BvS Batman v Superman - Reviews Thread [TAG SPOILERS] - Part 2

[The Batman]

You've picked bizarre examples here.

Reliability isn't really about having weaknesses, it's not about saying "Oh, he's just like me and doing what I'd do". It's about creating an interesting and consistent character-- It's about understanding why they'd do what they do, even if it's not what you'd do.

Re: Weaknesses and deus ex machina... That's all superheroes. That's practically all fictional characters. First of all, Kryptonite is far from the only thing that can beat Superman. Many, many supervillains (and heroes) have gone toe-to-toe with him over the decades and come out on top, or nearly so. Whether using weapons, traps, or their fists. It happens... exactly the same as every other hero. Hell, he was once beaten to death. "But he came back to life!" you say? Well, so have many, maaanny other superheroes. Also, how is Wolverine's "I can heal from anything in seconds and practically live forever" somehow MORE relatable? Or Iron Man's intellect? Batman's brain and skills and background? Any of it?

And before you or anyone else says "But, even then, you always know Superman's going to win in the end!"... Are you really sitting there with stories about Batman, Spidey, Iron man, Wolverine, James Bond or Sherlock Holmes, Captain Kirk or Luke Skywalker, or John McClane (the ultimate every man, for many) and thinking "Oh wow, I think he's actually going to lose and die, and the Earth's going to blow up, and that'll be the end of the series!"

Superman has the DP Clark Kent persona-- That's the "relatable" in the sense that you and others espouse is so important. That's the side that has to behave like an invisible coward (compared to Supes), is lovesick for Lois and pines for her, is occasionally seen as an easy target by Lombard and others, needs to do his job or get chewed out by his boss etc. And even as the ultra-powerful Silver Age or All-Star Supes, THAT side of him grapples with complex emotional issues, to-- How to best go about saving the world, wondering about Krypton and the parents he never knew, dealing the problems he has so far failed with (restoring Kandor, rehabilitating Luthor) etc. Yet... even through all that... Even though he may question how to go about certain things sometimes... He absolutely believes in the fundamental good of himself and most everyone else. Honestly, more than any other (mistakenly) perceived lack of physical weaknesses... I think that's what a lot of the characters critic's have a problem with-- That morally, he's kinder and better than we'll ever be (even though he does get angry and sad on occasion). Personally, that's what he always should be. That's just on of the core reasons he's always been and always will be such a brilliant character... He's someone to aspire to.

All the most successful, acclaimed versions of the character over his near 80 year history of being one of the biggest fictional icons in the world ("Oh, people just don't like him" my ass) are the ones that EMBRACE all that with open arms-- From George Reeves to Chris Reeve, Silver and Bronze Age Supes, All-Star and Secret Identity, Kingdom Come and Red Son (stories about him reaffirming that side of himself)... They're all kind to a fault, all unapologetically good either all the way through or by the end.

Those that aren't on board with that, who don't get it... Well, you end up with what we're getting right damn now-- a disappointment.

Great Post.

There's nothing wrong with Superman, hell, even in his current state, he's still a big merchandise seller. The only problem with Superman is that they seemingly listen to people with SpiderDevil's mentality, or put people on Superman projects who have Spiderdevil's mentality.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The main reason Superman isn't all that popular these days has nothing to do with relatability. It is because all his movies SUCK. It has been over 35 years since the last legitimately good one. That continuous lack of quality will kill interest in any character.

 

[Spiderdevil]

Great Post.

There's nothing wrong with Superman, hell, even in his current state, he's still a big merchandise seller. The only problem with Superman is that they seemingly listen to people with SpiderDevil's mentality, or put people on Superman projects who have Spiderdevil's mentality.

Hey Don't lump me with Snyder!

People criticize Goyer's MOS script but imo it was a great script, the outsider and loner angle would have worked pretty had they gotten a competent director.

