BvS All Things Batman v Superman: An Open Discussion (TAG SPOILERS) - - - - - - Part 307

[flickchick85]

I honestly don't see how, when you have the entire thing in full. Unless you're still cherry picking little quotes, to fit your narrative, you're not making much sense here.

Bizarre.

Don't have to cherry pick anything. He's clearly applying the adverse reaction to his take on Batman and Superman to the Watchmen conversation. It's right there in the quotes you pulled.

 

[Travesty]

He barely mentions it, but the entire point of this conversation, is you making the claim that he blamed the audience for BvS. And yet, he didn't. He was answering a question about Watchmen, and then his thoughts on superheros being deconstructed after Watchmen. That's not him blaming the audience at all, that's him explaining his outlook on superheroes, due to Watchmen. The question was about Watchmen, his answer was about Watchmen. He was at a Watchmen screening, and the entire Q&A was about Watchmen. Just because he had to juxtapose his thoughts on Batman, doesn't mean he was "blaming" anyone about BvS, he was just getting to his overall point about Watchmen. He even ends it by saying it's fine if you like your heroes more innocent, but he sees it differently because of Watchmen. That's not placing blame, that's just an explanation of his though process on where he thinks superheroes are after Watchmen. The entire point is about Watchmen...it isn't even about BvS.

Honestly, how are you reading it differently, knowing the full context? Sure, if you cherry pick one of those paragraphs out of context, you can read it in the most uncharitable way you see fit(which is precisely what you're doing). But I don't understand how you can still just double and triple down on this, knowing the full context of the situation? It's just bizarre to me.

Now, if you want to disagree with him, by saying he shouldn't be applying his outlook on superheroes after Watchmen, I can understand that, but that's not the point of this.

 

[flickchick85]

He's still blaming the audience for their reaction to BvS, though - using Watchmen to defend what he did with the characters in BvS, implying that the negative responses were irrational, and Watchmen illustrates why. It's...weird. But I think the quote about MoS just bolsters my interpretation. He blames audience expectations for the failures of the films rather than his own shortcomings or missteps.

But if you see it differently, that's cool. Agree to disagree.

 

[DyeLorean]

I don't know what the general consensus is, but I really liked Watchmen and Snyder's vision/direction worked there. But because those characters could inhabit that world.
At the end of the way, it's all about tone.

 

[Da-Scribe]

And that's all well and good, but like you said, most people don't wanna see that from their flagship heroes, - the ones that have been the symbols of inspiration for 80 years. Superheroes were created for the opposite reasons. Superman was created during the Great Depression, during the rise of Hitler - In the darkest times (like now), that's when we need their brand of escapism the most. We don't need him to fall victim to the same cynicism that's plaguing the rest of the world. His whole point of existing is that he's the guy who doesn't.

Someone who doesn't get that shouldn't be handed the keys to the kingdom in the first place, imo.

That’s all fine but it still doesn’t matter to me. Superman will always be Superman. There’s plenty of room for different interpretations. A few movies won’t suddenly alter his legacy forever.

 

[flickchick85]

That’s all fine but it still doesn’t matter to me. Superman will always be Superman. There’s plenty of room for different interpretations. A few movies won’t suddenly alter his legacy forever.

Oh I'm totally open to different interpretations. I just want them to be actual good ones that respect the character. Hence me enjoying JJ's final Flyby script despite it taking MAJOR liberties with the mythos. But the end of the day, I didn't care because it embraced what Superman's all about. It's fine if you don't care about that though, obviously. Different strokes and all that.

 

[2kt09]

I don't know what the general consensus is, but I really liked Watchmen and Snyder's vision/direction worked there. But because those characters could inhabit that world.
At the end of the way, it's all about tone.

Definitely applies here. Hard pressed to find another cbm with this many original characters taking up the limelight for key plot defining twists and turns in conjuction with source established characters.

 

[RomanticPenguin]

when he thought he was giving some big revelation by saying it's a dreamworld lul

 

[Da-Scribe]

That’s not what fiction means though. This is the stuff I’m talking about though. Folks will take shots at Snyder without understanding what they’re actually talking about.

