Justice League Henry Cavill IS Clark Kent/Superman - - - - - - Part 15

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]536615[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]535585[/split]

 

[FunkMiller]

It means you like the movie. It doesn't necessarily mean he's your favorite director/movie guy. The guy in my av ain't the Patchwork Man.

Ah, so anyone who criticises an aspect of the glorious DCEU is a Marvelite then?

No room in your head for any nuance or grey areas in that equation?

Yeah, I think we might be done talking, Captain...

 

[heatvision38]

D'oh. Now I can't respond to the posts from the previous threat.

 

[misslane38]

Because that isn’t Superman to me. And it never will be.

What Superman is that? A Superman who, like the council on Krypton, would rather dither than make a decision to save their planet and race? A Superman who would rather let people die to preserve their attacker's life and his own moral code than save those innocent lives? A Superman who never has to get his hands dirty because the narrative cushions him from ever having to make the tough moral decisions that actual heroes and human beings have to make, making his righteousness only something abstract and something he can do and not something concrete that anyone else can apply in reality?

And finally, a Superman who has never existed, since he has killed in other stories before. You must then disavow Reeve Superman and comic Superman. I don't know what Superman that leaves you with, but it's not any Superman I recognize. Maybe you are religious after all except you only believe in the fictional idol that is Superman who is, as Lex desires, someone who is all good and all powerful.

 

[Patchwork Man]

Ah, so anyone who criticises an aspect of the glorious DCEU is a Marvelite then?

No room in your head for any nuance or grey areas in that equation?

Yeah, I think we might be done talking, Captain...

No, I made a joke, and then you referred to your avatar, which isn't necessarily indicative of "Nolan is my favoritest director ever!" For all I know, your favorite director could be Denis Villenueve, Ridley Scott, or Rob Zombie. But hey, whatever floats.

 

[FunkMiller]

What Superman is that? A Superman who, like the council on Krypton, would rather dither than make a decision to save their planet and race? A Superman who would rather let people die to preserve their attacker's life and his own moral code than save those innocent lives? A Superman who never has to get his hands dirty because the narrative cushions him from ever having to make the tough moral decisions that actual heroes and human beings have to make, making his righteousness only something abstract and something he can do and not something concrete that anyone else can apply in reality?

And finally, a Superman who has never existed, since he has killed in other stories before. You must then disavow Reeve Superman and comic Superman. I don't know what Superman that leaves you with, but it's not any Superman I recognize. Maybe you are religious after all except you only believe in the fictional idol that is Superman who is, as Lex desires, someone who is all good and all powerful.

Good grief. Chill. I just like a non mopey, non murdery, happy Superman. Tyler Hoechlin’s for instance. And why do you want a Superman who is brought down to our level? Who deals with things the way we have to? Superman’s a power fantasy, a wish filfulment. He’s there to inspire, to smile at and with. He’s not supposed to be realistic. He’s an alien in tight red pants. Why reduce him to just a human with superpowers? Can’t he be different? Can’t he be that beacon to look up to? I go elsewhere for ‘tough moral decisions that humans have to make.’ I go to Superman for fun, awe and something beyond the normal.

 

[misslane38]

Good grief. Chill. I just like a non mopey, non murdery, happy Superman. Tyler Hoechlin’s for instance. And why do you want a Superman who is brought down to our level? Who deals with things the way we have to? Superman’s a power fantasy, a wish filfulment. He’s there to inspire, to smile at and with. He’s not supposed to be realistic. He’s an alien in tight red pants. Why reduce him to just a human with superpowers? Can’t he be different? Can’t he be that beacon to look up to? I go elsewhere for ‘tough moral decisions that humans have to make.’ I go to Superman for fun, awe and something beyond the normal.