Snyder asked for an increase in the budget because he wanted to increase fight lengths and scale, he probably cut out a large bunch of meaningful scenes to fulfill his fetishes of destruction, and most of the criticisms were of that (overly long and destructive fight scenes)

 

[Spiderdevil]

The main reason Superman isn't all that popular these days has nothing to do with relatability. It is because all his movies SUCK. It has been over 35 years since the last legitimately good one. That continuous lack of quality will kill interest in any character.

Well we see a new Batman and Spider-man games and cartoons once every two years, but not Superman, there must be another reason

 

[AnneFan]

I used to think Superman was lacking in quality content, but not so much anymore. Superman and Superman II are quality products. I love STAS, and always will have a soft spot for Lois & Clark with Dean Cain. I'm a fan of MoS and BvS, and the comics, if you know where to look, are also excellent. Superman III, Superman IV and Superman Returns drag the reputation down in my opinion. But I basically ignore those, even if they have some redeeming qualities. And the video games...well...yeah.

 

[MadVillainy]

You've picked bizarre examples here.

Reliability isn't really about having weaknesses, it's not about saying "Oh, he's just like me and doing what I'd do". It's about creating an interesting and consistent character-- It's about understanding why they'd do what they do, even if it's not what you'd do.

Re: Weaknesses and deus ex machina... That's all superheroes. That's practically all fictional characters. First of all, Kryptonite is far from the only thing that can beat Superman. Many, many supervillains (and heroes) have gone toe-to-toe with him over the decades and come out on top, or nearly so. Whether using weapons, traps, or their fists. It happens... exactly the same as every other hero. Hell, he was once beaten to death. "But he came back to life!" you say? Well, so have many, maaanny other superheroes. Also, how is Wolverine's "I can heal from anything in seconds and practically live forever" somehow MORE relatable? Or Iron Man's intellect? Batman's brain and skills and background? Any of it?

And before you or anyone else says "But, even then, you always know Superman's going to win in the end!"... Are you really sitting there with stories about Batman, Spidey, Iron man, Wolverine, James Bond or Sherlock Holmes, Captain Kirk or Luke Skywalker, or John McClane (the ultimate every man, for many) and thinking "Oh wow, I think he's actually going to lose and die, and the Earth's going to blow up, and that'll be the end of the series!"

Superman has the DP Clark Kent persona-- That's the "relatable" in the sense that you and others espouse is so important. That's the side that has to behave like an invisible coward (compared to Supes), is lovesick for Lois and pines for her, is occasionally seen as an easy target by Lombard and others, needs to do his job or get chewed out by his boss etc. And even as the ultra-powerful Silver Age or All-Star Supes, THAT side of him grapples with complex emotional issues, to-- How to best go about saving the world, wondering about Krypton and the parents he never knew, dealing the problems he has so far failed with (restoring Kandor, rehabilitating Luthor) etc. Yet... even through all that... Even though he may question how to go about certain things sometimes... He absolutely believes in the fundamental good of himself and most everyone else. Honestly, more than any other (mistakenly) perceived lack of physical weaknesses... I think that's what a lot of the characters critic's have a problem with-- That morally, he's kinder and better than we'll ever be (even though he does get angry and sad on occasion). Personally, that's what he always should be. That's just on of the core reasons he's always been and always will be such a brilliant character... He's someone to aspire to.

All the most successful, acclaimed versions of the character over his near 80 year history of being one of the biggest fictional icons in the world ("Oh, people just don't like him" my ass) are the ones that EMBRACE all that with open arms-- From George Reeves to Chris Reeve, Silver and Bronze Age Supes, All-Star and Secret Identity, Kingdom Come and Red Son (stories about him reaffirming that side of himself)... They're all kind to a fault, all unapologetically good either all the way through or by the end.

Those that aren't on board with that, who don't get it... Well, you end up with what we're getting right damn now-- a disappointment.

Great post.
I agree fully

The main reason Superman isn't all that popular these days has nothing to do with relatability. It is because all his movies SUCK. It has been over 35 years since the last legitimately good one. That continuous lack of quality will kill interest in any character.

Exactly.

