Justice League Henry Cavill IS Clark Kent/Superman - - - - - - - - Part 17

[kguillou]

For the people here saying that from the two deleted scenes of Zack Snyder's, that Superman had changed but just in a more subtle way than what Joss Whedon presented in the reshoots. WHAT?. Lol. You can't honestly believe that can you?. Now don't get me wrong, Joss' take wasn't great either but honestly go back and look at those two scenes. In the first one where Clark goes to the Scout ship to collect his suit, nothing has changed. From the moment he steps into frame till the last second before he steps out of the ship in his suit he is frowning. He looks completely unhappy just like in MOS and BVS. I'm not saying he should be all smiles but atleast have a look of relief, like a burden had been lifted and now being Superman is finally a choice for him, instead of living his life the way his father saw it, writing wrongs for a ghost, as Superman put it in BVS. He still just looked all round unhappy. As for the scene with Alfred, it makes no sense. Why would Superman find out from Lois that Bruce needs him and then go visit Alfred, all smiles while his new team mates are in mid battle trying to fight a world ending titan?. You might say it's to find out where the League are but would Bruce not have told Lois the full plan so that she could pass it onto Clark directly?. On top of that, Alfred is all serious and looks in shock, telling Superman he hopes he's not to late and this is the one time he smiles? Really?. Alfred looks worried about the team and Superman smiles now?. WOW!.

I think the deleted scene with Clark getting his suit back probably perfectly encapsulates why some like Snyder's style and why some don't. Some people see one thing and others see another. You seem to watch that scene and see the same old "mopey" Superman that you didn't like from the prior entries. But I don't see that. Yes, he's not smiling, but in that close up shot of Henry looking at the suit, I see a subtle look of purpose in Henry's facial acting. I read Henry's face and to me it says, "Well, there is it...my destiny..am I ready for this? Yeah, I think I'm ready for this." And when he emerges from it, his posture and stature with his cape flowing in the wind tells me that Clark's thinking to himself "I'm SUPERMAN. I'm ready for this."

But, hey, that's my reading and i definitely don't invalidate yours and I think that's how Zack likes to make his films, so that people can take away separate meanings.

But. I think one thing is very safe to say and yes, I do think there is evidence in the footage to support this. Zack's intention for Superman in JL was that he was finally confident and ready to embrace the mantle. I don't see how you could not take that away from the footage we've seen that he shot. How it was conveyed...well we can debate that.

 

[heatvision38]

For the people here saying that from the two deleted scenes of Zack Snyder's, that Superman had changed but just in a more subtle way than what Joss Whedon presented in the reshoots. WHAT?. Lol. You can't honestly believe that can you?. Now don't get me wrong, Joss' take wasn't great either but honestly go back and look at those two scenes. In the first one where Clark goes to the Scout ship to collect his suit, nothing has changed. From the moment he steps into frame till the last second before he steps out of the ship in his suit he is frowning. He looks completely unhappy just like in MOS and BVS. I'm not saying he should be all smiles but atleast have a look of relief, like a burden had been lifted and now being Superman is finally a choice for him, instead of living his life the way his father saw it, writing wrongs for a ghost, as Superman put it in BVS. He still just looked all round unhappy. As for the scene with Alfred, it makes no sense. Why would Superman find out from Lois that Bruce needs him and then go visit Alfred, all smiles while his new team mates are in mid battle trying to fight a world ending titan?. You might say it's to find out where the League are but would Bruce not have told Lois the full plan so that she could pass it onto Clark directly?. On top of that, Alfred is all serious and looks in shock, telling Superman he hopes he's not to late and this is the one time he smiles? Really?. Alfred looks worried about the team and Superman smiles now?. WOW!.

But by that point in the movie, Bruce did not know where Steppenwolf would be. So how would he have been able to tell Lois?

As for the first scene you described, that was certainly not frowning. That was a look of purpose and focus. That is very different from frowning.

 

[herolee10]

Gotta say that I'm pleasantly surprised to see on how this thread still has a lot of life/activity in it, even after 7 months of the film's release.

 

[The Guard]

I thought his warm,demanor towards the kids was good and needed even though the dialogue was a little wonky.

Yo me, the pandering moment of the film that almost made me laugh out loud was in the final battle where Superman stops everything and goes, "wait, Batman CIVILIANS. I must go and make sure the fanboys dont complain!"

THAT moment felt very inauthentic and blatantly pandering. I feel like they could've come up with a much more organic way of Superman saving some civilians.

