Diana or whoever, just to be sure, "Am I really doing the right thing?" It's not called "impotent", it's called Getting Perspective. When you can hear a pin drop from space, you need to surround yourself with people you trust who can make sure you're not getting too wrapped up in yourself and the Big Picture. That's one of my favorite things about the character; "Just because I can punch out the sun, doesn't mean I'm always right." Sometimes you just need a second opinion. Nothing new there.

[Commenter 42]

So, when Snyder admits, flat out that he's just drawing by himself and trying to come up with stuff that's "cool" - you assign that to some omnipotent understanding of all things Super?

Get over it folks - this isn't a larger story. They were going to go a whole different direction, and then pivoted when Affleck was brought on. The back slapping going on here is f*cking hilarious. The writer they credited at the SDCC pannel was Chris Terrio, not Goyer, and Terrio wasn't involved with MOS... SHM.

100% Shoe-horned idea. "Golly gee - they didn't like all that distruction in MOS, better figure out how to justify that....I know let's take everyones favorite character, and give him the vantage point of our fanboy detractors! Then, We'll just have them fight! I smell the Billions!"

And Leo, Your justifications just don't hold water dude. You make too many allowances. Either it is or it isn't ripped from the comics - and while they are borrowing numerous elements - the Horse himself spate "It's a new story we came up with"

It's Batman in a red cape. Just bloody admit it. MOS made zero sense, so if this is a continuation now, of a story that went no-****ing where...why should we be interested? To see expensive cosplay? To watch more after effects work? ****** muddy color and heavy grain filter passes? 300 starring DC characters?

Snyder is a HACK. Simple as that. They don't understand Superman, and I'm starting to think neither do you.

Mark my words. They'll make huge bank, no question. It might be the biggest movie opening ever.

The film itself though, will be the equivalent of Bay's Transformers, full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing.

[Leo656]

It is an original story. In the sense that it's comprised of elements of dozens of pre-existing stories, that were trimmed and streamlined to make something that works better in the condensed storytelling format of film rather than the decompressed format of print. It's not a 1:1 adaption, but it's in no way "original", either. It's a "new" story that uses tons of old stories, without the clutter. In that, it's not so different from what most comic movies claim they attempt to do. This is simply a more literal translation than most, right down to the framing and sequencing of the scenes as comic book panels. Again, maybe you don't like comics. I do. And I like what I see in this more than what I usually see from these movies. You say they're not doing the work and don't get the material. Well, lots of people don't agree.

I hear what he says. To me, it sounds like he's simplifying the way it actually works, and maybe trying to give himself a little extra credit at the same time. But the fact is, you can NOT get SO close to the comics completely by accident. Clearly, he IS doing a lot of homework, or at least listening to people who are. It's probably as "original" as, "What if I take this, and put it together with that, but instead of this I do that?" Saying it's all his own ideas makes better copy, but... c'mon, that ain't serious. That's for attention, that is.

I also don't agree they had a completely different direction planned. I can't remember the exact interview either, but they were very explicit early on that MoS was going to have repercussions that would spill over into several other movies. They probably didn't have the exact BvS idea nailed down yet, but they were definitely thinking of a larger universe that used MoS as its launching point, and dealing with the consequences of everything that happened. And if they had something else planned... this is probably better, so whatever.

Personal insults, meanwhile, I don't have to respond to. You don't get to watch One Movie and tell me I don't "get" the character. I will absolutely pull the elitist card when it comes to Superman. I promise you, I've seen those movies more than you have. I've read more of the books than any sane person has. Not a day have I lived, where I haven't immersed myself in the mythology in some way. There are Christians who don't know their Bible the way I know the Superman mythology backwards and forwards. You don't get to say, "Well, I like the movie better," and imply that I "don't get" Superman. The character is far greater than and far beyond those silly movies. Or this silly movie, for that matter.

That's literally the second most insulting thing I've ever had said to me, and definitely the most irrational. No, sir, I don't like that at all.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

So, when Snyder admits, flat out that he's just drawing by himself and trying to come up with stuff that's "cool" - you assign that to some omnipotent understanding of all things Super?

Get over it folks - this isn't a larger story. They were going to go a whole different direction, and then pivoted when Affleck was brought on. The back slapping going on here is f*cking hilarious. The writer they credited at the SDCC pannel was Chris Terrio, not Goyer, and Terrio wasn't involved with MOS... SHM.