Just put out some quality, well liked Superman movies and the character will be fine

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Well we see a new Batman and Spider-man games and cartoons once every two years, but not Superman, there must be another reason

Spider-Man and Batman have had great movies far more recently than 1980.

 

[The Joker]

You've picked bizarre examples here.

Reliability isn't really about having weaknesses, it's not about saying "Oh, he's just like me and doing what I'd do". It's about creating an interesting and consistent character-- It's about understanding why they'd do what they do, even if it's not what you'd do.

Re: Weaknesses and deus ex machina... That's all superheroes. That's practically all fictional characters. First of all, Kryptonite is far from the only thing that can beat Superman. Many, many supervillains (and heroes) have gone toe-to-toe with him over the decades and come out on top, or nearly so. Whether using weapons, traps, or their fists. It happens... exactly the same as every other hero. Hell, he was once beaten to death. "But he came back to life!" you say? Well, so have many, maaanny other superheroes. Also, how is Wolverine's "I can heal from anything in seconds and practically live forever" somehow MORE relatable? Or Iron Man's intellect? Batman's brain and skills and background? Any of it?

And before you or anyone else says "But, even then, you always know Superman's going to win in the end!"... Are you really sitting there with stories about Batman, Spidey, Iron man, Wolverine, James Bond or Sherlock Holmes, Captain Kirk or Luke Skywalker, or John McClane (the ultimate every man, for many) and thinking "Oh wow, I think he's actually going to lose and die, and the Earth's going to blow up, and that'll be the end of the series!"

Superman has the DP Clark Kent persona-- That's the "relatable" in the sense that you and others espouse is so important. That's the side that has to behave like an invisible coward (compared to Supes), is lovesick for Lois and pines for her, is occasionally seen as an easy target by Lombard and others, needs to do his job or get chewed out by his boss etc. And even as the ultra-powerful Silver Age or All-Star Supes, THAT side of him grapples with complex emotional issues, to-- How to best go about saving the world, wondering about Krypton and the parents he never knew, dealing the problems he has so far failed with (restoring Kandor, rehabilitating Luthor) etc. Yet... even through all that... Even though he may question how to go about certain things sometimes... He absolutely believes in the fundamental good of himself and most everyone else. Honestly, more than any other (mistakenly) perceived lack of physical weaknesses... I think that's what a lot of the characters critic's have a problem with-- That morally, he's kinder and better than we'll ever be (even though he does get angry and sad on occasion). Personally, that's what he always should be. That's just on of the core reasons he's always been and always will be such a brilliant character... He's someone to aspire to.

All the most successful, acclaimed versions of the character over his near 80 year history of being one of the biggest fictional icons in the world ("Oh, people just don't like him" my ass) are the ones that EMBRACE all that with open arms-- From George Reeves to Chris Reeve, Silver and Bronze Age Supes, All-Star and Secret Identity, Kingdom Come and Red Son (stories about him reaffirming that side of himself)... They're all kind to a fault, all unapologetically good either all the way through or by the end.

Those that aren't on board with that, who don't get it... Well, you end up with what we're getting right damn now-- a disappointment.

Go to the head of the class. Great post

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

I feel like the biggest BIGGEST issue with Superman is what is his motives for being Superman? Why does Clark want to be Superman?

In Man of Steel, Superman becomes Superman because Zod invaded and either way, Superman didn't have a choice.

Zod: "Step forward Kal El or I will destroy this world which would also include you."

This isn't developing Superman if either way, he will face Zod. If Zod said "We are looking for Kal El" in a peaceful way to gain his trust (and not threaten the planet right away), that would have been some good development.

Still back to his motives. His motive to be Supers is because Zod invaded. Ok what about afterwards? Why is Superman still Superman in BvS?

Let's look at other motives.

Spider-Man

[YT]ouG3PqGxTmM[/YT]

Daredevil

[YT]mbx9xdlAEM4[/YT]

Batman

[YT]qYJONPqBvlY[/YT]

Spider-Man isn't Spidey because his Uncle was murdered but because Spidey blames himself for Uncle Ben's death and his selfishness

Daredevil isn't Daredevil because his father was murdered but because he has the skills to help those in need.

