Is Superman getting the shaft in "Justice League"? - Part 1

[writer0327]

Except Superman has always been the heroic person we've always known, if they did that again it literally would've been nothing but an imitation of the Donner movies and 95% of the source material. At least someone had the minerals to explore him in a more grounded and real way, the "hardcore fans" know exactly who Superman is and always has been, but apparently they can't deal with not having him be that exact same guy for 1.5 movies that he's been for 75 years.

Not in the first movie when you're starting a new universe. This is the FIRST iteration of this particular Superman with this actor portraying him, wearing this particular suit, with this backstory, etc. So in many ways, this isn't the same character from the past 75 years. This is a new take on an old character and you're introducing him to the world for the first time.

And essentially, we know what Man of Steel was. It was "Superman Begins". It was supposed to do what Batman Begins did, tell the Superman origin story in an original, a grounded, and realistic way. The difference between Man of Steel and Batman Begins is Batman Begins actually tells the story of Batman as we know it. The character of Batman was highly recognizable in that origin story. But the character of Kal-El, Clark Kent, Superman as we know him never made an appearance.

That's why I felt launching the Superman story as they did was a problem. Introducing that character in that particular way has rubbed mostly everyone the wrong way. Because if you want to tell a Superman story like that, you can do it, but it's more of a nuanced, niche sort of story. And that's something you can do in a sequel as we explore the character deeper, or that's something you can do in a smaller budgeted film, maybe something like an art-house film if you want to get into it right away

 

[Greens]

Oh so NOW we care about how people inside the universe think?

Isn't that the whole point of this? That the way he is perceived in JL doesn't mesh with BvS or MoS? If it wasn't, okay, whatever.

 

[DeadPresident]

I think you'll find characterisation is far more important than you're giving it credit for. Wonder Woman embraced heroism, leadership, strength, and most importantly, heart. These are values that people want to see in these characters, so yes, on top of technical execution I think a large part of the success of that film comes down to the creators wanting a positive message sewn throughout its lead character. The reason the words about Superman in the trailer ring hollow is because there has never been the same level of posivity shown to Superman as what was given to Wonder Woman, in fact those words ring truer to her than they do him. She inspired hope, she influenced those around her, and she wasn't shrouded in a questions debating the merits of being a hero, it was simply her doing the right thing, being a hero and not apologising for it.

Sure, I don't disagree about characterization, but I think there are a lot more elements that went into the success of WW than just that - and like I said before, I'd have preferred if BvS's approach was a lot less meta and deconstructive and more honest and forthright like Jenkins approached WW, I prefer movies that try to be more faithful to their own stories rather than engaging in some kind of analysis.

But again, WW's success was a combination of a lot of things, one of which was the honest characterization.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Doesn't "Sacrificing yourself to ensure the survival of humanity" fall into that category…?

Definitely. If they'd spent time showing people actually reacting to that it would have helped a lot.

But I still think the court scene was a wasted opportunity for the world to actually hear from Superman HIS SIDE of the debate. He appeared to make no attempt to actually address any of the fears and doubts people had. He just kind of sulked about the negative reception. In fact, he told Lois he didn't care what people thought of his actions.

 

[Marvin]

Lex might have used them to his advantage, but he didn't cause the things that brought them to their hatred of Superman...

I'd even say opening the film with a ground view of what it was like during the Superman/Zod fight, with Bruce saving a little girl from almost being crushed to death and losing one of his colleagues in a building collapse, made you think 'Yeah, I can see why people would hate Superman after all that'...

I only remember two witness testimony. The african woman, which is a can of worms given lex did that stuff to her and she even knew it. And wally who if batman's cheques actually went though is actually living a very different life and might not be as desolate and looking for someone to blame(god).

I can't speak on how people feel about ground zero survival. To me that's a step removed from asking people how they feel about all the emergency responders during say 911 that didn't get to their own loved ones. People look to blame where they can, but they are also people that are inspired.

It's a greater question the films asks though(one more complex than say god thor). If the people believe that superman is a god, then like we do, he is blamed for all things both the good and the bad for that is what comes with omnipotence and god worship. But our gods inspire us as well.

Sorry but unless i can give examples of MJ saving the world multiple times and dying doing so and never asking a single thing in return, I really can't. What's more is that you really don't know if what batman is talking about applies to what is in those films alone. This observation of his could also encompass what is happening up until he makes this pep talk.

Did superman do anything as inspirational as the likes of our inspirational figures? It boils down to a simple question, is giving your life for the world inspiration or a show of strength by blessed power?
You talk of inspirational speeches by what is more inspirational, a man giving his agenda on a mic, or a man giving his shirt off his back as an act.