100% Shoe-horned idea. "Golly gee - they didn't like all that distruction in MOS, better figure out how to justify that....I know let's take everyones favorite character, and give him the vantage point of our fanboy detractors! Then, We'll just have them fight! I smell the Billions!"

And Leo, Your justifications just don't hold water dude. You make too many allowances. Either it is or it isn't ripped from the comics - and while they are borrowing numerous elements - the Horse himself spate "It's a new story we came up with"

It's Batman in a red cape. Just bloody admit it. MOS made zero sense, so if this is a continuation now, of a story that went no-****ing where...why should we be interested? To see expensive cosplay? To watch more after effects work? ****** muddy color and heavy grain filter passes? 300 starring DC characters?

Snyder is a HACK. Simple as that. They don't understand Superman, and I'm starting to think neither do you.

Mark my words. They'll make huge bank, no question. It might be the biggest movie opening ever.

The film itself though, will be the equivalent of Bay's Transformers, full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing.

What a bunch of crap... Duh, it's an original story that he made up. That doesn't mean it isn't influenced or even borrowing from the comics.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

So, when Snyder admits, flat out that he's just drawing by himself and trying to come up with stuff that's "cool" - you assign that to some omnipotent understanding of all things Super?

Get over it folks - this isn't a larger story. They were going to go a whole different direction, and then pivoted when Affleck was brought on. The back slapping going on here is f*cking hilarious. The writer they credited at the SDCC pannel was Chris Terrio, not Goyer, and Terrio wasn't involved with MOS... SHM.

100% Shoe-horned idea. "Golly gee - they didn't like all that distruction in MOS, better figure out how to justify that....I know let's take everyones favorite character, and give him the vantage point of our fanboy detractors! Then, We'll just have them fight! I smell the Billions!"

And Leo, Your justifications just don't hold water dude. You make too many allowances. Either it is or it isn't ripped from the comics - and while they are borrowing numerous elements - the Horse himself spate "It's a new story we came up with"

It's Batman in a red cape. Just bloody admit it. MOS made zero sense, so if this is a continuation now, of a story that went no-****ing where...why should we be interested? To see expensive cosplay? To watch more after effects work? ****** muddy color and heavy grain filter passes? 300 starring DC characters?

Snyder is a HACK. Simple as that. They don't understand Superman, and I'm starting to think neither do you.

Mark my words. They'll make huge bank, no question. It might be the biggest movie opening ever.

The film itself though, will be the equivalent of Bay's Transformers, full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing.

Please produce a quote where Snyder says he's just trying to make stuff that's "cool". BvS has an Academy Award winning writer. They're making Batman v Superman, not Dinner with Andre. There has to be action.

Batman was announced weeks before Affleck was announced, not sure how the "plans changed". Snyder has talked about the consequences of the end of MoS the same week the movie was released. He talked about the consequences of Kal killing Zod. This is days after the release of the movie. He talked about it all while saying he isn't sure they're getting a sequel. There wasn't ever a time where he ignored it. Or just wanted destruction porn in MoS. I think some of you are just blinded by action movies, and as soon as you see a few CGI shots you roll your eyes and think it's a crappy movie.

Goyer was the writer of MoS, not BvS. Why on earth would he praise Goyer at a BvS panel?!

"100% shoehorned idea" You just make stuff up. You have NO factual evidence. You don't like something so you create fantasy.

The story didn't makes sense you say...well that's your fault. Plenty of people had no problem following along. And you're mad about effects work...in a Superman movie...Maybe they should have went the Superman Lives route, and had him not fly, and not wear the suit. I personally see pictures of Reeves, or Routh, and the light blue and bright red just doesn't look good on a real person. I prefer the darker. It makes it more realistic.

I swear if I read that one more movie is a Bay rip off, I am going to vomit. Can we just censor "Michael Bay" and "Transformers" like they censor curse words?

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Personal insults, meanwhile, I don't have to respond to. You don't get to watch One Movie and tell me I don't "get" the character. I will absolutely pull the elitist card when it comes to Superman. I promise you, I've seen those movies more than you have. I've read more of the books than any sane person has. Not a day have I lived, where I haven't immersed myself in the mythology in some way. There are Christians who don't know their Bible the way I know the Superman mythology backwards and forwards. You don't get to say, "Well, I like the movie better," and imply that I "don't get" Superman. The character is far greater than and far beyond those silly movies. Or this silly movie, for that matter.

That's literally the second most insulting thing I've ever had said to me, and definitely the most irrational. No, sir, I don't like that at all.

