Justice League Henry Cavill IS Clark Kent/Superman - - - - - - - - - - Part 19

I love the last few scenes of MOS. Always have. I can watch the last scene over and over again. It's why I pushed for a MOS sequel for the longest time. It's why I've pushed for Cavill to return. Even with the big opening Krypton sequence, the battle of Smallville, and the destruction of the world engine, it's those last couple of scenes that I enjoy the most. I still hold out hope for a standalone moving forward in the tone and direction set by the end of MOS.
 
I love the last few scenes of MOS. Always have. I can watch the last scene over and over again. It's why I pushed for a MOS sequel for the longest time. It's why I've pushed for Cavill to return. Even with the big opening Krypton sequence, the battle of Smallville, and the destruction of the world engine, it's those last couple of scenes that I enjoy the most. I still hold out hope for a standalone moving forward in the tone and direction set by the end of MOS.

i loved how zack forgo a bombastic type ending and had clark quietly show up at the daily planet.
it's the origin of the mild mannered reporter disguise as well.
then lois saying "welcome to the planet." to him.

awww snap. double meaning!
 
I just wish he had shown any interest/training in journalism before that. The Planet’s not just supposed to be a job “where he can keep his ear to the ground” for Superman emergencies; it’s supposed to be his dream job, driven by his passion for uncovering truths and exploring the human condition. They talked about the Planet at the end there like it was just the perfect cover job, and weren’t interested in what it meant to Clark as a character. I hated that, tbh.
 
I just wish he had shown any interest/training in journalism before that. The Planet’s not just supposed to be a job “where he can keep his ear to the ground” for Superman emergencies; it’s supposed to be his dream job, driven by his passion for uncovering truths and exploring the human condition. They talked about the Planet at the end there like it was just the perfect cover job, and weren’t interested in what it meant to Clark as a character. I hated that, tbh.

i feel they expanded a bit more on that in bvs ultimate edition.

though...he basically ended up investigating batman so he can go vigilante on him. lol
 
It was just one example of Goyer/Snyder showing a lack of interest in Clark’s actual personality to me. When those of us who didn’t like their take on Clark say we wish he had more personality, that’s not “he should’ve smiled more!” It’s far more than that I felt was missing.
 
It was just one example of Goyer/Snyder showing a lack of interest in Clark’s actual personality to me. When those of us who didn’t like their take on Clark say we wish he had more personality, that’s not “he should’ve smiled more!” It’s far more than that I felt was missing.

i do wish they showed clark and superman much more in bvs.
it felt like a glass half-full situation for me.
i liked the bits we got overall, but i feelit was snyder trying to throw too much into one movie.
 
i loved how zack forgo a bombastic type ending and had clark quietly show up at the daily planet.
it's the origin of the mild mannered reporter disguise as well.
then lois saying "welcome to the planet." to him.

awww snap. double meaning!

The greatest ending to any CBM ever, with a Batman Begins a close second
 
Why can't Clark just be someone who develops an interest in journalism, though? A character doesn't lack a personality just because they're not given a personality trait you've come to expect. His personality was that he was adrift, trying to figure out who he was and what he wanted. In other words, Clark can start out as someone who sees journalism as a means to an end for his personal practical purposes, yet grow to see its value.

In BvS, Clark initially goes to Gotham to talk to Kahina. However, when he's informed she's not there and another resident starts talking about the new, more brutal, Batman, he shifts focus away from himself. Clark doesn't use his Batman investigation for selfish reasons. Far from it. He doesn't know that Batman even has a grudge against him. All he knows is that because he is public, politicians and other citizens are given a platform to air their grievances.

He seeks Kahina out because she accuses Superman of answering to no one, and ultimately he answers to Finch's committee. However, while in Gotham, he discovers Batman's in the shadows operations as a vigilante among the poor and disenfranchised have allowed his actions to go largely unquestioned, and thus Clark comes to realize how he can use his position to give them a voice. He repeatedly defies Perry's cynicism and attempts to refocus his efforts on more trivial pursuits, to champion the merits of journalism and his own investigation.

