All Things Superman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 27

[ThePhantasm]

Originally Posted by fanboiii

Yeah, it could be they were just looking for something to criticize. I don't even know what "fine but replaceable" means. Were they expecting him to do what Heath Ledger did for Joker? Superman isn't that dramatic a character anyway.

Exactly.

People have different criteria for what it means to be a good actor as well. If Cavill's acting in the film is subtle but effective, that's good acting to me. But not to most people...

So long as I believe he is Clark Kent and Superman while watching the film, his acting is fine.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Loving all this spin after all the smack talk.

[hopefuldreamer]

Originally Posted by fanboiii

Yeah, it could be they were just looking for something to criticize. I don't even know what "fine but replaceable" means. Were they expecting him to do what Heath Ledger did for Joker? Superman isn't that dramatic a character anyway.

I'd seriously like to ask those people claiming he's replaceable who they would replace him with... if it's that easy...

Originally Posted by G.Godfrey

Cage is a great actor. So I guess a lot of people here would be ok with him as Supes.

I'd love it if they gave him a cameo though.

[ThePhantasm]

Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie

Loving all this spin after all the smack talk.

Smack talk from one single Twitter source's hearsay.

[Dragon_316ca]

Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie

Loving all this spin after all the smack talk.

Thanks for that retweet, FNJ.

[Mike22]

Heh, I couldn't possibly care any less about those comments on Cavills acting.
I¨ve evaluated some of his work specifically to get an impression of his acting abilities, and as far as I'm concerned, this guy is gonna do great. He's not as wooden as Routh was by any stretch of the imagination, but not necessarily as great as Reeve, ( which I didn't expect him to be).
The actor playing Superman needs to have the talent, charisma and screen presence, and Cavill has all three as far as I'm concerned.
The problem with some people is that they are expecting him to surpass Reeve and turn over this incredible performance that'll get everyone's attention, but realistically it isn't going to happen.

[G.Godfrey]

The twitter dude said he heard the score isn't done yet but according to JunkieXL it's done and in the soundtrack CD mixing stages.

[Lead Cenobite]

Originally Posted by The Batman

Its looking like the movie itself is good. I think some of us are just wondering if the lead is going to be amazing or just passable.

I'm speaking more hypothetically. These twitter comments have shaken my faith a bit, though, and it is important to me that the lead actor does well. But to be honest, when it comes to acting, I don't have very high standards. What others call bad acting, I consider to be decent and sometimes even good.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Originally Posted by ThePhantasm

Smack talk from one single Twitter source's hearsay.

If it was the opposite reaction to Cavill, I guarantee there would be zero skepticism here.

[The Batman]

"Fine but replaceable" means that in their view, anyone with passable acting skills and a good physique could've done as good a job as Cavill.

Whereas with Iron Man for example, most people can't imagine anyone but RDJ playing the part. It's all about having ownership of the role, to the point where you find it hard to see anyone else playing it.

[Boy Scout]

Originally Posted by fanboiii

Yeah, it could be they were just looking for something to criticize. I don't even know what "fine but replaceable" means.

It means that he didn't suck, but if they had to replace him in the sequel, it wouldn't be a big deal.

[STARMAN]

If we could just see one scene of Cavill as Superman than I think we would get a good idea of how good he is. Just once scene.

[The Batman]

Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie

Loving all this spin after all the smack talk.

"Oh, forget trying to get a great actor to play one of the most iconic characters in fiction. I'll be TOTALLY FINE WITH a potentially mediocre performance as long as he has the look and some sort of aura."

[G.Godfrey]

Originally Posted by Mike22

The problem with some people is that they are expecting him to surpass Reeve and turn over this incredible performance that'll get everyone's attention, but realistically it isn't going to happen.

The thing is, Cavill will obviously play a very different Superman to Reeve. More stoic, introspective and depressed/angry. Reeve's jovial, charming and relaxed character is the kind that endears more to people. Cavill has shown a similar kind of relaxed charm and quality in a lot of his previous roles, but I doubt this will be used in MOS and that's a disadvantaged already when comparing him to Reeve. Plus we've had a lot of great performances in superhero movies since Reeve so it's not as easy to come in and do something that makes as big a mark as Reeve did back then. Almost impossible, IMO.

[Tacit Ronin]

I find it amusing that we so readily accepted and celebrated the positive twitter buzz a couple of days ago without one single person questioning the validity of the source and the instant we have some not so positive buzz (that is not outright negative either) are we encouraged to practice scrutiny.

[hopefuldreamer]

Meh, We're fans. If we hear he's done a good job, were all going to smile and be happy about it. If we hear he's done a bad job, we'll try and rationalise why that info might be wrong or subjective.