I'm not "insulting you" anymore than you've insulted me. You've claimed the same, assuming you know me, and I was more than irritated, but that's fine.

I wrote my thesis on Superman dude. I've studied Nietzsche. I know my **** as well. I said before that my main source of fandom stems from the Donner films, not my only. Yes, Reeve embodied 80% of who I think the character is, but wasn't the perfect version.
I cherry pick a little as well - I don't consider Superman red/blue or Dean Cain cannon. I ignored much of Justice League Unlimited. I like the idea of the eradicator. I loved the stupid big key to the fortress no matter how stupid it was. I also love his menagerie of aliens, his robot clones, Lex as billionaire mogule over mad scientist or career criminal, the new Supergirl is terrible, but The 80's Supergirl was only passable. I'd really like to see the Michael turner Supergirl ... i really liked her rebellious nature. I don't think of Kryptonians as robotic - or Vulcan might be a better word - but simply enlightened, possibly more passive. I imagine a group of philosophers debating a topic, while the world around them crumbles - but I know THAT is just my take.
I'm just as selective with my head cannon, in a way. I havn't yet, but plan on visiting Metropolis for the annual festival. Superman for all seasons is one of my fave's for it's charming art, Kingdom Come for it's epic battle, and the interesting inclusion of Wormwood, while Superman V Mohammed Ali was my very first comic book ever at the age of 4. Of all the artists, I think José Luis García-López is my touchstone, though I appreciate Frank Quietly, and Jurgens. Jerome K Moore is pretty damned talented too.
http://img15.deviantart.net/a7ca/i/2...me_k_moore.jpg

Random facts - The Daily Planet was based on The Toronto Star in Canada, Siegel and Shuster detested Gingers in their highschool, but still put them in their comics...
Seriously, I could go on man. I'm not sure what proof your looking for :p

This Supergirl would be great...


BUT! I hate how Snyder is aligning and re-arranging the material. It's backwards and awkward, and plain wrong tonally.

I'm not the sort of purist who argues if Superman has killed in the past. That's frankly irrelevant. I don't view that as a line that should not be crossed.

I do care that Superman, the thing I wanted to be when I grew up, not be retooled into something unrecognizable.

I'm not looking to get into a full on pissing match, BUT you've been acting as though you are the only person on this board with any claim on the character, and telling the rest of us we're wrong. Buddy, you a'int the only fanatic here. We just didn't get down on the lore at the same exact place and time, meaning you keep reaching into a specific time frame of the comics as justification, and I look at the larger picture of almost 80 years, and call that view into question.

Long story short - I'm just as fanatical - believe it. We have very different interpretations, obviously, but something you should be agreeing with me on, is that Superman is not a DARK character. He's supposed to be living perfection, not a regular joe with super powers - at least as far as I'm concerned.

Snyder treats him like that. A guy with problems. An outsider who can't relate with parents who don't care if he ever does. He's this ultimate loner struggling to figure out if he should bother with humanity at all.

I don't care if Snyder is pulling events from the comics, or making them up. I honestly don't care if there's a shred of cannon from the timeline. The timelines are so overwrought, that it's almost pointless to care. I care that the central idea remain intact, and I think that's where we disagree, fundamentally on who Superman is, and why it feels like you don't get the character, at least the way I do. I'm okay with that, but man, I'll be honest, the way you denounce other interpretations as though you're the only one smart enough to divine the essence of a comic book ... dude. I like you and all, but you're sounding like the bay apologists in the PDMT thread. I just didn't expect that from you.

Snyder pissed me off long ago. It started with the ****ing trunks. "we don't need these".

WHO THE **** ARE YOU BRO? Step off! you don't tug on Superman's cape, and you sure as F don't take the undies.

That's like saying TMNT don't need bandanas. Sure, it's rational, but some things are sacred.

Then the rest of the suit, with F'ing chain mail. Hell no.
Everything since that moment has been Snyder playing in his sandbox with his action figures, coming up with childish ideas, and destroying Superman.

Some people see Jesus in a burnt piece of toast ... and while, you can argue a case for it, the toast is just toast, and not a miracle. I say again, you're giving Snyder et al. credit for happy accidents.

Not looking to make an enemy - just giving a slap to the face of a friend. Wake up man!

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by Turo602

What a bunch of crap... Duh, it's an original story that he made up. That doesn't mean it isn't influenced or even borrowing from the comics.

Bunch of crap? Yep BvS is a POS just like MOS.