So wait...it's okay to pander to audiences who wanted Superman to be warmer and more inspirational...but not ok to pander to audiences who wanted Superman to acknowledge civilians in danger more directly?

Is it really inherently pandering to show Superman (a character who largely exists to save people in peril) acknowledging civilians in peril and acting to save them?

In terms of it not being organic...if only some of the civilians in question that the League had been saving had been woven into the story itself somehow. Perhaps that would have put a more intimate face on the people in peril.

People would have loved that, right?

Right?

People like to get on the film's portrayal of Superman and specifically the scenes where he shows personality traits we didn't see that much of in prior films, but the sequences he was in weren't only about Superman himself, but were generally also often relevant to JUSTICE LEAGUE and its storylines and themes. Even that opening sequence.

The "hope is like your car keys" bit, for instance, wasn't just about Superman himself being a figure of hope (which we know because he is, even in previous films), but about hope being hard to find in certain circumstances. It immediately precedes a montage where people have lost hope, and sets up what is perhaps the key thematic conflict of the film; a circumstance where hope may be hard to find.

It is arguably not structured into the film as well as it should have been and certainly not executed, at least effectswise, as well as it could have been, but that concept was explored at several points throughout the film and returned to, albeit a bit clunkily, when Lois did her wrap up at the end. But it wasn't just an arbitrary Superman moment for the heck of it...it was also an opening statement by the filmmakers about a key theme of the film itself that they intended to explore.

 

[misslane38]

Just to clarify, I would have loved to have seen more of Cavill's Superman interacting with the public in a warm and inspirational way in JL. I would have been overjoyed to see him rescuing civilians. But I didn't get any of that in JL. Not really. For one, I will I never know what may have been in the Snyder Cut. But the biggest disappointment was that there was an intention to enrich and add to Superman's role in the film, but the people involved executed those ideas in such an inartful and dismissive way that whatever ended up on screen is actually worse than doing nothing at all. What I saw in the Whedon cut was pandering, condescending, and just plain awful. Superman was turned into a puppet not a person. There is a way to show Superman interacting with the public in inspiring ways and saving them that isn't awkward or fake. It was like WB and Whedon thought if you just perfunctorily go through the motions with the bare minimum of fanservice, then all be well. It wasn't good.

 

[BH/HHH]

Just to clarify, I would have loved to have seen more of Cavill's Superman interacting with the public in a warm and inspirational way in JL. I would have been overjoyed to see him rescuing civilians. But I didn't get any of that in JL. Not really. For one, I will I never know what may have been in the Snyder Cut. But the biggest disappointment was that there was an intention to enrich and add to Superman's role in the film, but the people involved executed those ideas in such an inartful and dismissive way that whatever ended up on screen is actually worse than doing nothing at all. What I saw in the Whedon cut was pandering, condescending, and just plain awful. Superman was turned into a puppet not a person. There is a way to show Superman interacting with the public in inspiring ways and saving them that isn't awkward or fake. It was like WB and Whedon thought if you just perfunctorily go through the motions with the bare minimum of fanservice, then all be well. It wasn't good.

Some people did in some respects though myself included and if I liked a certain scene (even with a dodgy CG mouth) then that’s my opinion. End of the day I think both got it wrong Snyder went too far one way in BvS and ultimately Whedon went too far the other. For me I still think at the end of Man of Steel he’s Superman when he says “Glad to be here Lois” and smiles, the Superman we all know and love. Man of Steel was a great springboard. When Snyder brought Batman in to the sequel I’m convinced he changed the outlay there wasn’t any need to deconstruct Superman in BvS whatsoever at least without showing us the construction. For me that’s why I say Snyder did a little retcon on Superman in BvS, it’s like he reverts him back a little in order to serve the story.

Also what I’m saying doesn’t mean there weren’t good/great moments for Superman in BvS and JL and it’s all subjective at the end of the day.

But there has to be a balance to Superman that they haven’t gotten right yet through BvS and JL (I’m not doubting MOS because that film is supposed to set up him becoming Superman and to me does a great job) and I hope they get it right in the next movie.

I’m not trying to start an argument here I’m just reflecting my opinion. Which is what I did when I talked about the opening scene in JL. I actually don’t care if you hated it, I’m sorry if you did but I was and am expressing my opinions on it and Superman in BvS and JL.

 

[idiot09]

Then why did they scrap/reshoot pretty much the entire movie after it was filmed

THAT's the thing Chip. That's the most confusing part. Why would they do such a thing, it makes no sense, and hence the anger towards WB. They made a stupid call.