 

[misslane38]

Which I would whole heartedly agree with if we had seen Superman do anything worldy inspirational - he was a wordless figure, a godly being saving people in awe stricking ways with super human powers, and therefore became an idol and a figure of worship to some...

But true inspiration is about so much more than that. Bringing out the best in people is about so much more than that...

You bring out the best in people by doing what Jor-El said, which is act as an ideal to strive toward with that ideal being that within each person is the capacity to do good. Superman models that behavior because, with all his power, he could have become a tyrant, but he chose to devote himself to the world. And, because he does it even when people don't always love him, it's clear he isn't even doing it for the glory.

You also bring out the best in people by believing in them. Submitting himself to the military in MoS, honoring Finch's invitation to speak at the Senate hearing, and dying for humanity were all actions that demonstrate to humanity that they're worth it. For someone like Superman to choose you again and again and again can make you feel like you have value, because it makes you feel loved. As Wonder Woman's movie establishes, humanity's challenge is to choose love, which is about doing things for people regardless of whether they deserve it.

Superman choosing love is a model for the world to choose love. They, like the JL members, can be more like Superman. To use whatever talents and powers you have in the service of others with no care for attention or reward, to take chances by standing up before others, to resolve conflicts by talking over issues and seeking the truth, to believe in second chances, and by making sacrifices for strangers all inspire people and all apply to DCEU's Superman.

 

[jmc]

Sure, I don't disagree about characterization, but I think there are a lot more elements that went into the success of WW than just that - and like I said before, I'd have preferred if BvS's approach was a lot less meta and deconstructive and more honest and forthright like Jenkins approached WW, I prefer movies that try to be more faithful to their own stories rather than engaging in some kind of analysis.

But again, WW's success was a combination of a lot of things, one of which was the honest characterization.

And I'm not disagreeing with you about the other aspect of what made the film a success. But people love her in a way they don't love this Superman.

 

[DeadPresident]

Definitely. If they'd spent time showing people actually reacting to that it would have helped a lot.

But I still think the court scene was a wasted opportunity for the world to actually hear from Superman HIS SIDE of the debate. He appeared to make no attempt to actually address any of the fears and doubts people had. He just kind of sulked about the negative reception. In fact, he told Lois he didn't care what people thought of his actions.

Sure, I agree with that, I'd probably say that was the occasion in the movie where I most disagreed with how the scene went. I'd go so far as saying if they allowed a lot of good dialogue in that scene it might have prevented some of the bad reaction about Superman being a passenger.

Also, I believe he told Lois he didn't care what they "said" about him, but I could be wrong.

 

[DeadPresident]

And I'm not disagreeing with you about the other aspect of what made the film a success. But people love her in a way they don't love this Superman.

I know, I wasn't accusing you of doing that. And I do agree about the second, part. I would've preferred if the MoS follow up wasn't BvS and I'd have preferred if whatever the MoS sequel was ended up being approached the way WW was, but we are where we are and I'd prefer not to spend several years lamenting what could've been and rather enjoy what I can instead of reciting the same tired criticisms for four years on an internet forum like some have chosen to, again, not aimed at you.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I can't speak on how people feel about ground zero survival. To me that's a step removed from asking people how they feel about all the emergency responders during say 911 that didn't get to their own loved ones. People look to blame where they can, but they are also people that are inspired.

That's not a comparison. The emergency responders during 9/11 did not cause the incident. Superman was one of two people actually physically destroying buildings.

Whether it was for 'the greater good' or not, it was physically him up there doing it.

What's more is that you really don't know if what batman is talking about applies to what is in those films alone. This observation of his could also encompass what is happening up until he makes this pep talk.

That is true, if they actually take some time at the beginning of the movie to show how people feel about Superman post sacrifice, it will help

Did superman do anything as inspirational as the likes of our inspirational figures? It boils down to a simple question, is giving your life for the world inspiration or a show of strength by blessed power?
You talk of inspirational speeches by what is more inspirational, a man giving his agenda on a mic, or a man giving his shirt off his back as an act.

It's not that speeches are more important than actions, but letting people know in words what you stand for is definitely essential if your actions are being interpreted negatively by many.

 

[misslane38]

Sure, I agree with that, I'd probably say that was the occasion in the movie where I most disagreed with how the scene went. I'd go so far as saying if they allowed a lot of good dialogue in that scene it might have prevented some of the bad reaction about Superman being a passenger.

If Superman had gotten to speak at the hearing, then Lex would look like an ineffective villain and Superman an ineffective hero. Lex needed to stop Superman from undermining his manipulation of the public, and had Superman inspired people then his struggle would have been over. It is no misstep to have that hearing be silenced before it got started.