Also, that's my point. Leo was arguing that it was faithful to the comics. I'm saying, not so much.

I've also said that an exact translation of the comics events aren't my concern - my problem is that the movie is not a Superman movie in essence - kind of like how PDMT isn't actually a Turtles movie. It's an elseworlds tale, at best.

Originally Posted by Purse Grabbin Puke

Please produce a quote where Snyder says he's just trying to make stuff that's "cool".

I did, already.

Try reading. It's a fun thing we do here.

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

...........

Reeve wasn't perfect, but MOS, and BVS aren't even close. He's bending the story to fit a narrative he wants to tell, which is a what if story. It's Snyder trying to turn Superman into an alien invasion film. It's all about fear, and mistrust, and darkness. I watched the SDCC Pannel, and Snyder himself said if you look hard enough you can "justify anything".

Also, no offense, but, you're not the brightest guy. I can't take you seriously with that sig.

1. "100% shoehorned idea". That was a hyperbolic statement. It would be utterly impossible to prove, for any of us, how and when they came up with anything. I was clearly stating an opinion. I might be 100% right or 0% right, and considering no one here is actually Nolan Or Goyer, we'll never know. Based on what i've read, this is my educated guess.

2. I understood what the story was; however, the story they attempted to tell was inconsistent. I won't go over it here, as most of us have tread that path before.

3. I LOVE action movies. I even adore most of Bay's action movies. Yep I admit, he knows how to shoot action. I LOVED Fury road. Loved. BIG HEART! Yep. Snyder, did not handle the action well in MOS. He turned to vomit cam.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

Bunch of crap? Yep BvS is a POS just like MOS.

Also, that's my point. Leo was arguing that it was faithful to the comics. I'm saying, not so much.

I've also said that an exact translation of the comics events aren't my concern - my problem is that the movie is not a Superman movie in essence - kind of like how PDMT isn't actually a Turtles movie. It's an elseworlds tale, at best.

You must think very low of your opinions.

But that's exactly what he meant by "faithful to the comics." He's elaborated that point several times.

Well, that's sort of the point. Man of Steel is an origin story. He's not really Superman yet but that doesn't mean he's not true to character. I can see what you mean by it not feeling like a Superman movie, it was a darker film and very much all over the place but in the bigger picture, I can really appreciate it. It's hard to say that Snyder didn't have a grander picture in mind with what we know about both Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice and while Batman may have not been part of the plan from the start, I think he knew what he was doing with Superman.

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by Turo602

You must think very low of your opinions.

But that's exactly what he meant by "faithful to the comics." He's elaborated that point several times.

Well, that's sort of the point. Man of Steel is an origin story. He's not really Superman yet but that doesn't mean he's not true to character. I can see what you mean by it not feeling like a Superman movie, it was a darker film and very much all over the place but in the bigger picture, I can really appreciate it. It's hard to say that Snyder didn't have a grander picture in mind with what we know about both Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice and while Batman may have not been part of the plan from the start, I think he knew what he was doing with Superman.

I completely disagree. Snyder Isn't that smart.

That's like suggesting the sequel to 300 would have apologized for the existence of the 300. Maybe Sucker Punch 2 was planned to explain the events of SP 1.

No, bloody way. You buy that, I got swamp land you might be interested in.

And seriously, I don't need MOS explained to me. FFS, I understand exactly what Snyder wanted to say, but he didn't say it well, and what he did say, was idiotic.

My dad died slowly saving a dog.
My other dad is a living hologram who forgot to invite mom.
Don't think of others, just do you.
You can always punch your way out of a problem, especially laser problems.
Let's all terraform the planet, that way nobody will be super, including us!
My planet exploded, and all I got was this lousy Codex.
I'm inexplicably carrying all the genes of all the krypts, but there are 0 girl krypts left to get freaky with.
Now that I made a big mess, I'ma gonna go and hide out with my new GF, and act like nothing happened.
When the military follows me, I bust their sh*t up fast son!
I'm exactly like Jesus, because I'm nothing like Jesus.
I'm not very good at anything yet, but I'm learning! Oh WELL!
Was it helpful, me coming to Earth? Did things get better?
I have emotional issues. When I kill, I cry.


Superman should learn to Superman off screen. He isn't Spider-man. This isn't television. A film should have 3 acts, not be one giant first act with lazy flashbacks inserted throughout.

It was a terrible film folks. It doesn't get a pass because it needs a sequel to tell the rest of the story.

And if Zod is DD, that's ultra crap.