From what we can see from Snyder's Superman in JL, his storyline was much more positive and he was more confident and happy in his demeanour. And the storyline was the same too, not as if Snyder had a completely different storyline. Superman comes back evil/confused, fights with League, Lois calms him down, he goes to the Kent farm and finds himself again, goes to the scoutship to get his suit, goes to Aflred to know about the fight, joins the fight, stands together with the league, and then we see him with Bruce and in the shirt rip sequence. I mean does that really seem like a dark Superman or the Superman who was at his lowest point in BvS for you?

Spoiler

The only possible explanation is, they just wanted Superman to be more quippy/jokey. Because otherwise, we were getting classic Superman.

 

[BH/HHH]

I definitely think Whedon made him too quippy and I think that’s what’s WBs thought people wanted. What they wanted was a balance. I guess until we see a Snyder cut we’ll never know for sure what Superman’s impact on the film was. But given they felt they had to add extra dialogue it makes me wonder if Superman barely spoke. Which is another of Snyder’s mistakes in BvS for me. So I guess with Miss Lane saying they turned him into a talking puppet in JL (and I do get that complaint) maybe he just didn’t say a lot and WBs knowing that complaint went overboard on his dialogue in the final cut of Justice League.

I guess overall for me I feel frustration at both BvS and JL for different reasons but still enjoy aspects of both, which is what I’m getting at when I say I like the scene with the kids that’s not me saying that I like what they did with Superman in JL better than what Snyder did or even prefer JL as a film overall, I’m just saying that I liked that one scene. Even though ultimately time hasn’t been kind to either film for me.

 

[matt47]

But by that point in the movie, Bruce did not know where Steppenwolf would be. So how would he have been able to tell Lois?

As for the first scene you described, that was certainly not frowning. That was a look of purpose and focus. That is very different from frowning.

Good lord MAN O STEEL. You try sooo hard to hate on Snyder and his Superman huh..?...damn.


I love the way Supes smiles at Alfred when approaching him with his head sort of tilted as if to say, "hey, I'm a friend, dont be afraid of the dude who just fell from the sky aye."
And of course he's gonna smile when Alfred calls this farmboy Master Kent! Are you kidding me?

 

[idiot09]

. I guess until we see a Snyder cut we’ll never know for sure what Superman’s impact on the film was.

True. However I didnt feel he underspoke in either MOS or BvS UC(in BvS TC,yes you have a point). I like that Superman is not too talkative, a man of few words, but when he speaks...the room falls silent and everyone listens. Snyder is a fan of minimalistic dialogue, and visual storytelling.

But lets not pretend as if WB tried to do us a favour by cutting stuff like Clark talking with Lois about their engagement, and replacing that with death feeling "itchy". That's not a case of WB adding dialogue to improve the film, but taking something good and removing it and replacing it with something laughably bad.

Edit : And its fine you like the opening scene, you dont have to defend yourself. I think without the CGI face, horrible lighting, and some better dialogue and placement/context in the movie, it could have been a GREAT scene.

Good lord MAN O STEEL. You try sooo hard to hate on Snyder and his Superman huh..?...damn.


I love the way Supes smiles at Alfred when approaching him with his head sort of tilted as if to say, "hey, I'm a friend, dont be afraid of the dude who just fell from the sky aye."
And of course he's gonna smile when Alfred calls this farmboy Master Kent! Are you kidding me?

Yeah that's a bad take, I'm not going into that one

 

[BH/HHH]

True. However I didnt feel he underspoke in either MOS or BvS UC(in BvS TC,yes you have a point). I like that Superman is not too talkative, a man of few words, but when he speaks...the room falls silent and everyone listens. Snyder is a fan of minimalistic dialogue, and visual storytelling.

But lets not pretend as if WB tried to do us a favour by cutting stuff like Clark talking with Lois about their engagement, and replacing that with death feeling "itchy". That's not a case of WB adding dialogue to improve the film, but taking something good and removing it and replacing it with something laughably bad.

Edit : And its fine you like the opening scene, you dont have to defend yourself. I think without the CGI face, horrible lighting, and some better dialogue and placement/context in the movie, it could have been a GREAT scene.

I get that he is and I actually think he spoke plenty in Man of Steel. I just don’t think he did in BvS personally but that doesn’t mean I wanted him to be quippy like he was in JL.