Batman isn't Batman because his parents were murdered but because of how corrupt the city of Gotham was.

Superman became Superman because Zod invaded. Ok. So why is he still Superman? What motives him to still become Superman? Why is Superman still Superman? Because the script tells him to, not because he wants to be Superman.

Superman should be Superman because he has the powers to help those in need sorta like Daredevil's motive. Superman should have revealed himself on his own and not have Zod come out.

What makes for more interesting character development?

A) A character who is forced to become a hero and if he doesn't, he along with the planet is killed?

B) A character who chooses on his own to become a hero and help those in need because he has the power to do that?

There is zero reason for Superman to be Superman in BvS which is probably the most sad thing about BvS.

 

[BatLobster]

You've picked bizarre examples here.

Reliability isn't really about having weaknesses, it's not about saying "Oh, he's just like me and doing what I'd do". It's about creating an interesting and consistent character-- It's about understanding why they'd do what they do, even if it's not what you'd do.

Re: Weaknesses and deus ex machina... That's all superheroes. That's practically all fictional characters. First of all, Kryptonite is far from the only thing that can beat Superman. Many, many supervillains (and heroes) have gone toe-to-toe with him over the decades and come out on top, or nearly so. Whether using weapons, traps, or their fists. It happens... exactly the same as every other hero. Hell, he was once beaten to death. "But he came back to life!" you say? Well, so have many, maaanny other superheroes. Also, how is Wolverine's "I can heal from anything in seconds and practically live forever" somehow MORE relatable? Or Iron Man's intellect? Batman's brain and skills and background? Any of it?

And before you or anyone else says "But, even then, you always know Superman's going to win in the end!"... Are you really sitting there with stories about Batman, Spidey, Iron man, Wolverine, James Bond or Sherlock Holmes, Captain Kirk or Luke Skywalker, or John McClane (the ultimate every man, for many) and thinking "Oh wow, I think he's actually going to lose and die, and the Earth's going to blow up, and that'll be the end of the series!"

Superman has the DP Clark Kent persona-- That's the "relatable" in the sense that you and others espouse is so important. That's the side that has to behave like an invisible coward (compared to Supes), is lovesick for Lois and pines for her, is occasionally seen as an easy target by Lombard and others, needs to do his job or get chewed out by his boss etc. And even as the ultra-powerful Silver Age or All-Star Supes, THAT side of him grapples with complex emotional issues, to-- How to best go about saving the world, wondering about Krypton and the parents he never knew, dealing the problems he has so far failed with (restoring Kandor, rehabilitating Luthor) etc. Yet... even through all that... Even though he may question how to go about certain things sometimes... He absolutely believes in the fundamental good of himself and most everyone else. Honestly, more than any other (mistakenly) perceived lack of physical weaknesses... I think that's what a lot of the characters critic's have a problem with-- That morally, he's kinder and better than we'll ever be (even though he does get angry and sad on occasion). Personally, that's what he always should be. That's just on of the core reasons he's always been and always will be such a brilliant character... He's someone to aspire to.

All the most successful, acclaimed versions of the character over his near 80 year history of being one of the biggest fictional icons in the world ("Oh, people just don't like him" my ass) are the ones that EMBRACE all that with open arms-- From George Reeves to Chris Reeve, Silver and Bronze Age Supes, All-Star and Secret Identity, Kingdom Come and Red Son (stories about him reaffirming that side of himself)... They're all kind to a fault, all unapologetically good either all the way through or by the end.

Those that aren't on board with that, who don't get it... Well, you end up with what we're getting right damn now-- a disappointment.

Great post titan. The bolded section though, triggered something for me. Because while I'm NOT saying at all that Snyder's direction is the solution, I do find there to be some truth to Superman being a bit of a trickier character to pull off.

In a nutshell...in Superman's cinematic absence (not counting SR), a generation basically got their Superman movies. It's called Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films. I've always thought that, but your post especially reminded me of it when you mentioned awkward Clark, being lovesick for Lois, etc.