The Superman you're describing is the exception to how he's been characterized throughout media for nearly 80 years. The Superman you're describing is also not a beacon to look up to; he is a false idol who isn't better because he is better, but because his circumstances are written to be better. He is happier because the world treats him better. He doesn't have to kill because he always has the option not to. The best wish fulfillment is to wish for the ability to get through the dark times when dark times inevitably come, and the courage and strength to make tough decisions and deal with the consequences both positive and negative. Wonder Woman could fit the description of fun and awe inspiring, yet she actually did murder in cold blood. So, in light of that and everything else you've said thus far, I must say I appreciate getting to the heart of your objection to Superman killing Zod. It was never about morals or ethics. It was about making you feel more comfortable by making it seem like evil is easily defeated.

 

[Patchwork Man]

Good grief. Chill. I just like a non mopey, non murdery, happy Superman. Tyler Hoechlin’s for instance. And why do you want a Superman who is brought down to our level? Who deals with things the way we have to? Superman’s a power fantasy, a wish filfulment. He’s there to inspire, to smile at and with. He’s not supposed to be realistic. He’s an alien in tight red pants. Why reduce him to just a human with superpowers? Can’t he be different? Can’t he be that beacon to look up to? I go elsewhere for ‘tough moral decisions that humans have to make.’ I go to Superman for fun, awe and something beyond the normal.

We've had multiple iterations of that Superman, and Singer's stealth revisit didn't further anything. It was time for a different take. It was time for MoS. It was great to see that "alien guy" who didn't know "what he was supposed to be" as soon as he sprouted pubes and took to blowing bubbles and rescuing kittens and letting criminals' bullets bounce off his solar plexus (hey, those things ricochet).

 

[FunkMiller]

The Superman you're describing is the exception to how he's been characterized throughout media for nearly 80 years. The Superman you're describing is also not a beacon to look up to; he is a false idol who isn't better because he is better, but because his circumstances are written to be better. He is happier because the world treats him better. He doesn't have to kill because he always has the option not to. The best wish fulfillment is to wish for the ability to get through the dark times when dark times inevitably come, and the courage and strength to make tough decisions and deal with the consequences both positive and negative. Wonder Woman could fit the description of fun and awe inspiring, yet she actually did murder in cold blood. So, in light of that and everything else you've said thus far, I must say I appreciate getting to the heart of your objection to Superman killing Zod. It was never about morals or ethics. It was about making you feel more comfortable by making it seem like evil is easily defeated.

Boy, you... you really have a problem with Superman being a nice bloke, don’t you?

 

[heatvision38]

Good grief. Chill. I just like a non mopey, non murdery, happy Superman. Tyler Hoechlin’s for instance. And why do you want a Superman who is brought down to our level? Who deals with things the way we have to? Superman’s a power fantasy, a wish filfulment. He’s there to inspire, to smile at and with. He’s not supposed to be realistic. He’s an alien in tight red pants. Why reduce him to just a human with superpowers? Can’t he be different? Can’t he be that beacon to look up to? I go elsewhere for ‘tough moral decisions that humans have to make.’ I go to Superman for fun, awe and something beyond the normal.

For one, people often like to connect with a character, or at least find some aspect of the character with which to relate. I loved Smallville because it showed me the struggles a young Clark went through. I love Mark Waid's Birthright because it first humanized Clark before introducing us to Superman, and it found a great balance between the more human Clark Kent and the larger than life Superman, but in order to do so, it first introduced us to Clark Kent.

There are different ways to portray Superman. Some see him as Clark Kent who happens to have powers (ala John Byrne). Others see him as this godlike being who takes on human form. And some see him as something in between. There is no right or wrong way to view him in this regard. It's a matter of personal taste, as is wanting to see a version of Superman that struggles with what it means to have these powers, bringing the god into the human world. That's fascinating for many people.

As to your first line, you are throwing around simplistic adjectives such as mopey (which he wasn't; he was pensive, there's a big difference) and murderous, a word which was already debunked as he did not murder anyone.