I think WBs thought they knew what people wanted but what it just proved is they continue to make the same dumb mistakes that they were making in the 90s with regards to Superman. They don’t actually understand that there’s a balance to the character and that he’s great in his own right. He doesn’t have to be ripping off something else to be great. I actually feel WBs are the major problem with DC Films.

Yeah it probably was placed poorly in the film if I’m honest.

I’d actually love to start a thread on what’s changed for me with BvS overtime and why I like it less now but I know exactly what kind of thread that would turn into. I might talk about it on my podcast one day.

 

[Nemeres]

I liked the cellphone video bit. By opening the film with Superman you don't need to explain him later through exposition. He explains himself, in simple terms, while communicating that his absence is sth to regret, an idea that the film needs. Here's betting money that Cavill enjoyed it. It's just a "bad idea" because Whedon had it.

 

[matt47]

When I heard the film opened with cellphone footage of supes talking to kids I was all for it. But the execution was awful. The suit looked terrible, but that's somewhat because the suit is bad in general (dont start that debate again) but the way they shot the scene didn't do it any favors.
The dialogue was awful! Of all the things they could've gone with all they got was, "hope is like your key keys" and why did he feel the need to stop himself when he said "my father"...like oh no! Supes has a dad. HE MUST BE CLARK KENT. ????????

 

[misslane38]

I liked the cellphone video bit. By opening the film with Superman you don't need to explain him later through exposition. He explains himself, in simple terms, while communicating that his absence is sth to regret, an idea that the film needs. Here's betting money that Cavill enjoyed it. It's just a "bad idea" because Whedon had it.

It's bad because the dialogue is bad. It doesn't explain anything about Superman. It's hollow and cliche. There are dozens if not hundreds of better ideas and better dialogue to reintroduce us to Superman, but the cell phone footage was not it. Not at all. You want to reintroduce people to Superman? You want it to be simple terms? You want to communicate absence and regret? That's all great. Bring it on. Then show him being Superman. The best of Superman. The best of this Superman.

Revisit ideas of Superman already introduced in this incarnation of the character in ways reminiscent of Superman's first feats in the 1930s comics: stop a man from abusing a woman or save a bully to show him a better way. Or, follow a different path, and show us how people were changed and inspired by this Superman. People we've met before. Show the little boy in Gotham working in a community garden wearing a red cape. Show the EMT who responded to the Capitol bombing wearing a \S/ under his uniform.

Don't show us something that tries to inartfully reshape the past. Don't give us dialogue that has nothing of Superman's true voice. Yes, Superman in the DCEU was quiet. Yes, he was sometimes distant. He was distant with those who approached him as a god, or by contrast, those who treated him with fear and contempt. But he was never a man who spoke in old-fashioned homespun wisdom or lazy metaphors. When he talked about what the \S/ represented in MoS, he was simple and direct.

BvS ended with a message humanity gave to Superman. After his sacrifice, humanity scrawled over his destroyed monument these words: If you seek his monument, look around you. That was Superman's legacy of hope. Hope can come and go like a river; it can be close by when it's lost. The end of BvS exemplified that message, so start there. Show us how humanity is Superman's monument. The only way the audience can truly feel the weight of what was lost is if the audience identifies and empathizes with Superman. If the audience is already bringing baggage to the film that obscures the message, it will not resonate. It also will not resonate if it is repackaging old and basic ideas from prior films in a didactic rather than a dramatic way.

I think Cavill probably did enjoy filming the Whedon scene, but did he enjoy watching it? Is it something you think he can ever watch with any pride? I don't. I think it's a huge joke. Whatever true emotions he felt during that scene are obscured by its shoddy CGI. And if the scene was as vital as you say it is, then surely it must have been important to WB and Whedon, right? Only you wouldn't know it based on how it looks and sounds. The cell phone scene sucks because it doesn't have any truth, or thought, or love in it. It's shameless pandering rendered with indifference.

 

[markjoedelonge]

It's bad because the dialogue is bad. It doesn't explain anything about Superman. It's hollow and cliche. There are dozens if not hundreds of better ideas and better dialogue to reintroduce us to Superman, but the cell phone footage was not it. Not at all. You want to reintroduce people to Superman? You want it to be simple terms? You want to communicate absence and regret? That's all great. Bring it on. Then show him being Superman. The best of Superman. The best of this Superman.

Revisit ideas of Superman already introduced in this incarnation of the character in ways reminiscent of Superman's first feats in the 1930s comics: stop a man from abusing a woman or save a bully to show him a better way. Or, follow a different path, and show us how people were changed and inspired by this Superman. People we've met before. Show the little boy in Gotham working in a community garden wearing a red cape. Show the EMT who responded to the Capitol bombing wearing a \S/ under his uniform.