 

[jmc]

I know, I wasn't accusing you of doing that. And I do agree about the second, part. I would've preferred if the MoS follow up wasn't BvS and I'd have preferred if whatever the MoS sequel was ended up being approached the way WW was, but we are where we are and I'd prefer not to spend several years lamenting what could've been and rather enjoy what I can instead of reciting the same tired criticisms for four years on an internet forum like some have chosen to, again, not aimed at you.

Fair enough.

 

[DeadPresident]

If Superman had gotten to speak at the hearing, then Lex would look like an ineffective villain and Superman an ineffective hero. Lex needed to stop Superman from undermining his manipulation of the public, and had Superman inspired people then his struggle would have been over. It is no misstep to have that hearing be silenced before it got started.

Sure, I agree, but I think there would've been a way to balance the two from a scene-writing perspective. Superman could've said his piece and still not spotted the bomb and all the people would've died, it would've balanced out the two extremes.

There were elements of Lex playing Bruce and Clark like cheap pianos a little bit too well, could've had the heroes get a couple of bits for themselves in too.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

You bring out the best in people by doing what Jor-El said, which is act as an ideal to strive toward with that ideal being that within each person is the capacity to do good. Superman models that behavior because, with all his power, he could have become a tyrant, but he chose to devote himself to the world. And, because he does it even when people don't always love him, it's clear he isn't even doing it for the glory.

You also bring out the best in people by believing in them. Submitting himself to the military in MoS, honoring Finch's invitation to speak at the Senate hearing, and dying for humanity were all actions that demonstrate to humanity that they're worth it. For someone like Superman to choose you again and again and again can make you feel like you have value, because it makes you feel loved. As Wonder Woman's movie establishes, humanity's challenge is to choose love, which is about doing things for people regardless of whether they deserve it.

Superman choosing love is a model for the world to choose love. They, like the JL members, can be more like Superman. To use whatever talents and powers you have in the service of others with no care for attention or reward, to take chances by standing up before others, to resolve conflicts by talking over issues and seeking the truth, to believe in second chances, and by making sacrifices for strangers all inspire people and all apply to DCEU's Superman.

Well I guess that's the problem. His actions were not interpreted by some as a man choosing to do good. They were interpreted by some as recklessly enforcing his own will on others, as disregarding law, political agendas etc for his own priorities.

If his actions were completely clearly altruistic, there would have been no debate. The debate was there because his actions did not clearly show his intentions... people doubted and feared his intentions because he was shrouded in so much mystery.

One of the best things about Superman is that he doesn't wear a mask, that he makes his intentions completely transparent and he reassures people they have nothing to fear. I didn't see much reassuring going on.

Sure, I agree with that, I'd probably say that was the occasion in the movie where I most disagreed with how the scene went. I'd go so far as saying if they allowed a lot of good dialogue in that scene it might have prevented some of the bad reaction about Superman being a passenger.

Also, I believe he told Lois he didn't care what they "said" about him, but I could be wrong.

Yeah I agree, it would have helped a lot

 

[Marvin]

That's not a comparison. The emergency responders during 9/11 did not cause the incident. Superman was one of two people actually physically destroying buildings.

Whether it was for 'the greater good' or not, it was physically him up there doing it.



That is true, if they actually take some time at the beginning of the movie to show how people feel about Superman post sacrifice, it will help



It's not that speeches are more important than actions, but letting people know in words what you stand for is definitely essential if your actions are being interpreted negatively by many.

It's perfectly fair, he showed up after it happened. He actually only had a hand in 'destroying' the glass on one building. what happened to that girl was due to a world engine terror bomb and or zod's heat vision. Still i suppose the people in there didn't see that as well as 'we' did. Fair enough, however that they built a monument at that sight for him is the counter evidence that 'the people' also hero worship him for that day.

A 21 gun salute post heroic sacrifice helped plenty. But I can't argue with more. The superman crowd definitely demands the best.

The point however wasn't about if people(in film) interpreted his stuff negatively(batman did at first), it was if people did or could have interpreted it positively and if you have grounds to keep saying he did nothing as inspirational as such and such cause he didn't talk into a camera. Or if what batman is saying 'has' an argument. It is an argument, like it is with all our real life figures(obama most recently), that's the beauty of it for me. I get that this is escapism but it doesn't have to be.

I also love that in the middle act of the story superman didn't get his day in court. Maybe that comes later in return of the jedi or tdkr. Wouldn't change the senate hearing one lick lol. The villain won that round, i suspect ledger would have won as well.

 

[misslane38]

Well I guess that's the problem. His actions were not interpreted by some as a man choosing to do good. They were interpreted by some as recklessly enforcing his own will on others, as disregarding law, political agendas etc for his own priorities.