 

[misslane38]

Oh I'm totally open to different interpretations. I just want them to be actual good ones that respect the character. Hence me enjoying JJ's final Flyby script despite it taking MAJOR liberties with the mythos. But the end of the day, I didn't care because it embraced what Superman's all about. It's fine if you don't care about that though, obviously. Different strokes and all that.

What is Superman all about?

 

[flickchick85]

What is Superman all about?

Hope and optimism, mainly. Finding joy in helping others, and the comfort of knowing there’s someone out there who’ll never let us down.

 

[misslane38]

Hope and optimism, mainly. Finding joy in helping others, and the comfort of knowing there’s someone out there who’ll never let us down.

What is hope to you? Does the joy come from Superman or from the public liking Superman, which he reacts to? Do you really mean "never," as in Superman is infallible in some way?

 

[flickchick85]

What is hope to you? Does the joy come from Superman or from the public liking Superman, which he reacts to? Do you really mean "never," as in Superman is infallible in some way?

No offense, but I don’t have the energy or desire to break down this stuff. It’s clear as day to me, and I’ve seen Snyder’s version enough to be confident in my own interpretation (which is where this is headed, let’s be real), which doesn’t and will never line up with yours, so let’s just leave it at that.

 

[BatLobster]

That quote is basically saying that Watchmen should contextualize all his superhero work that came after it. So while he's talking about Watchmen, he's talking about all of his superhero work in conjunction with it. Which means he's talking about MoS and BvS too, and how he feels the audience should address those films with the foreknowledge of Watchmen...which is a kind of weird and arrogant take, especially considering Watchmen wasn't exactly a monster success. And he flat out says that anyone who doesn't see it like he does is "living in a f***ing dream world". I mean...

I feel for the guy, he's taking some hard bumps in recent years, and he's free to say what he wants given that he's no longer involved and isn't representing the brand anymore. But he is often not his own best representative when he opens his mouth about this stuff, and it only leads me to question the artistic merit of his movies even more.

 

[Aurakles]

I take issue with the idea that MOS and BVS betrayed Superman.

The core concept of Superman is up for debate. He's gone through so many alterations overs the decades that there isn't really a definitive version. To some, having Superman break the law would be a betrayal of the character, to some it would be a betrayal if he didn't rebel against the authorities.
People can have diametrically opposed beliefs and yet both would be able to point to comics where Superman is on their side.
Superman is flexible, that's how he's survived as long as he had. He can be a warrior patriot happy and he can be a multinational pacifist. He's been everything, hero and villain, lover and fighter, left and right, logical and emotional, joyful and mournful.
If MOS and BVS were a betrayal of the character, then every new version of Superman could be accused of the same.

 

[misslane38]

No offense, but I don’t have the energy or desire to break down this stuff. It’s clear as day to me, and I’ve seen Snyder’s version enough to be confident in my own interpretation (which is where this is headed, let’s be real), which doesn’t and will never line up with yours, so let’s just leave it at that.

Yeah, I'm not interested in a conversation about Snyder or any of his films. I'm genuinely curious how you can tell when a version of Superman (or any person in fiction or real life) embodies a spirit of hope and optimism. Are there any incarnations of Superman that you like who have let people down?

 

[flickchick85]

Yeah, I'm not interested in a conversation about Snyder or any of his films. I'm genuinely curious how you can tell when a version of Superman (or any person in fiction or real life) embodies a spirit of hope and optimism. Are there any incarnations of Superman that you like who have let people down?

How can I tell when a version embodies hope and optimism? That’s one of those things you just know when you read it. There’s not a formula for hope and optimism, or for determining what someone embodies - they just embody those qualities for you in their actions and their worldview, or they don’t. They come across as hopeful and optimistic or they don’t. They inspire hope and optimism in others or they don’t. And I’ve enjoyed stories where Supes let certain characters down, but not the reader.

 

[Travesty]

 

[misslane38]

That quote is basically saying that Watchmen should contextualize all his superhero work that came after it. So while he's talking about Watchmen, he's talking about all of his superhero work in conjunction with it. Which means he's talking about MoS and BvS too, and how he feels the audience should address those films with the foreknowledge of Watchmen...which is a kind of weird and arrogant take, especially considering Watchmen wasn't exactly a monster success. And he flat out says that anyone who doesn't see it like he does is "living in a f***ing dream world". I mean...