I like takes on Clark where his interest in journalism is something that he has from an early age or at least as a teen or young adult, but it's hardly the most consistent trait of his and hardly something that can't be explored in different, yet equally valid, ways that show him having a genuine passion for the profession.
 
It was just one example of Goyer/Snyder showing a lack of interest in Clark’s actual personality to me. When those of us who didn’t like their take on Clark say we wish he had more personality, that’s not “he should’ve smiled more!” It’s far more than that I felt was missing.

Agreed. Hoping Cavill is allowed to show off more charisma and personality in the role going forward.
 
Cap wasn’t really like Superman, he was just bang on Captain America.

Also you don’t have to let like Snyder’s take but it’s as valid as any other interpretation of Superman.

Cap was a hopeful, intelligent, charismatic leader, which is to me what superman is meant to be.

You are absolutely right, fictional characters are open canvases, open to interpretation, alteration, evolution and revolution. With that being said, just as every interpretation is valid, so is my decision to personally reject that interpretation and luckily I and most of the world said no thanks to Snyder's attempt.
 
Cap wasn’t really like Superman, he was just bang on Captain America.

Also you don’t have to let like Snyder’s take but it’s as valid as any other interpretation of Superman.

Spot on, but therein likes the problem as I see it. Fanboy/fangirl communities tend to only consider mainstream depictions of Superman (specifically the ones that resonate with them strongest) as valid interpretations of the character, and even when mainstream depictions deviate in a way that's perceived as incongruous with what has come before, people cry foul. I myself have been guilty of behaving in like manner from time to time. As you suggested, though, every interpretation has its own respective audience and is therefore valid in some way. While I don't always agree with Snyder's creative choices, I take issue with the false narrative going around that he somehow isn't a true DC fan simply because he took it upon himself to mine stories that exist outside of mainstream continuity for inspiration (e.g., Elseworlds content.) Hate Red Son? Fine. Think Dark Knight Returns is trash? Fair enough, that's your prerogative. But, again, stories like this have more than earned their audience. There's no negating or getting around that fact. Moreover, mainstream continuity isn't the be-all and end-all of comics, as far too many of us want to believe. Basing your personal aspirations for an upcoming film on that side of the "extended universe" is fine--I do it all the time--but we have to stop acting as if there's not some whole other well of untapped resources waiting for filmmakers to play with. Also, notwithstanding the stories we prefer for reasons not always having to do with quality if we're being totally honest, that doesn't make them objectively superior to the ones we can do without.

A lot of casual fans/general audience types could probably stand to learn this as well. Whereas traditionalists demand a stricter adherence to the source material at its most consistent, the former chooses only to recognize the popular adaptations they were first introduced to as kids, be that in the form of TV shows, movies, cartoons or even video games. They're mostly oblivious to the manner in which these adaptations take their cues from the ever-evolving medium that is... wait for it, wait for it... the comics. Not to mention the rich history of all these characters, as defined in countless tales spanning the decades. And that too is fine, so long as it ends with mere indifference and not a disputatious tirade about how some director stole your childhood.
 
It's also entirely possible to think that Snyder's take is straight-up poorly done, regardless of whether it adheres to what we want to see from the character.

I'm kind of sick of people trying to explain away other people's criticisms of Snyder's Superman as "it just wasn't what you wanted to see." Sure, but it's also bad, imo. It's badly written, badly acted in a lot of spots, VERY poorly paced and weirdly executed with attempts at humor that fall flat, metaphors and symbolism so heavy-handed they're more unintentionally funny than anything, and characters so dour and thinly-drawn that I can't seem to care about them. That's a perfectly valid take, too. Just accept that some people think it's bad, without trying to bend over backwards to explain their own opinions to them or invalidate them.
 
Agreed, but as sad as it may sound Tra, Chris Evan's Cap was far more Superman than Snyder's emo, mopey version ever was.
Please dear god, keep Snyder as far away from superman as humanly possible.

I felt MOS set up the character to be prime superman/clark in MOS2

I just wish he had shown any interest/training in journalism before that. The Planet’s not just supposed to be a job “where he can keep his ear to the ground” for Superman emergencies; it’s supposed to be his dream job, driven by his passion for uncovering truths and exploring the human condition. They talked about the Planet at the end there like it was just the perfect cover job, and weren’t interested in what it meant to Clark as a character. I hated that, tbh.

