I feel like DC still doesn't know what they're doing

[Frodo]

Especially when characters are supposed to be "superheroes".

I've often said that realism can only go so far in superhero films. Nolan managed to mix gritty realism with some pretty fantastic ideas in BB, so it worked.

Ultimately people want to see heroes that are heroic, and more importantly, enjoy being heroes. MoS and BvS, it felt like the heroes didn't actually want to be heroes. There was this heavy is the head that wears the crown feeling hanging over both Superman and Batman that had the audience feeling sorry for these characters instead of rooting them on.

I agree. Realism worked in TDK trilogy because the Batman character is more grounded in comparison to other superheroes. It was a more natural fit than what The Amazing Spiderman and MOS tried to do in terms of tone .

Superman inherently wants do good and likes saving people. He enjoys being Superman. There may be a cost to being Superman depending on which version your talking about, but he enjoys it.

Batman , while dower alot of the time, feels like he's making a difference in at least some small part.

I also think for the GA, the pendulum has swung in the direction of lighter and more heroic model of Gadot, Gustin, and Benoist as opposed to the "we need our heroes to be tortured and brooding" model .

I think that's why you see an embrace of the Lego Batman and the Adam West Batman much more than you did a decade ago.

 

[Rorschach2012]

TDKReturns should be adapted in this elseworlds thing. But if they do it now, the whole BVS thing loses a lot of it's appeal since they already stole it in BvS: DOJ.

I like BVS: DOJ but I can admit it was a huge f***up

The DCEU has a horrible foundation.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

One big reason Batman works in a grounded universe like TDKT is that at the end of the day, he doesn't have super powers. There are some villains that do like Poison Ivy and Clayface, but Nolan either didn't use them or stripped those elements out (ie. the Lazarus Pit).

A character like Superman can't really be grounded in the same way Batman can because he is an alien from another planet with all kinds of superhuman abilities. There is no getting around that.

 

[Fincher]

You can't make Superman truly realistic, and there are certain elements that clash with a plausible discovering aliens movie (like these aliens happening to look exactly like us). However, accepting that as a flaw in the premise, I liked Man of Steel and think it had the potential to be one of the best comic book movies without fundamentally changing the approach.

That's not to say that it was the optimal approach, either, though. The best for Superman would probably be to take Man of Steel's action, naturalism, and general aesthetic and mix it with some of the Donner era charm, optimism, and humor without the camp. Maybe make it a bit more colorful, too, but I wouldn't go overboard with it.

 

[Jochimus]

I agree. Realism worked in TDK trilogy because the Batman character is more grounded in comparison to other superheroes. It was a more natural fit than what The Amazing Spiderman and MOS tried to do in terms of tone .

Superman inherently wants do good and likes saving people. He enjoys being Superman. There may be a cost to being Superman depending on which version your talking about, but he enjoys it.

Batman , while dower alot of the time, feels like he's making a difference in at least some small part.

I also think for the GA, the pendulum has swung in the direction of lighter and more heroic model of Gadot, Gustin, and Benoist as opposed to the "we need our heroes to be tortured and brooding" model .

I think that's why you see an embrace of the Lego Batman and the Adam West Batman much more than you did a decade ago.

One big reason Batman works in a grounded universe like TDKT is that at the end of the day, he doesn't have super powers. There are some villains that do like Poison Ivy and Clayface, but Nolan either didn't use them or stripped those elements out (ie. the Lazarus Pit).

A character like Superman can't really be grounded in the same way Batman can because he is an alien from another planet with all kinds of superhuman abilities. There is no getting around that.

...pretty much why I would have preferred basically a modernized version of the original late '30s/early '40s Siegel/Shuster version of the character: aside from the tamped-down power levels, you'd still have a Superman who is committed to fighting for the defenseless and more often than not has fun with himself doing it (because let's face it, few things would be more fun to watch than seeing a modern-day politician screaming in mortal horror as Superman gives them a skyline-altitude piggyback ride over the city t while at the same time courting that element of danger about him and what he CAN do that would provide a natural trigger for conflict from the world around him.

 

[Skrilla31]

You can make a grounded, naturalistic movie about a character like Superman. At it's core it's the story of an alien with mythical powers. It doesn't NEED an abundance of levity or camp to justify it's being.