First, let me refer to a longer post I made on this topic months ago when the "dream world" comment first stirred up controversy. Second, Snyder is not at all implying that audiences should approach his films with Watchmen in mind. He's saying the audience's response to his DCEU films and their most controversial elements suggests an ignorance or blindness about superhero storytelling. For example, audiences were outraged that Superman killed Zod because, to them, Superman does not kill. But that's not true. Superman has killed before. He's killed Zod multiple times in films and comics. Let's look at another example: the depiction of Jonathan Kent as a man whose fears for his son make him wary of exposing the truth about him. Jonathan Kent has been portrayed that way in the Golden Age comics, Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman, and Smallville. Audiences were unhappy with Batman killing in BvS but had no problem with Batman still hold murderous incarnations like Keaton's and Bale's in high esteem.

Snyder's DCEU films were his way of placing superheroes in a world that would eschew fantasy escapism and tackle the reality of being a superhero head on. And, rather than show that superheroes are unsustainable as a concept as was the case in Watchmen, he wanted to show how superheroes can endure the existential challenge. That's the only context in which Watchmen is important.

 

[misslane38]

How can I tell when a version embodies hope and optimism? That’s one of those things you just know when you read it. There’s not a formula for hope and optimism, or for determining what someone embodies - they just embody those qualities for you in their actions and their worldview, or they don’t. They come across as hopeful and optimistic or they don’t. They inspire hope and optimism in others or they don’t. And I’ve read stories where Supes let certain characters down, but not the reader.

Well, then, what Superman stories didn't let you down? Which versions of Superman had qualities and a worldview that hit the right formula for you? What are some moments from those stories that stand out to you when you think about Superman as embodying hope and optimism?

 

[Zarex]

I've enjoyed lots of Superman stories over the years. And my favorites are the ones in which he isn't depicted as a sullen bully that slams multiple human beings through solid walls and stands idly by while his pops commits suicide.

Two that popped immediately into my mind are from the pre-crisis era. One is a story - Action Comics, I believe - involved Superman bringing a group of blind kids onto the Justice League satellite to fly around in zero gravity while he stood by watching with his shirt unbuttoned and the S logo on full display. The second was his fight with Mohammed Ali in which an depowered Supes got his butt kicked by Ali, but afterwards sneaked onto the alien ship dressed in blackface (it was a different time) to save the day.

 

[flickchick85]

Well, then, what Superman stories didn't let you down? Which versions of Superman had qualities and a worldview that hit the right formula for you? What are some moments from those stories that stand out to you when you think about Superman as embodying hope and optimism?

Up, Up and Away, and most of Busiek’s run on Supes hit the sweet spot of the character for me. Greg Pak’s “What Lies Beneath” arc is an example where Supes “let down” one of the people who know him best (Lana Lang) by pretending to vanquish a “monster” but actually taking it to the Fortress and trying to understand it, because that’s what he does. Lana was certainly pissed when she found out the truth, but we the readers knew Supes was in the right. And in terms of embodying optimism, there’s a wonderful sequence early on in Tomasi’s Rebirth that’s just like a day-in-the-life sequence where Supes wakes up in a great mood and is all jazzed to just help some people today, and there’s a montage of him helping his fellow Justice Leaguers before breakfast, and even when certain people (Batman) aren’t so receptive to his help, he doesn’t let that get him down and is just happy to be doing it. I love that sequence.

 

[Aurakles]

I think a great way to show that a character is hopeful and optimistic is is to put them in a seemingly hopeless scenario. The true optimist is someone who has hope not only in summer, but in the depths of winter.

If everything usually goes well for a character, having a positive outlook isn't optimistic, it's realistic. It's the character who is down on their luck but still believes in a better tomorrow that is the true optimist.
A real story of hope isn't about the reigning champion winning yet another fight and retaining their perfect record, it's about the boxer who has lost time and time again, yet still climbs into the ring.

I think there's a difference between Superman being an inspiring figure of hope, and Superman simply having a good time.
Being happy and being hopeful are not the same thing.

 

[craigaat]

I just wish we got to see his 5-film arc.

 

[Travesty]

I just wish we got to see his 5-film arc.

Yeah, it’s why I think the “release the Snyder Cut” stuff is a lost cause. Even if they release Snyder’s JL, it would still be an incomplete storyline. So in the end, it’s just a fruitless endeavor.