I agree, I mean, the film did show clark as an intellect, but it didn't expand specifically.

I wanted to know why he was on that fishing trawler, around that small table under a swinging lantern (glowing green) could have been a great bonding moment and introduction tot he character and clark's alias's. Think fo that famous scene in Jaws, around the table, chatting, singing.. that could have been so enjoyable. Also a metaphor for his ship...taking him somewhere.

It was just one example of Goyer/Snyder showing a lack of interest in Clark’s actual personality to me. When those of us who didn’t like their take on Clark say we wish he had more personality, that’s not “he should’ve smiled more!” It’s far more than that I felt was missing.

Also, at the bar with that girl.. I wanted that to be fleshed out, why was he there, how ddi he come across.

Why can't Clark just be someone who develops an interest in journalism, though? A character doesn't lack a personality just because they're not given a personality trait you've come to expect. His personality was that he was adrift, trying to figure out who he was and what he wanted. In other words, Clark can start out as someone who sees journalism as a means to an end for his personal practical purposes, yet grow to see its value.

In BvS, Clark initially goes to Gotham to talk to Kahina. However, when he's informed she's not there and another resident starts talking about the new, more brutal, Batman, he shifts focus away from himself. Clark doesn't use his Batman investigation for selfish reasons. Far from it. He doesn't know that Batman even has a grudge against him. All he knows is that because he is public, politicians and other citizens are given a platform to air their grievances.

He seeks Kahina out because she accuses Superman of answering to no one, and ultimately he answers to Finch's committee. However, while in Gotham, he discovers Batman's in the shadows operations as a vigilante among the poor and disenfranchised have allowed his actions to go largely unquestioned, and thus Clark comes to realize how he can use his position to give them a voice. He repeatedly defies Perry's cynicism and attempts to refocus his efforts on more trivial pursuits, to champion the merits of journalism and his own investigation.

I like takes on Clark where his interest in journalism is something that he has from an early age or at least as a teen or young adult, but it's hardly the most consistent trait of his and hardly something that can't be explored in different, yet equally valid, ways that show him having a genuine passion for the profession.

I have an interest in journalism, I doubt daily mail will give me a job with absolutely no credentials.

That scene where his dad died... the Kansas shirt...a throw away comment 'you're taking journalism at KU - isn't that something? where you can fight for truth, justice...' could have gone a long way.
 
It's also entirely possible to think that Snyder's take is straight-up poorly done, regardless of whether it adheres to what we want to see from the character.

I'm kind of sick of people trying to explain away other people's criticisms of Snyder's Superman as "it just wasn't what you wanted to see." Sure, but it's also bad, imo. It's badly written, badly acted in a lot of spots, VERY poorly paced and weirdly executed with attempts at humor that fall flat and characters so paper thin that I can't seem to care about them. That's a perfectly valid take, too. Just accept that some people think it's bad, without trying to bend over backwards to explain their own opinions to them or invalidate them.

I hear you and even have some of the same problems with Zack's production values, albeit not to the same extent naturally. I've just noticed that his detractors are especially vocal when it comes to his creative choices, which is partly what I was speaking to.
 
It's always the same. Mah Batman doesn't kill. Superman is too dark or emo. Bla bla bla...

Those are creative choices.
 
It's also entirely possible to think that Snyder's take is straight-up poorly done, regardless of whether it adheres to what we want to see from the character.

I'm kind of sick of people trying to explain away other people's criticisms of Snyder's Superman as "it just wasn't what you wanted to see." Sure, but it's also bad, imo. It's badly written, badly acted in a lot of spots, VERY poorly paced and weirdly executed with attempts at humor that fall flat, metaphors and symbolism so heavy-handed they're more unintentionally funny than anything, and characters so dour and thinly-drawn that I can't seem to care about them. That's a perfectly valid take, too. Just accept that some people think it's bad, without trying to bend over backwards to explain their own opinions to them or invalidate them.

I can assure you that’s not what I was doing. Also it’s subjective whether it was poorly done, there’s no fact in that.