However if you're going to make a movie about a guy that flies around in a spandex suit, red cape and a big 'S' on his chest... with villains named 'General Zod', 'Braniac' and 'Darkseid'... you can't make that movie anymore.

COMIC books are inherently silly and whimsical. If you want to make a serious movie, adapt a drama book.

 

[jmc]

The problem with a realistic Superman is that it would be genuinely terrifying in real life. A being of immense power able to destroy anything in his path? No matter how good that person is there will always be a level of fear around them.

 

[Jekecy]

The problem with a realistic Superman is that it would be genuinely terrifying in real life. A being of immense power able to destroy anything in his path? No matter how good that person is there will always be a level of fear around them.

It's not a problem if you know where to place the proper perspective. Anything can be skewed good or bad (and everything in-between), it's all about framing.

That's the problem with Snyder's version; nothing particularly inaccurate about his Superman concept, but where he chooses to focus and how he paints Superman is inherently a cynical one. An antithesis to the heart and idealism of Superman, and why so many fans detest it.

 

[2kt09]

COMIC books are inherently silly and whimsical. If you want to make a serious movie, adapt a drama book.

You mean "graphic novel"?
It's been decades since these picture books have been whatever the writers or editors intend them to be.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Balance is key. Nolan's 'realistic' Batman wasn't very cynical, especially not in the first film.

With MOS, I think some aspects of the serious 'real world' take worked to great effect. It's why that MOS trailer is so magnificent imo. It makes Superman feel real in a way he never was before, and in turn elevates the sense of hope and inspiration that the trailer gives off. The movie on the other hand doesn't get the balance right (that hopeful music in the trailer doesn't play until the end credits after all).

 

[I Am The Knight]

It's not a problem if you know where to place the proper perspective. Anything can be skewed good or bad (and everything in-between), it's all about framing.

That's the problem with Snyder's version; nothing particularly inaccurate about his Superman concept, but where he chooses to focus and how he paints Superman is inherently a cynical one. An antithesis to the heart and idealism of Superman, and why so many fans detest it.

I think that the point of the Lex Luthor character is to offer that "bad perspective". The man who will challenge the concept of Superman, who should be a person who really brings hope to people not just because of what he can do but also because of who he is. But we never really get to know this Superman.

BvS gave us a film where the main character was Lex Luthor in a Batsuit minus the intelligence and then on top of that also gave us another "Lex Luthor" so the film never bothers to show Superman in a truly positive light because then the whole premise of the film falls apart. So Superman never gets to shine the way he is supposed to. There's no real balance, no idealism vs cynicism.

 

[jmc]

It's not a problem if you know where to place the proper perspective. Anything can be skewed good or bad (and everything in-between), it's all about framing.

That's the problem with Snyder's version; nothing particularly inaccurate about his Superman concept, but where he chooses to focus and how he paints Superman is inherently a cynical one. An antithesis to the heart and idealism of Superman, and why so many fans detest it.

If we're talking about depicting something in the boundary of realism I think by its very nature something like Superman will always lean cynical. I look at a film like Arrival as what a real world response to an alien invasion would be. It wouldn't be pleasant because we as a species are easily afriad of something we don't understand. I don't think you can have a genuinely realistic perspective of Superman without cynicism because in the real world that's exactly the type of reaction you'd get.

 

[BruceWayne2]

You can't make Superman truly realistic, and there are certain elements that clash with a plausible discovering aliens movie (like these aliens happening to look exactly like us). However, accepting that as a flaw in the premise, I liked Man of Steel and think it had the potential to be one of the best comic book movies without fundamentally changing the approach.

That's not to say that it was the optimal approach, either, though. The best for Superman would probably be to take Man of Steel's action, naturalism, and general aesthetic and mix it with some of the Donner era charm, optimism, and humor without the camp. Maybe make it a bit more colorful, too, but I wouldn't go overboard with it.

To be fair, it's not that far fetched to think that some aliens might look exactly like us, if life evolved in an environment similar to our own (except with a red sun)

 

[Skrilla31]

You mean "graphic novel"?
It's been decades since these picture books have been whatever the writers or editors intend them to be.

I don't care how grim-dark the story is. If it involves characters wearing masks and capes it's still a silly comic book. There's nothing shameful about that and there's no need to deny or run away from it.