Don't show us something that tries to inartfully reshape the past. Don't give us dialogue that has nothing of Superman's true voice. Yes, Superman in the DCEU was quiet. Yes, he was sometimes distant. He was distant with those who approached him as a god, or by contrast, those who treated him with fear and contempt. But he was never a man who spoke in old-fashioned homespun wisdom or lazy metaphors. When he talked about what the \S/ represented in MoS, he was simple and direct.

BvS ended with a message humanity gave to Superman. After his sacrifice, humanity scrawled over his destroyed monument these words: If you seek his monument, look around you. That was Superman's legacy of hope. Hope can come and go like a river; it can be close by when it's lost. The end of BvS exemplified that message, so start there. Show us how humanity is Superman's monument. The only way the audience can truly feel the weight of what was lost is if the audience identifies and empathizes with Superman. If the audience is already bringing baggage to the film that obscures the message, it will not resonate. It also will not resonate if it is repackaging old and basic ideas from prior films in a didactic rather than a dramatic way.

I think Cavill probably did enjoy filming the Whedon scene, but did he enjoy watching it? Is it something you think he can ever watch with any pride? I don't. I think it's a huge joke. Whatever true emotions he felt during that scene are obscured by its shoddy CGI. And if the scene was as vital as you say it is, then surely it must have been important to WB and Whedon, right? Only you wouldn't know it based on how it looks and sounds. The cell phone scene sucks because it doesn't have any truth, or thought, or love in it. It's shameless pandering rendered with indifference.

Personally, I would have loved to open with a scene (flashback) of Superman talking down a teenager/man/woman from suicide, being warm and friendly and embracing the person. We then cut to that person standing at Superman's monument, mourning his absence and we could segue into the "Everybody Knows" montage.

 

[misslane38]

Personally, I would have loved to open with a scene (flashback) of Superman talking down a teenager/man/woman from suicide, being warm and friendly and embracing the person. We then cut to that person standing at Superman's monument, mourning his absence and we could segue into the "Everybody Knows" montage.

Yes, exactly. Something like that. Something that shows the audience what Superman means; something that engages the audience using dramatic storytelling. Actually dramatizing what it looks like to see Superman helping people find the hope that they lost is not too far away or hard to find? That's something I would have loved to see.

 

[BH/HHH]

Personally, I would have loved to open with a scene (flashback) of Superman talking down a teenager/man/woman from suicide, being warm and friendly and embracing the person. We then cut to that person standing at Superman's monument, mourning his absence and we could segue into the "Everybody Knows" montage.

That would have been really good to see.

 

[Nemeres]

It's bad because the dialogue is bad.

In BVS, a random stranger watches Clark hike by and goes, "He's come here to die." One of Lois's two lines to the film's villain is, "You're psychotic!" MOS's amount of clichéd/cringe lines is its own drinking game. "I'm a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter." I would've also thought that was self-evident, but not everyone agrees, and that's ok. I like the JL opening scene bc it's a perspective he's sharing. Superman trying to make himself understandable to kids who took the trouble to approach the alien demigod. Reaching out, aware that the footage will probably be shared. It's cute. Yes, it looks terrible. That's more a reflection on the studio's production standards than on Whedon, I think, who's there working with somebody else's pieces of a movie. As an idea on the script level, it's valid and it's solid enough.

There's no alternate reality where this same scene made it into a JL that's completely Snyder's and you guys have the same vehement dislike for the dialogue. I believe that.

 

[idiot09]

It's bad because the dialogue is bad. It doesn't explain anything about Superman. It's hollow and cliche. There are dozens if not hundreds of better ideas and better dialogue to reintroduce us to Superman, but the cell phone footage was not it. Not at all. You want to reintroduce people to Superman? You want it to be simple terms? You want to communicate absence and regret? That's all great. Bring it on. Then show him being Superman. The best of Superman. The best of this Superman.

Revisit ideas of Superman already introduced in this incarnation of the character in ways reminiscent of Superman's first feats in the 1930s comics: stop a man from abusing a woman or save a bully to show him a better way. Or, follow a different path, and show us how people were changed and inspired by this Superman. People we've met before. Show the little boy in Gotham working in a community garden wearing a red cape. Show the EMT who responded to the Capitol bombing wearing a \S/ under his uniform.