Not sure what's wrong with that, or why anyone is surprised.

Originally Posted by The Batman

"Oh, forget trying to get a great actor to play one of the most iconic characters in fiction. I'll be TOTALLY FINE WITH a potentially mediocre performance as long as he has the look and some sort of aura."

You are aware it's too late to change the casting decision, right?

I mean, we can sit around whining about Cavill not being perfect enough, or we can just focus on the positives he brings to the role...

[UaalaDan]

I don't believe this twitter buzz at all.

[Mysteryman]

Even the part that said the movie was GOOD?

[STARMAN]

Maybe they didn't like his hairstyle. That's what it has to be.

[G.Godfrey]

Originally Posted by The Batman

"Oh, forget trying to get a great actor to play one of the most iconic characters in fiction. I'll be TOTALLY FINE WITH a potentially mediocre performance as long as he has the look and some sort of aura."

This may all very well be false or simply opinions of biased people or perhaps the script/role itself is such that no actor would be able to impress with a great performance because there IS NO great performance in it (think SR). Think about that before publicly executing Cavill without seeing a single scene of him from the film.

[ElDuderino]

To be honest, my expectations for Cavill are extremely low, particularly after seeing Immortals and Cold Light of Day. If I come out thinking that he did not -- at the least -- detract from the experience of the movie (i.e., "fine but replaceable"), then I'm good to go.

For example, I could not stand Bale's voice. It completely took me out of the experience and was like fingers on a chalkboard. But even then I still enjoyed the movies immensely.

[Rodrigo90]

Originally Posted by The Batman

"Oh, forget trying to get a great actor to play one of the most iconic characters in fiction. I'll be TOTALLY FINE WITH a potentially mediocre performance as long as he has the look and some sort of aura."

And so it is with God

[Lead Cenobite]

Originally Posted by G.Godfrey

The thing is, Cavill will obviously play a very different Superman to Reeve. More stoic, introspective and depressed/angry. Reeve's jovial, charming and relaxed character is the kind that endears more to people. Cavill has shown a similar kind of relaxed charm and quality in a lot of his previous roles, but I doubt this will be used in MOS and that's a disadvantaged already when comparing him to Reeve. Plus we've had a lot of great performances in superhero movies since Reeve so it's not as easy to come in and do something that makes as big a mark as Reeve did back then. Almost impossible, IMO.

I'd really rather have a Superman who can be both. Stoic, angry, depressed or whatever when dealing with an invasion by Zod's army and relaxed, charming, jovial and friendly when he's dealing with something comparatively easy, like a falling helicopter or bank robbers. I really hope we get to see Superman being Superman before dealing with Zod btw. And when I say Superman, I mean in the suit, not teen Clark rescuing a school bus or adult, bearded Clark rescuing workers on an oil drilling platform.

[G.Godfrey]

Originally Posted by Lead Cenobite

I'd really rather have a Superman who can be both.

Me too. But we won't we getting it. I'm sure of it. Even Snyder said (back in pre-production times) that Supes only needs a tiny amount of kindness to him, just so that it's there. Not very encouraging. Edit: ˙˙So that you could IMAGINE him being kind˙˙ - exact words. :/

[Mike22]

Originally Posted by G.Godfrey

The thing is, Cavill will obviously play a very different Superman to Reeve. More stoic, introspective and depressed/angry. Reeve's jovial, charming and relaxed character is the kind that endears more to people. Cavill has shown a similar kind of relaxed charm and quality in a lot of his previous roles, but I doubt this will be used in MOS and that's a disadvantaged already when comparing him to Reeve. Plus we've had a lot of great performances in superhero movies since Reeve so it's not as easy to come in and do something that makes as big a mark as Reeve did back then. Almost impossible, IMO.

Agreed, but as far as Superman is concerned, Cavill is now and always will be compared to the guy that most people to this days still see as the definitive Superman. It's true that there are a lot of new players in this game that have left their mark, but truly, none of those characters portrayed in these past years can claim be the first and original Superhero and arguably the most powerful and most recognizable, and for that reason alone the part of Superman will A-L-W-A-Y-S be given special attention, for better or worse.
The actor will be over-analyzed and compared and criticized for things that would turn off most actors for even giving a second look at the part, so at least for me, Cavill gets a lot of respect for even daring to accept such a risky part, not to mention his dedication to his physique and research of the character.
What I'm trying to get is that Cavill will receive a lot more attention/criticism than any of these other guys playing Superheros due to the legacy of Superman on and off screen, so a mere comment from someone about him being replaceable doesn't really hold much value in my eyes. In a movie this big about a character this big, the best thing to do is wait and see for oneself.