 

[random_havoc]

You can't make Superman truly realistic, and there are certain elements that clash with a plausible discovering aliens movie (like these aliens happening to look exactly like us). However, accepting that as a flaw in the premise, I liked Man of Steel and think it had the potential to be one of the best comic book movies without fundamentally changing the approach.

That's not to say that it was the optimal approach, either, though. The best for Superman would probably be to take Man of Steel's action, naturalism, and general aesthetic and mix it with some of the Donner era charm, optimism, and humor without the camp. Maybe make it a bit more colorful, too, but I wouldn't go overboard with it.

I did not like Man of Steel, but the bolded part I agree with SO MUCH!

 

[BestGirl]

The problem with a realistic Superman is that it would be genuinely terrifying in real life. A being of immense power able to destroy anything in his path? No matter how good that person is there will always be a level of fear around them.

That's why a realistic Superman movie would begin with the world fearing him but eventually learning to trust and love him. Yes I know that's not how things would play out for everyone but when has a "realistic" movie ever been completely realistic?

 

[jmc]

That's why a realistic Superman movie would begin with the world fearing him but eventually learning to trust and love him. Yes I know that's not how things would play out for everyone but when has a "realistic" movie ever been completely realistic?

I think when you have real life people appearing in a movie as themselves it speaks volumes of what you're trying to tell people about this world you're showing. If that's the world you want to show that's fine, but I think you kinda have to commit to that type of world and all the logical problems that come with it.

 

[dax]

That's why a realistic Superman movie would begin with the world fearing him but eventually learning to trust and love him. Yes I know that's not how things would play out for everyone but when has a "realistic" movie ever been completely realistic?

Too bad the world only trusts and loved Superman when he is dead. They never gave him his due while he was still breathing no matter how much good he's done for them.

 

[BestGirl]

I think when you have real life people appearing in a movie as themselves it speaks volumes of what you're trying to tell people about this world you're showing. If that's the world you want to show that's fine, but I think you kinda have to commit to that type of world and all the logical problems that come with it.

Just have Superman acknowledge that he'll never win everyone over but he's going to keep trying. Anything beyond that is overthinking, even in movies with real celebrities playing themselves.

 

[Brother Jack]

If we're talking about depicting something in the boundary of realism I think by its very nature something like Superman will always lean cynical. I look at a film like Arrival as what a real world response to an alien invasion would be. It wouldn't be pleasant because we as a species are easily afriad of something we don't understand. I don't think you can have a genuinely realistic perspective of Superman without cynicism because in the real world that's exactly the type of reaction you'd get.

There's a difference between having cynicism and distrust in the world around Superman and having cynicism and distrust in Superman himself. It's true that there would never be a 100% consensus around Superman as a force for good, but I think his intrinsic altruism should and would win out in the end. That's what the Snyder films should have been about, and what they attempted to be, but they didn't succeed because Clark was portrayed as too cold and distant. Him experiencing doubt and emotional frailty was not the issue. It's that the essential decency at the core of his character wasn't strong enough. If it had been his sacrifice at the end of BVS would've actually resonated narratively and emotionally.

 

[Flint Marko]

Just have Superman acknowledge that he'll never win everyone over but he's going to keep trying. Anything beyond that is overthinking, even in movies with real celebrities playing themselves.

I agree.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

COMIC books are inherently silly and whimsical. If you want to make a serious movie, adapt a drama book.

Are you thinking Golden Age stuff exclusively?

 

[Heretic]

There is no reason for Superman to be grounded or realistic. Verisimilitude is (usually) important...but the world they are trying to convince us to believe in doesn't have to be OUR world. Superman only needs to feel like he exists in the fantastical realm of the DC Universe...not that he could exist in 2017 America.

It seems to me that DC appears to have been ashamed of Superman...or at least felt that the character was outdated and required these changes in order to be successful with audiences. I disagree with them and believe that now...in our troubled times...the Man of Tomorrow is as important as ever.

 

[Jochimus]

It seems to me that DC appears to have been ashamed of Superman

Yeah, I've pretty much felt that's been the case since the '90s.

 

[STARMAN]

The first thing I want to see after JL is what their plans are for Superman. That will be my test to see if DC Movie Universe is getting it's act together.