I’m also not saying Superchan or you have to like it, but it is a valid take. My issue is more when people say it’s not Superman. Because it is, that’s where the facts are.

So if someone wants to critique it and say they do or don’t like it, it’s fine but my point was it’s still a valid take cause all takes are valid. It’s subjective whether or not we like those takes.
 
Clark Kent (& Lois Lanes) is a terrible journalist in all print & film fiction. lol

In fact he's a worst example for the showcase of journalist's skills & profession. He's essentially a 'Hack Journalist' or more properly 'Yellow Journalist'. The Lois & Clark characters remain almost unchanged since 1930s/40s and their journalist ethos really came from that period of time where 'yellow journalisms' were in full force.

Journalists with skills like speaking four languages & transcribing them, Pitman shorthand, speed typing, investigative reporting, interviewing, allocation of assisgment, editing paper/magazine, publishing to name a few on top of having a formal training, a body of published works, and cultivated sources are rarity. My mother was one such person.

In the end I don't particularly care for Clark's development as a journalist. Well why not if most of the stories revolve around his alter-ego Superman. I knew from 1970s that Clark was never a real journalist. lol
 
Clark Kent (& Lois Lanes) is a terrible journalist in all print & film fiction. lol

In fact he's a worst example for the showcase of journalist's skills & profession. He's essentially a 'Hack Journalist' or more properly 'Yellow Journalist'. The Lois & Clark characters remain almost unchanged since 1930s/40s and their journalist ethos really came from that period of time where 'yellow journalisms' were in full force.

Journalists with skills like speaking four languages & transcribing them, Pitman shorthand, speed typing, investigative reporting, interviewing, allocation of assisgment, editing paper/magazine, publishing to name a few on top of having a formal training, a body of published works, and cultivated sources are rarity. My mother was one such person.

In the end I don't particularly care for Clark's development as a journalist. Well why not if most of the stories revolve around his alter-ego Superman. I knew from 1970s that Clark was never a real journalist. lol

He can just investigate a case via super hearing lol
 
I thought one of the best things Snyder did as showing Clark the investigative journalist in the BvS UE. I loved that he even clashed with Perry in the film over what he should be reporting on. In fact when it comes to the movies BvS UE Clark is easily the best we’ve had from the journalist aspect.
 
It was just one example of Goyer/Snyder showing a lack of interest in Clark’s actual personality to me. When those of us who didn’t like their take on Clark say we wish he had more personality, that’s not “he should’ve smiled more!” It’s far more than that I felt was missing.

I just wish he had shown any interest/training in journalism before that. The Planet’s not just supposed to be a job “where he can keep his ear to the ground” for Superman emergencies; it’s supposed to be his dream job, driven by his passion for uncovering truths and exploring the human condition. They talked about the Planet at the end there like it was just the perfect cover job, and weren’t interested in what it meant to Clark as a character. I hated that, tbh.

It's also entirely possible to think that Snyder's take is straight-up poorly done, regardless of whether it adheres to what we want to see from the character.

I'm kind of sick of people trying to explain away other people's criticisms of Snyder's Superman as "it just wasn't what you wanted to see." Sure, but it's also bad, imo. It's badly written, badly acted in a lot of spots, VERY poorly paced and weirdly executed with attempts at humor that fall flat, metaphors and symbolism so heavy-handed they're more unintentionally funny than anything, and characters so dour and thinly-drawn that I can't seem to care about them. That's a perfectly valid take, too. Just accept that some people think it's bad, without trying to bend over backwards to explain their own opinions to them or invalidate them.

tumblr_pk36gtBm531sieiueo1_500.gifv
 
I just wish he had shown any interest/training in journalism before that. The Planet’s not just supposed to be a job “where he can keep his ear to the ground” for Superman emergencies; it’s supposed to be his dream job, driven by his passion for uncovering truths and exploring the human condition. They talked about the Planet at the end there like it was just the perfect cover job, and weren’t interested in what it meant to Clark as a character. I hated that, tbh.
You do remember that Golden Age Superman started working at the Daily Plant/Star just so he could "keep his ear to the ground".
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,612
Messages
21,772,021
Members
45,611
Latest member
kimcity
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"