All Things Superman: An Open Discussion (Spoilers) - - - - - - - - - - Part 90

[ConnorKon-El]

Chicken you like the film ?

 

[titansupes]

Who did that? Shouldn't her skinsuit be just like Kal's since it's the one he found in the ship?

Speaking of the skinsuits. When Jor gets into his armor to defend his home he's wearing "the" suit. In the movie it's clear that it's blue but all the other colors are washed out, like they didnt want to have him in it. Weird I know, but reading the scene I always thought it would be cool to see Jor in the actual suit with the colors right and everything.

I don't think he's in the suit, per se. It's blue, but a slightly different blue and the shield is all gold. I think, only seen it once so far.

 

[The Infernal]

The art is a bit meh imo. The artist can clearly draw. I'm not knocking the talent, but the design choices. Firstly I think that's entirely the wrong body shape for Kara and she comes off more She-Hulk or a gender swapped Superman. The latter of which pretty much sums up my problem with the design of the suit itself. It is largely just the MoS suit with minimal changes. I hardly expect we'd see Kara in a skirt (and don't personally want to see that), but I'd prefer to see a design that's more her own than a Superman hand me down.

 

[Binker]

I have a question: CBR posted an opinion article over MOS leading into both Justice League and a DC Film Universe, and according to the author, and using the MCU as an example, so far MOS is presenting a bleak DCU. Would you guys agree?

The article can be found here:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=46374

 

[InJustice]

To call DC's world bleak is grossly oversimplifying its universe and taking the "serious" tone a bit too seriously (as ironic as it is).

 

[Bruce Malone]

That guy lost me when he used the fact that someone specifically wouldn't want to live in nolan's gotham city as an argument againt DC's bleakness on film.

Nobody would really want to live in gotham city, hell Nolan's gotham city looks a hell of a lot nicer actually than how it's often portrayed in the comics.

Also because the avengers eat shawarma after a big battle that shows how wrong DC is? come on.

The comic "experts" criticisms of MoS i feel is sometimes even more infuriating than the movie critics. With the comic critics it seems to come down to "well this what I would have done and they didn't"...

 

[InJustice]

"Now let me ask you this -- would you want to live in a Marvel movie universe? Say, the L.A. you see in the Iron Man flicks?"

They both agreed that yeah, that seemed like a pretty cool place. And that Gotham City was downright scary and bleak.

So I'd want to live in an L.A. over Gotham City because it's a better place? Well, Aldrich Killian did just destroyed Stark's home, and made human bombs out of his Extremis subjects placed in certain areas of Los Angeles (and some outside LA). By that logic, it's hypocritical to say Gotham is scary so much so that it's uninhabitable, and then proceed to say that L.A. in IM3 is "fine" when in actuality both areas are ****** to live in (from the standpoint of superhuman threats).

People making cases like these have no understanding of the purpose of the setting. Gotham City is intentionally scary as it references the corruption of its people, the ill regard to do any good as crime has forced people to be afraid to speak up, the insane control that criminals have over its citizens. Gotham is a dystopia for a reason. I feel like he's simply using this horrible argument to say "I love optimism, and this is not optimistic enough."

They live in a world that is optimistic.

Superman is supposed to be The Man of Tomorrow; Metropolis is The City of Tomorrow. Superman could, many would argue should, be the best of us. He should represent the best of all possible tomorrows. But the tomorrow represented here is false, and out of synch with what today's 22-year-old will show us is indeed better. When the most fantastic of fictions fall well short of our mundane realities, something is wrong. What's wrong is the outlook of "Man of Steel" and all the DC character movies. In the final analysis, perhaps it's best the name "Superman" is absent from the title.

Clearly missed the point of Man of Steel, which is to show that Clark does not possess the innate knowledge of how to be a hero. The only innate feeling he has is the will to become something greater, a hero (as best exemplified in the montage where he runs in a cape as a young child). This is the first piece of the puzzle in the same way that Batman Begins was for Bruce Wayne. Clark cannot become Superman until he grows into that role (similar logic: Snyder refused to have him be named Superman until he started saving the world from Zod and co). The benefit is that it shows a journey of how one becomes a hero, which is uplifting and interesting to see, whereas to have him be "Superman" early on reduces the significance of his journey to becoming a hero. How can he be the Man of Tomorrow without knowing what it takes to be one through experience?

 

[Lighthouse]

Yeah, the Gotham City argument is pretty weak. Nobody is supposed to want to live in Gotham City, whether it's Nolan's, Burton's, or Timm/Dini.

I do agree that the world set up by the films doesn't look like it has much room for joy or fun.

 

[Lencho01]

The art is a bit meh imo. The artist can clearly draw. I'm not knocking the talent, but the design choices. Firstly I think that's entirely the wrong body shape for Kara and she comes off more She-Hulk or a gender swapped Superman. The latter of which pretty much sums up my problem with the design of the suit itself. It is largely just the MoS suit with minimal changes. I hardly expect we'd see Kara in a skirt (and don't personally want to see that), but I'd prefer to see a design that's more her own than a Superman hand me down.