Now, Peter Parker is really the epitome of the ultra-humanized superhero, so I'm not saying this is a fair one to one comparison. And Spidey being a coming of age story only makes it all the more relatable. But I do think that in focusing on the love story (specifically in the first two films), it simultaneously contributed to a warmth in tone and gave Peter an ultimate goal that always felt just out of reach: two things I think many would agree are vital ingredients for making a character gifted with incredible powers so easy to root for. And Spider-Man has one little details that makes the love story a little easier to swallow for a mainstream audience...the hero wears a mask. In a modern more serious take on the Superman mythos, it's kind of easy to see why they'd sidestep the whole thing and just have Lois figure out Clark's identity from the get go. Also, that's just what's in vogue now in superhero films post-Batman Begins/Iron Man, for better or worse.

Of course, Raimi's Spider-Man movies were largely his versions of Donner's Superman movies, I think most people figured that out. But if you think about it, those movies contained so much of what many Superman fans would still love to see in a Superman movie. Bright and colorful tone, warmth, awkward/nerdy alter ego, unabashedly comic booky aesthetic that stays grounded by the emotional reality of the characters. Maybe slightly less camp and cheese, but IMO you kind of need some of that "gee wiz" tone if you want to make a Clark/Superman/Lois love triangle work in a way that feels organic to the story rather than completely undermining Lois' intelligence to the audience.

I guess overall what I'm saying is that Superman being THE superhero template, full of so many of the oldest superhero tropes in the book is what can make him a bit tricky. It can make him come off as generic if not handled very carefully. Snyder's "solution" is to basically treat him like a diety, focusing more on his godliness, making him more of an abstract than an actual character in the story. In a way, it's understandable because the religious undertones/overtones of the character aren't there nearly as strongly in other heroes. It's something a bit more unique to Supes, so you can sort of see why focusing on that aspect in order to emphasize that he's the "king daddy" of superheroes in a pop culture utterly saturated with superheroes, despite essentially being the template for so many (which to some people means: boring).

I'm not sure what the answer is, other than finding a writer/director who really does love the character first and foremost, but is also smart enough to figure out a way to present the unabashed optimism and light of the character in a way that will resonate with the GA without feeling like it's too derivative of Marvel's tone (which can really all be traced back to Raimi's Spider-Man tone).

The real trick is figuring out, in a world where we've had Raimi's Spider-Man, where we currently have Marvel's take on Captain America...where does Superman fit in for the general audience? So far DC's best answer is unabashed Jesus metaphor juxtaposed against a dark world mirroring our own. This clearly hasn't resonated, but I suppose the one benefit of having killed off Supes is they might have some creative license to 'reboot' him a bit once he comes back in how they write the character and how his return affects the world.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Superman could also use a great cartoon and video game series. If the movies are hellbent on misinterpreting him, the non-comic book public need other mediums to get their superman fix.

 

[Timebomb]

You've picked bizarre examples here.

Reliability isn't really about having weaknesses, it's not about saying "Oh, he's just like me and doing what I'd do". It's about creating an interesting and consistent character-- It's about understanding why they'd do what they do, even if it's not what you'd do.

Re: Weaknesses and deus ex machina... That's all superheroes. That's practically all fictional characters. First of all, Kryptonite is far from the only thing that can beat Superman. Many, many supervillains (and heroes) have gone toe-to-toe with him over the decades and come out on top, or nearly so. Whether using weapons, traps, or their fists. It happens... exactly the same as every other hero. Hell, he was once beaten to death. "But he came back to life!" you say? Well, so have many, maaanny other superheroes. Also, how is Wolverine's "I can heal from anything in seconds and practically live forever" somehow MORE relatable? Or Iron Man's intellect? Batman's brain and skills and background? Any of it?

And before you or anyone else says "But, even then, you always know Superman's going to win in the end!"... Are you really sitting there with stories about Batman, Spidey, Iron man, Wolverine, James Bond or Sherlock Holmes, Captain Kirk or Luke Skywalker, or John McClane (the ultimate every man, for many) and thinking "Oh wow, I think he's actually going to lose and die, and the Earth's going to blow up, and that'll be the end of the series!"