Don't show us something that tries to inartfully reshape the past. Don't give us dialogue that has nothing of Superman's true voice. Yes, Superman in the DCEU was quiet. Yes, he was sometimes distant. He was distant with those who approached him as a god, or by contrast, those who treated him with fear and contempt. But he was never a man who spoke in old-fashioned homespun wisdom or lazy metaphors. When he talked about what the \S/ represented in MoS, he was simple and direct.

This so much this.

I loved the scene in the recent "Death of Superman" animated flick, where the scientist is wearing a Superman t-shirt, and the deep respect and admiration he has for him. Something like that from a character that was already been established in the previous movies, would have been beautiful.

 

[idiot09]

There's no alternate reality where this same scene made it into a JL that's completely Snyder's and you guys have the same vehement dislike for the dialogue. I believe that.

yes and thats why nearly all of us who love these movies can agree on the fact that the dialogue post MOS kiss was bad. Oh wait, does that go agains the narrative?

Ohh, and you just like this scene because it was not done by Snyder, and hate the prev movies because it was done by him. See, two can play at this game.

Not cool.

 

[heatvision38]

So wait...it's okay to pander to audiences who wanted Superman to be warmer and more inspirational...but not ok to pander to audiences who wanted Superman to acknowledge civilians in danger more directly?

Is it really inherently pandering to show Superman (a character who largely exists to save people in peril) acknowledging civilians in peril and acting to save them?

In terms of it not being organic...if only some of the civilians in question that the League had been saving had been woven into the story itself somehow. Perhaps that would have put a more intimate face on the people in peril.

People would have loved that, right?

Right?

People like to get on the film's portrayal of Superman and specifically the scenes where he shows personality traits we didn't see that much of in prior films, but the sequences he was in weren't only about Superman himself, but were generally also often relevant to JUSTICE LEAGUE and its storylines and themes. Even that opening sequence.

The "hope is like your car keys" bit, for instance, wasn't just about Superman himself being a figure of hope (which we know because he is, even in previous films), but about hope being hard to find in certain circumstances. It immediately precedes a montage where people have lost hope, and sets up what is perhaps the key thematic conflict of the film; a circumstance where hope may be hard to find.

It is arguably not structured into the film as well as it should have been and certainly not executed, at least effectswise, as well as it could have been, but that concept was explored at several points throughout the film and returned to, albeit a bit clunkily, when Lois did her wrap up at the end. But it wasn't just an arbitrary Superman moment for the heck of it...it was also an opening statement by the filmmakers about a key theme of the film itself that they intended to explore.

It's execution not the concept people are taking issue with.

 

[BH/HHH]

In BVS, a random stranger watches Clark hike by and goes, "He's come here to die." One of Lois's two lines to the film's villain is, "You're psychotic!" MOS's amount of clichéd/cringe lines is its own drinking game. "I'm a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter." I would've also thought that was self-evident, but not everyone agrees, and that's ok. I like the JL opening scene bc it's a perspective he's sharing. Superman trying to make himself understandable to kids who took the trouble to approach the alien demigod. Reaching out, aware that the footage will probably be shared. It's cute. Yes, it looks terrible. That's more a reflection on the studio's production standards than on Whedon, I think, who's there working with somebody else's pieces of a movie. As an idea on the script level, it's valid and it's solid enough.

There's no alternate reality where this same scene made it into a JL that's completely Snyder's and you guys have the same vehement dislike for the dialogue. I believe that.

I don’t get what’s bad about the Pulitzer prize winning reporter line personally but I was mostly agreeing with you until that last part. The dig to the Snyder fans was a little unnecessary.

This so much this.

I loved the scene in the recent "Death of Superman" animated flick, where the scientist is wearing a Superman t-shirt, and the deep respect and admiration he has for him. Something like that from a character that was already been established in the previous movies, would have been beautiful.

That was great and what a damn great animated movie that was too.

 

[idiot09]

That was great and what a damn great animated movie that was too.

My favourite Superman animated flick for sure.

 

[Mandon Knight]

HMV doing an exclusive steelbook for it....out 6th August.

https://store.hmv.com/film-tv/blu-r...814.354320273.1530006434-590207071.1529365812

 

[Aurakles]

The phone scene needed to be something that showed what Superman meant to the world, and why his absence would be so keenly felt. It didn't do this.
It showed he was nice to kids, which is good, but not remarkable. As has been said by a few people, it needed to show how Superman affected people’s lives, how his presence made a difference.
If it had done this, I would've been able to forgive the worst CGI.