Well, you could view Kal's suit as a hand-me-down from Kara. t:

I have a question: CBR posted an opinion article over MOS leading into both Justice League and a DC Film Universe, and according to the author, and using the MCU as an example, so far MOS is presenting a bleak DCU. Would you guys agree?

The article can be found here:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=46374

Kinda. But, mostly due to Goyer...

 

[Lighthouse]

I'm sure the comments to that article will be well thought out critiques without any ad hominem or lazy, half-baked generalizations about the author or critics in general.

 

[ChickenScratch]

Chicken you like the film ?

It was cool. Cannot really judge it yet. Spent the last few weeks avoiding the Superman threads because of my achilles injury sidelined me. Read the book, but obviously remembered the ending wrong (gotta get that back from my sis).

I will say that at certain points the single camera thing shined really well, like in the flying. I loved that sometimes the camera could not keep up with him. Hated the colors at times, I'm still trying to decide if Jor did wear "the" skinsuit or just a blue one with the S on it. Sometimes the movie was way dark, and at others the colors almost washed out, but then that goes with the singe camera, trying to make it look real thing.

Didnt like the scene when Jor got the codex. From what I read it was a many towered building, Jor entered through one tower and then it was like swimming through a giant organisms bloodstream with alcoves of fetuses going in all directions. In fact he didnt find his way back out the way he got in. In the movie it was more Matrixy if you get my meaning.

 

[Bruce Malone]

This could probably go in the superman double standards thread but with the continual Avengers comparisons being brought up by that critic and many others.

Does having shawarma after really validate a bright and happy world, even though in that same world you had some government think it was a good idea to try and nuke all of new york city over an invasion of aliens on ski-doos? Again shawarma makes all the difference right?

 

[ChickenScratch]

Live in NY, never had shwarma, just the name sounds gross. I don't wanna live in Marvel's NY, I prefer the real one.

 

[Mad Love]

I have a question: CBR posted an opinion article over MOS leading into both Justice League and a DC Film Universe, and according to the author, and using the MCU as an example, so far MOS is presenting a bleak DCU. Would you guys agree?

The article can be found here:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=46374

Nope, these are the type of fans always calling New 52 grimdark even when they stopped reading it. Judging future films based on the origin chapter of a specific character is extremely short-sighted and biased.

I don't think every Marvel movie feels the same. Iron Man and Incredible Hulk were a bit grittier than the rest. Each Batman movie in Nolan's trilogy had a slightly different feel. For all we know, MOS2 could be brighter now that Clark has found his calling so judging the rest of DC movies on MOS is silly. Every character has their differences. Would a Flash movie be like MOS? Doubt it.

 

[Project862006]

that Gotham city comparison is flat out stupid

the reason he wants to become batman is to stop the crime from drugs to mob bosses in his city

so should it be all sunshine and butterflies?

 

[Mad Love]

And asking "which place would you rather live in?" doesn't really matter. These movies aren't tourism ads.

DC's approach is trying to reflect and say something about modern culture.

Marvel's approach is fun fantasy. It's not more optimistic. It's more escapist.

Neither approach alone determines whether the movie is bad.

 

[InJustice]

And asking "which place would you rather live in?" doesn't really matter. These movies aren't tourism ads.

DC's approach is trying to reflect and say something about modern culture.

Marvel's approach is fun fantasy. It's not more optimistic. It's more escapist.

Neither approach alone determines whether the movie is bad.

Couldn't have said it any better.

Though you have to wonder, what does Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, Martian Manhunter, Flash, Cyborg/Aquaman/etc. (depending on which JL continuities you like) reflect about modern culture?

 

[Mad Love]

Couldn't have said it any better.

Though you have to wonder, what does Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, Martian Manhunter, Flash, Cyborg/Aquaman/etc. (depending on which JL continuities you like) reflect about modern culture?

Cyborg could touch upon the danger of too much technology making us less human. Wonder Woman could be about all kinds of social equality. Martian Manhunter is sort of like Superman but even more of an outsider. Flash could have something about how we live in a fast-paced world. Aquaman could be about the environment.

 

[Iron Patriot]

This could probably go in the superman double standards thread but with the continual Avengers comparisons being brought up by that critic and many others.

Does having shawarma after really validate a bright and happy world, even though in that same world you had some government think it was a good idea to try and nuke all of new york city over an invasion of aliens on ski-doos? Again shawarma makes all the difference right?

The shawarma scene wasn't even part of the movie until a week or two before the premiere, so no.

 

[Iron Patriot]

The MCU, to me, is a much more desirable place to live. The people in that universe actually appreciate their heroes, like the fruit vendor in IM2 telling Tony that "(the people) believe in him" or the closing montage in Avengers. We saw guys getting Avengers tattoos, fireworks in Paris, kids playing with homemade Mjolnirs, and that woman screaming "I love you, Thor!" The heroes are seen as and treated like positive forces for good by the people they protect, something that was clearly missing in MoS. Even with the screwed up aspects of the MCU, like SHIELD's Phase 2 plan or the WSC's willingness to nuke New York, it still feels like a better place to live. It's strange when I look back at the JLA/Avengers crossover, because, at that time, the DC universe was the one where the heroes were beloved and the people were happy and the Marvel universe was the one where the heroes were angsty and trust was in short supply. Total 180.