Superman has the DP Clark Kent persona-- That's the "relatable" in the sense that you and others espouse is so important. That's the side that has to behave like an invisible coward (compared to Supes), is lovesick for Lois and pines for her, is occasionally seen as an easy target by Lombard and others, needs to do his job or get chewed out by his boss etc. And even as the ultra-powerful Silver Age or All-Star Supes, THAT side of him grapples with complex emotional issues, to-- How to best go about saving the world, wondering about Krypton and the parents he never knew, dealing the problems he has so far failed with (restoring Kandor, rehabilitating Luthor) etc. Yet... even through all that... Even though he may question how to go about certain things sometimes... He absolutely believes in the fundamental good of himself and most everyone else. Honestly, more than any other (mistakenly) perceived lack of physical weaknesses... I think that's what a lot of the characters critic's have a problem with-- That morally, he's kinder and better than we'll ever be (even though he does get angry and sad on occasion). Personally, that's what he always should be. That's just on of the core reasons he's always been and always will be such a brilliant character... He's someone to aspire to.

All the most successful, acclaimed versions of the character over his near 80 year history of being one of the biggest fictional icons in the world ("Oh, people just don't like him" my ass) are the ones that EMBRACE all that with open arms-- From George Reeves to Chris Reeve, Silver and Bronze Age Supes, All-Star and Secret Identity, Kingdom Come and Red Son (stories about him reaffirming that side of himself)... They're all kind to a fault, all unapologetically good either all the way through or by the end.

Those that aren't on board with that, who don't get it... Well, you end up with what we're getting right damn now-- a disappointment.

Awesome post. Can somebody get this in front of WB/DC and Snyder ASAP.

 

[Marvin]

I do people keep forgeting marketing and budget! MOS was budgeted at 230M and marketed like crazy, while both TFA and BB had a modest budget of 150M

Then the issue is spending, not if the film can make money in this day and age. If a cap movie can generate more at the box office than a batman movie, it can generate more at the box office than a batman movie in this day and age, regardless of if it ended up costing 50mill more produce. That was the context the discussion seemed to be taking place in anyhow.

If a superman film right now made 15 billion dollars at the current box office that would be pretty insane...oh but wait...it cost about 13billion(in total) to make so that 15 is kinda meh(even though no film but one has even approached 2bill). But wait a sec, a superman film made 160mill total at the box office.. that's alot less than alot of these movies now a days...yea but it only cost 70million total(like some district 9 picture). yay a superman movie made 160mill.
Point being a big gross(see extreme example) isn't automatically undermined by budget in the context of this conversation.

 

[MadVillainy]

Superman could also use a great cartoon and video game series. If the movies are hellbent on misinterpreting him, the non-comic book public need other mediums to get their superman fix.

I agree about a Superman game, but I really don't see how to make it work. Whoever gets it then kudos to them, but forget movies I think making a good Superman game is damn near impossible.

Also agreed about the cartoons. Both Marvel and DC are slacking in the good cartoons department.

 

[The Batman]

Hey Don't lump me with Snyder!

I'm just saying, you never find guys like Richard Donner, Mark Waid, or Grant Morrison claiming that the character is unrelateable or have to ask "How do we make Superman relevant?"

People criticize Goyer's MOS script but imo it was a great script, the outsider and loner angle would have worked pretty had they gotten a competent director.

MOS had a script that could've been elevated by the right director...sadly, Nolan had to settle on his, what, fifth choice in director?

 

[Keyser Sushi]

I feel like the biggest BIGGEST issue with Superman is what is his motives for being Superman? Why does Clark want to be Superman?

In Man of Steel, Superman becomes Superman because Zod invaded and either way, Superman didn't have a choice.

Zod: "Step forward Kal El or I will destroy this world which would also include you."

This isn't developing Superman if either way, he will face Zod. If Zod said "We are looking for Kal El" in a peaceful way to gain his trust (and not threaten the planet right away), that would have been some good development.