You acknowledged in the prior thread that this is not the version of Superman you like. That's all that needs to be said. This is not YOUR version of Superman. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Where you run into issues is when you try to act as if YOUR version is the only version or that there cannot be other variations. People loved Burton's Batman even though he killed. I was reading Detective Comics at the time Batman '89 came out, I was just a young pup, but I didn't love the movie as much as others did because it did not feel like the Batman I was used to. That did not make Burton's Batman wrong as it still has most of the essence of Batman, but still a little too stylized for me as by this point, Batman had already been the more serious version of Batman we see today (I see some people saying Burton brought Batman out of the Adam West age, but this is far from true, he had already left that version far behind). But I also acknowledge that it was just a matter of taste.

Hoechlin's version was fine, but felt a little too much like a caricature of Reeve's Superman without the charm and gravitas. That so many at the time were prisoners of the moment and pointed to this version of Superman as being THE Superman tells me how inflexible people's view of Superman can be, and that's hurt Superman as an IP more than anything, imso.

 

[heatvision38]

Boy, you... you really have a problem with Superman being a nice bloke, don’t you?

I think Cavill's version of Clark/Superman is perfectly nice. He is also more complex and nuanced than he has been shown in the movies to this point (whereas the comics and tv shows, such as Smallville , have been less afraid to show other sides of him). What's funny is many of the people who prefer the Reeve/Routh/Hoechlin version of Superman as THE version of Superman have not read any or enough Superman stories to know that Superman is often more complex than the cinematic versions.

The very same Superman that I think many want to see in the movies is going to be the very same thing that risks damning him in the long run. People still just want a boyscout.

 

[misslane38]

Boy, you... you really have a problem with Superman being a nice bloke, don’t you?

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Superman didn't kill Zod in MoS because he isn't nice. Reeve's Superman killed Zod and he's considered nice. I have a problem with your shallow morality and hypocrisy. Diana is a "nice" hero and she killed at least a dozen people in her film. What an odd tangent from you!

 

[Superchan]

Because that isn’t Superman to me. And it never will be.

We all have our own ideal version of Superman and like you I hate Snyder's Superman and glad that it failed miserably and is most likely gone by the wayside.
I don't mind it when a creator/writer tries to re-invent the wheel provided that the execution is sound, which wasn't the case with Snyder's mopey superman . That superman was heroic but also bland as f*** IMO.
Reeve's superman made numerous mistakes and questionable decisions (reverse time, give up his powers), he was vain at times (see the deleted scene from SM 1 where jor-el talks to him about the subject of vanity) and he behaved like a total *****bag on more than one occasion (picked a fight with rocky and when he got his butt kicked he came back fully powered and took his revenge like a petulant child).
Snyder's superman by comparison was more responsible and one would argue is a better hero within the context of the story, but for the majority of the audience Reeve's superman was likable and charismatic thanks to Mankewitz's dialogue and Donner's appreciation of the character's symbolism and so the audience were willing to forgive the character's flaws, infact the character came off as more interesting because of them.
Then you have Cavill's superman who was heroic and all but for me and the majority of the audience he was mopey, emo and just plain bland and that's because he had little dialogue to be able to show any modicum of charisma and Snyder was too busy deconstructing the character to notice that he hasn't even began to make him interesting.

Superman wasn't created to be relatable but must be likeable, intelligent and charismatic to such a degree that the character can have flaws and yet not incur the wrath of fans everywhere when he does something questionable.
I hope the next director who takes the reigns will think about that.

 

[Patchwork Man]

If Cav-el wasn't "nice," he never would've let the US Army take him into custody, let alone agree to be turned over to Zod. That wasn't complacency, that was humility. That he didn't wink at the camera eye as he was being led aboard the scout ship is less than relevant.