 

[Bruce Malone]

Live in NY, never had shwarma, just the name sounds gross. I don't wanna live in Marvel's NY, I prefer the real one.

It's actually not bad depending on the place you get it at. By coincidence there is actually a shawarma restaurant right nearby the theater i saw the avengers at and i'm pretty sure i heard a bunch of people in the theatre talk about going there right after that scene finished haha

must have been great business for that place.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

And asking "which place would you rather live in?" doesn't really matter. These movies aren't tourism ads.

DC's approach is trying to reflect and say something about modern culture.

Marvel's approach is fun fantasy. It's not more optimistic. It's more escapist.

Neither approach alone determines whether the movie is bad.

Cyborg could touch upon the danger of too much technology making us less human. Wonder Woman could be about all kinds of social equality. Martian Manhunter is sort of like Superman but even more of an outsider. Flash could have something about how we live in a fast-paced world. Aquaman could be about the environment.

Totally agreed there

I think the problem is that Marvel films have been dominating for so long now that people are used to the more lighthearted style of superhero storytelling.

But that's WHY I prefer DC over Marvel.

Because I like the more serious exploration of that kind of world and those kind of characters.

If critics don't, that's fine. But they should understand that's their TASTE, not something they can declare it a bad movie for.

 

[-JKR-]

Ah, come on, guys. There is (or should not) no such DC or Marvel approach. The tone of the movies depend on the creative team (writers & director) who are on board. Even though, to be honest, there has been a Marvel approach at one point (Iron Man 2, Cap America, Thor): take control away from writers and directors because we just have to steer towards The Avengers, so there won't be any place for their ideas and vision.

I, for example, LOVE the first and third Iron Man just as much as I love Chris Nolan's Batman movies, Zack Snyder's Superman, Sam Raimi's Spider-man (1 & 2), etc. It's just a matter of giving the directors the freedom to tell a story in an interesting and personal way. Not interested in the rest ( and I'm a comic book fan - but I simply can't get into bland movies with no personality).

 

[Tempest]

The MCU, to me, is a much more desirable place to live. The people in that universe actually appreciate their heroes, like the fruit vendor in IM2 telling Tony that "(the people) believe in him" or the closing montage in Avengers. We saw guys getting Avengers tattoos, fireworks in Paris, kids playing with homemade Mjolnirs, and that woman screaming "I love you, Thor!" The heroes are seen as and treated like positive forces for good by the people they protect, something that was clearly missing in MoS. Even with the screwed up aspects of the MCU, like SHIELD's Phase 2 plan or the WSC's willingness to nuke New York, it still feels like a better place to live. It's strange when I look back at the JLA/Avengers crossover, because, at that time, the DC universe was the one where the heroes were beloved and the people were happy and the Marvel universe was the one where the heroes were angsty and trust was in short supply. Total 180.

I think that the reactions of MOS were more in line with how society works. Here's this alien who's lived among humans for years, and then his race comes to Earth to you know, destroy it.

Why would they be shouting out their love to him or getting tattoos of him, when they don't even know who he is? That's a dreadfully unfair comparison.

As for which world I would live in, thanks, I like the one I'm in now. Having Superheroes would be kind of nice, but haven't ANY of you noticed that there is always a lot more "The End of the World Is Nigh" situations when they're around? They just attract trouble.

I don't know which of the two worlds I'd live in (movie-wise), since I don't really watch the Marvel movies. I have yet to finish any of the Iron Man movies. This is one of the cultural phenomenons that I have yet to understand. Iron Man holds less interest for me than a bucket of paint.

Er, and I still don't get how Marvel is "happier". I did not see the third Iron Man, but wasn't Pepper basically tortured in a horrible, agonizing manner? And X-Men seemed pretty dark to me as well. There were more humorous moments than in MOS, but I certainly wouldn't call Marvel more fun.

But that's just my opinion, and we all know what opinions are worth. t:

 

[Project862006]

The MCU, to me, is a much more desirable place to live. The people in that universe actually appreciate their heroes, like the fruit vendor in IM2 telling Tony that "(the people) believe in him" or the closing montage in Avengers. We saw guys getting Avengers tattoos, fireworks in Paris, kids playing with homemade Mjolnirs, and that woman screaming "I love you, Thor!" The heroes are seen as and treated like positive forces for good by the people they protect, something that was clearly missing in MoS. Even with the screwed up aspects of the MCU, like SHIELD's Phase 2 plan or the WSC's willingness to nuke New York, it still feels like a better place to live. It's strange when I look back at the JLA/Avengers crossover, because, at that time, the DC universe was the one where the heroes were beloved and the people were happy and the Marvel universe was the one where the heroes were angsty and trust was in short supply. Total 180.

the universe you are talking about is a fantasy world the same fantasy make believe world reeve superman films were and raimi spiderman films are so superficial and all smiles and cheery pies

thats not how society works

look at x men films thats how real people react with fear and apprehension