Still back to his motives. His motive to be Supers is because Zod invaded. Ok what about afterwards? Why is Superman still Superman in BvS?

Let's look at other motives.

Spider-Man

[YT]ouG3PqGxTmM[/YT]

Daredevil

[YT]mbx9xdlAEM4[/YT]

Batman

[YT]qYJONPqBvlY[/YT]

Spider-Man isn't Spidey because his Uncle was murdered but because Spidey blames himself for Uncle Ben's death and his selfishness

Daredevil isn't Daredevil because his father was murdered but because he has the skills to help those in need.

Batman isn't Batman because his parents were murdered but because of how corrupt the city of Gotham was.

Superman became Superman because Zod invaded. Ok. So why is he still Superman? What motives him to still become Superman? Why is Superman still Superman? Because the script tells him to, not because he wants to be Superman.

Superman should be Superman because he has the powers to help those in need sorta like Daredevil's motive. Superman should have revealed himself on his own and not have Zod come out.

What makes for more interesting character development?

A) A character who is forced to become a hero and if he doesn't, he along with the planet is killed?

B) A character who chooses on his own to become a hero and help those in need because he has the power to do that?

There is zero reason for Superman to be Superman in BvS which is probably the most sad thing about BvS.

Except from the very beginning of MoS, Clark was shown saving people in trouble. He had no secret identity so every time he did something dramatic and people saw him walking through fire or holding up an oil rig or whatever else, he moved on, disappeared, in order to remain anonymous. Jon Kent taught him that people would fear someone so powerful, and that he ought to keep his powers secret, so of course he values his anonymity. And since 1938 he always has.

Once he gets the suit, he has a way to make himself a public figure, and then at the end of MoS he's Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter with the glasses... so he's shown to have found a way to separate the two sides of himself in a way that lets him be both.

In other words, saving people, being Superman, was in his nature from the very beginning of MoS. It wasn't Zod's invasion that made him be a hero, it was Zod's invasion that forced him to have to go public. Big difference. But since he found a way to be the hero without sacrificing his anonymity, he didn't have to run away anymore.

Thus, in BvS, being Superman is a perfectly logical thing for him to be doing, given who he has already been established as being.

In other words, we got B, not A. Watch MoS again.

 

[shauner111]

MOS had a script that could've been elevated by the right director...sadly, Nolan had to settle on his, what, fifth choice in director?

I agree, but still think a second draft would have done wonders. You then add the right director and cinematographer, and you get magic. The designs, the cast, the story, the composer...all home-runs.

 

[javonstokess]

The "Supergirl" TV show is the best interpretation of "Super-anything" I've seen since the JLU cartoon ended.

 

[TheBat812]

MOS had a script that could've been elevated by the right director...sadly, Nolan had to settle on his, what, fifth choice in director?

Who were the other contenders?

 

[Marvel Knight]

The "Supergirl" TV show is the best interpretation of "Super-anything" I've seen since the JLU cartoon ended.

That's really sad.

 

[batfreakforever]

Superman could also use a great cartoon and video game series. If the movies are hellbent on misinterpreting him, the non-comic book public need other mediums to get their superman fix.

I think it's fans that misinterpreted Superman not film makers. Fans are so stuck on one type of interpretation that they can't reinterpretation him in another way. Snyder has done nothing different. To me the Donner films have created more sins against Superman than any version or interpretation ever. Donner created stupid powers for Superman and killed a depowered Zod which is worse than killing a Zod who wouldn't stop and wanted to kill everyone if he wasn't stopped. Superman turned the world backwards. Really campy and even campy Luthor than Jessie. Double standards from fans who grew up with the Reeve films.

 

[Micromind]

I feel like the biggest BIGGEST issue with Superman is what is his motives for being Superman? Why does Clark want to be Superman?

In Man of Steel, Superman becomes Superman because Zod invaded and either way, Superman didn't have a choice.

Zod: "Step forward Kal El or I will destroy this world which would also include you."