 

[MAN O STEEL]

Reeve's superman made numerous mistakes and questionable decisions (reverse time, give up his powers), he was vain at times (see the deleted scene from SM 1 where jor-el talks to him about the subject of vanity) and he behaved like a total *****bag on more than one occasion (picked a fight with rocky and when he got his butt kicked he came back fully powered and took his revenge like a petulant child).
Snyder's superman by comparison was more responsible

Snyder's Superman was more responsible? So Reeve's Superman was irresponsible based on the actions you describe above but Cavill's Superman was more responsible when he, oh I don't know, Destroyed that guys truck and livelyhood or when he had complete control of Zod and still rammed him into a Gas station blowing up god knows how many people in the vicinity and inside the station itself?.Flying Faora through an IHOP, not knowing if he was gonna hit anybody or not? doesn't sound to responsible to me. And you can't use the , "He was new and his first day on the job" crap because he is a 33 year old man raised on good values and common sense.

 

[MAN O STEEL]

If Cav-el wasn't "nice," he never would've let the US Army take him into custody, let alone agree to be turned over to Zod. That wasn't complacency, that was humility. That he didn't wink at the camera eye as he was being led aboard the scout ship is less than relevant.

No one's asking for a wink, we're asking for a personality. Sure he does good in the film. Sure he is nice in the film but he looks down right miserable doing it. And no I'm not talking about smiling in every scene so don't even bother going there, but in every scene he looks frustrated and unhappy about his decisions. Always frowning and looking almost uninterested. I agree he should look somewhat serious because a lot of crap is going down but this is a movie, not real life. You have to inject some levity and moments where Clark seems at peace and comfortable in himself too. If it's all one way then it just comes off as boring and depressing.

 

[matt47]

No one's asking for a wink, we're asking for a personality. Sure he does good in the film. Sure he is nice in the film but he looks down right miserable doing it. And no I'm not talking about smiling in every scene so don't even bother going there, but in every scene he looks frustrated and unhappy about his decisions. Always frowning and looking almost uninterested. I agree he should look somewhat serious because a lot of crap is going down but this is a movie, not real life. Yu have to inject some levity and moments where Clark seems at peace and comfortable in himself too. If it's all one way then it just comes off as boring and depressing.

Yeah, maybe they should've had a scene or two with his mum to show these things.

Oh wait.

[YT]6VFCfx_rKbI[/YT]

 

[MAN O STEEL]

Yeah, maybe they should've had a scene or two with his mum to show these things.

Oh wait.

[YT]6VFCfx_rKbI[/YT]

That's it?. That tiny 1 minute conversation in a 2 and a half hour film?. This is what i'm talking about, you've done nothing but prove my point. You need more scenes like this. A chance for charisma and levity and understanding of how the characters feel. But even this scene alone what does it really have to say?. Clark couldnt breathe as a baby?, he found his parents and he says he isn't going anywhere to his mother. So let's break it down:

Tell's Martha he found his biological parents:

Martha says that's awesome and moves on to a story about breathing. Never asking how?, where?, what race are they?, What did you learn about yourself from them?. Nothing. No progress

Tell's Clark about not breathing properly as a baby and how she's afraid they'll take Clark away from her:

Clark just laughs at her and says he's not going anywhere and gives her a hug. That's it. That's the extent of their discussion in that clip you posted. That's all the progression you get. Don't you see how uninteresting and plain boring that is?. Nothing happened.

 

[FunkMiller]

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Superman didn't kill Zod in MoS because he isn't nice. Reeve's Superman killed Zod and he's considered nice. I have a problem with your shallow morality and hypocrisy. Diana is a "nice" hero and she killed at least a dozen people in her film. What an odd tangent from you!

Why are you obsessed with bringing in different characters in comparison? What the hell does Diana have to do with Superman’s character? Should I start talking about Snoopy when discussing the niceness of Superman’s character? And what’s hypocritical about wanting a happy Superman? You can tell deep and affecting stories about characters who are happy. You don't need angst, torment, darkness and a constant furrowed brow to tell a story with gravity and meaning.

 

[Superchan]

Snyder's Superman was more responsible? So Reeve's Superman was irresponsible based on the actions you describe above but Cavill's Superman was more responsible when he, oh I don't know, Destroyed that guys truck and livelyhood or when he had complete control of Zod and still rammed him into a Gas station blowing up god knows how many people in the vicinity and inside the station itself?.Flying Faora through an IHOP, not knowing if he was gonna hit anybody or not? doesn't sound to responsible to me. And you can't use the , "He was new and his first day on the job" crap because he is a 33 year old man raised on good values and common sense.

It doesn't matter that he was 33 or 75, it WAS his first day in the job and he had to fight the kryptonian equivalent of special forces.
The truck and the gas station stuff was irresponsible I agree but it really pales when compared with changing time and giving up his powers to get with Lois in the FOS.
Look as I said before I loath Snyder's superman but not because I see him as less of a hero than Reeve's superman but rather because he was just so mopey and bland and exuded non of the qualities that make superman such a compelling character.
Luckily Snyder is gone now and hopefully his s***y take on superman will follow suit.

 

[MAN O STEEL]

It doesn't matter that he was 33 or 75, it WAS his first day in the job and he had to fight the kryptonian equivalent of special forces.
The truck and the gas station stuff was irresponsible I agree but it really pales when compared with changing time and giving up his powers to get with Lois in the FOS.
Look as I said before I loath Snyder's superman but not because I see him as less of a hero than Reeve's superman but rather because he was just so mopey and bland and exuded non of the qualities that make superman such a compelling character.
Luckily Snyder is gone now and hopefully his s***y take on superman will follow suit.

I don't think Snyder's Superman is less heroic. he does heroic stuff throughout the whole film but my problem is he looks plain bored, frustrated and annoyed at having to do it. And yes, in my opinion it does matter that he is 33. He's been saving people a very long time before he became Superman. Saving people equals experience so he should have been experienced enough to not blow up a Gas station, experienced enough to not smash through an IHOP and experienced enough and moral enough and mature enough at 33 to not destroy a man's livelyhood. When it comes to fighting superhumans, then yes you're right, he's inexperienced and that made sense to me.

 

[markjoedelonge]

No, I made a joke, and then you referred to your avatar, which isn't necessarily indicative of "Nolan is my favoritest director ever!" For all I know, your favorite director could be Denis Villenueve, Ridley Scott, or Rob Zombie. But hey, whatever floats.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Also trying to lighten the mood in here haha.

 

[Superchan]

I don't think Snyder's Superman is less heroic. he does heroic stuff throughout the whole film but my problem is he looks plain bored, frustrated and annoyed at having to do it. And yes, in my opinion it does matter that he is 33. He's been saving people a very long time before he became Superman. Saving people equals experience so he should have been experienced enough to not blow up a Gas station, experienced enough to not smash through an IHOP and experienced enough and moral enough and mature enough at 33 to not destroy a man's livelyhood. When it comes to fighting superhumans, then yes you're right, he's inexperienced and that made sense to me.

Hey you're preaching to the choire here, Snyder's superman lacks the inspirational qualities that i think are necessary for any interpretation of superman to have.
I hated the gas station bit because it was unnecessary and added nothing to movie apart from Snyder thinking it's ''cool to blow s*** up" as was the truck bit, which was done purely to get a chuckle out of the audience.
The IHOP bit I can forgive because superman had to make a split decision inorder to save the pilot from Faora and was lucky that no one was killed.

 

[misslane38]

I don't think Snyder's Superman is less heroic. he does heroic stuff throughout the whole film but my problem is he looks plain bored, frustrated and annoyed at having to do it. And yes, in my opinion it does matter that he is 33. He's been saving people a very long time before he became Superman. Saving people equals experience so he should have been experienced enough to not blow up a Gas station, experienced enough to not smash through an IHOP and experienced enough and moral enough and mature enough at 33 to not destroy a man's livelyhood. When it comes to fighting superhumans, then yes you're right, he's inexperienced and that made sense to me.

He didn't look bored or frustrated, and he was an inexperienced flyer as well as fighter. And pardon me if I don't care whether a bully and sexual assaulter might have to make some insurance claims on his livelihood. At least he didn't attack the man like Reeve Superman did in a similar situation.