This isn't developing Superman if either way, he will face Zod. If Zod said "We are looking for Kal El" in a peaceful way to gain his trust (and not threaten the planet right away), that would have been some good development.

Still back to his motives. His motive to be Supers is because Zod invaded. Ok what about afterwards? Why is Superman still Superman in BvS?

Let's look at other motives.

Spider-Man

[YT]ouG3PqGxTmM[/YT]

Daredevil

[YT]mbx9xdlAEM4[/YT]

Batman

[YT]qYJONPqBvlY[/YT]

Spider-Man isn't Spidey because his Uncle was murdered but because Spidey blames himself for Uncle Ben's death and his selfishness

Daredevil isn't Daredevil because his father was murdered but because he has the skills to help those in need.

Batman isn't Batman because his parents were murdered but because of how corrupt the city of Gotham was.

Superman became Superman because Zod invaded. Ok. So why is he still Superman? What motives him to still become Superman? Why is Superman still Superman? Because the script tells him to, not because he wants to be Superman.

Superman should be Superman because he has the powers to help those in need sorta like Daredevil's motive. Superman should have revealed himself on his own and not have Zod come out.

What makes for more interesting character development?

A) A character who is forced to become a hero and if he doesn't, he along with the planet is killed?

B) A character who chooses on his own to become a hero and help those in need because he has the power to do that?

There is zero reason for Superman to be Superman in BvS which is probably the most sad thing about BvS.

Clark was already helping people using his power, remember the Oil rig fire scene in the beginning of MoS ? or young Clark rescuing school children from drowning ?

I think MoS showed that he wants to help people, Clark even says as much to Lois (and to Gen Swanwick) "I'm here to help"

I don't know how is that an issue.

 

[AnneFan]

Clark was already helping people using his power, remember the Oil rig fire scene in the beginning of MoS ? or young Clark rescuing school children from drowning ?

I think MoS showed that he wants to help people, Clark even says as much to Lois (and to Gen Swanwick) "I'm here to help"

I don't know how is that an issue.

Yep. Superman wants to be Superman, and as you show, he was helping people before he was well known. Lois even wonders in BvS about their relationship, with him juggling being Superman and also being her lover. Questioning your role in the world and hanging up your cape for good are two different things.

 

[MrsKent26]

Well we see a new Batman and Spider-man games and cartoons once every two years, but not Superman, there must be another reason

There isn't.

Batman and Spiderman have both had successful movie trilogies in recent memory (Nolan and Raimi, for the most part). Superman hasn't.

I don't think there's much mystery to why superman hasn't enjoyed the same success as his counterparts. This idea that the superman character needs to be altered in some way to achieve popularity is not just a thing cooked up by teenagers who think nice guys aren't cool or something. It's a mentality that seems to be upheld by the people in charge of the character's portrayal. That is what's holding superman back. How can you make a movie designed to capitalize on a character's previous popularity by removing what made him popular in the first place? How can a character shine when the people writing him and directing him think he's a broken character that's no longer relevant? He can't. And hasn't.

BvS and Snyder's comments about the character are a glaring example of why superman isn't as popular as other heroes. He was minimized and had all the fun removed from his presentation. Of course audiences won't connect with a remote and joyless character like that.

 

[SomeOldGuy]

I don't think there's much mystery to why superman hasn't enjoyed the same success as his counterparts. This idea that the superman character needs to be altered in some way to achieve popularity is not just a thing cooked up by teenagers who think nice guys aren't cool or something. It's a mentality that seems to be upheld by the people in charge of the character's portrayal. That is what's holding superman back. How can you make a movie designed to capitalize on a character's previous popularity by removing what made him popular in the first place? How can a character shine when the people writing him and directing him think he's a broken character that's no longer relevant? He can't. And hasn't.

BvS and Snyder's comments about the character are a glaring example of why superman isn't as popular as other heroes. He was minimized and had all the fun removed from his presentation. Of course audiences won't connect with a remote and joyless character like that.

This post is a grand slam home run. Thank you.