If his actions were completely clearly altruistic, there would have been no debate. The debate was there because his actions did not clearly show his intentions... people doubted and feared his intentions because he was shrouded in so much mystery.

One of the best things about Superman is that he doesn't wear a mask, that he makes his intentions completely transparent and he reassures people they have nothing to fear. I didn't see much reassuring going on.

So what? None of these statements from Bruce, etc. are meant as absolutes. They are generalizations and, in Bruce's case, coming from a place of personal experience.

Sure, not EVERYONE saw the "beautiful truth" of Superman, as Martha called it in MoS, but plenty of people did. No matter what people say or even do, others are capable of mistrust. Jesus did miracles and spoke glorious sermons, but some were still unmoved and sought to kill him, including one of his own disciples. Robert, Martin, and John did too. Bruce was initially so far gone because of his own issues that all he could see before him was that 1% chance; his transformation is akin to Saul becoming Paul. Jor-El said that humanity would stumble and fall before joining Kal in the sun. People aren't going to instantly believe in Superman no matter what he says or does. They will question him regardless. Barack Obama could be an inspirational speaker who reassured people with his words and actions, and even a birth certificate, but people whose hearts were blackened by hate and suspicion still questioned his legitimacy and benevolence.

In my view, things aren't as black and white as you're suggesting.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

It's perfectly fair, he showed up after it happened. He actually only had a hand in 'destroying' the glass on one building. what happened to that girl was due to a world engine terror bomb and or zod's heat vision. Still i suppose the people in there didn't see that as well as 'we' did. Fair enough, however that they built a monument at that sight for him is the counter evidence that 'the people' also hero worship him for that day.

I don't think I should get into a debate about Superman's responsibility and recklessness during that fight, it's an old arguement that could go on forever lol

A 21 gun salute post heroic sacrifice helped plenty. But I can't argue with more. The superman crowd definitely demands the best.

I'd have much rather have seen ordinary people laying down flowers gently, leaving messages of thanks etc than a 21 gun salute, but that's a personal preference.

The point however wasn't about if people(in film) interpreted his stuff negatively(batman did at first), it was if people did or could have interpreted it positively and if you have grounds to keep saying he did nothing as inspirational as such and such cause he didn't talk into a camera. Or if what batman is saying 'has' an argument.

I'm just of the opinion that the films have not done a good job of actually showing the grounds of the statements made in the trailer.

Whether or not it's possible a lot of people expressed their inspiration in 'offscreensville' or that we are supposed to see a statue of Superman or a 21 gun salute at his funeral and just accept this symbolises people's change in opinion, is irrelevant to my point.

I just feel it's hollow. Maybe it's a storytelling preference. I like to see scenes of people actually SAYING things, people having conversations about how their minds were changed by his actions, shots of every day people paying their respects to him - not just impersonal lifeless symbols to infer things from.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

So what? None of these statements from Bruce, etc. are meant as absolutes. They are generalizations and, in Bruce's case, coming from a place of personal experience.

Sure, not EVERYONE saw the "beautiful truth" of Superman, as Martha called it in MoS, but plenty of people did. No matter what people say or even do, others are capable of mistrust. Jesus did miracles and spoke glorious sermons, but some were still unmoved and sought to kill him, including one of his own disciples. Robert, Martin, and John did too. Bruce was initially so far gone because of his own issues that all he could see before him was that 1% chance. Jor-El said that humanity would stumble and fall before joining Kal in the sun. People aren't going to instantly believe in Superman no matter what he says or does. They will question him regardless. Barack Obama could be an inspirational speaker who reassured people with his words and actions, and even a birth certificate, but people whose hearts were blackened by hate and suspicion still questioned his legitimacy and benevolence.

In my view, things aren't as black and white as you're suggesting.

The statements from Bruce are tools that the creative team who made the film/trailer are using to paint a picture of the role Superman has taken in 'inspiring' the league to form.

In that sense alone, they are absolutes. They are there for a specific purpose, designed to tell the audience that this is how the world feels about Superman now (combined with the DP headline).

Which I personally think was a big leap from what they actually SHOWED in the previous 2 films.

If you don't feel it is a big leap like I do, I am happy for you Believe me, it's no fun on this side!

 

[Legendver2]

So....would you guys rather they NOT used those lines?

 

[hopefuldreamer]

So....would you guys rather they NOT used those lines?

I'd rather they'd done a better job of showing them to be true over the course of the last two films.

But perhaps in the context of what we have, a line from Bruce about his own personal inspiration from Superman rather than making a broad statement about him being inspirational to the world and 'people' in general, would have been easier to swallow.

 

[Marvin]

^ Oh i get that it's a personal preference fine. I mean u did say for me at the top of ur chime in. However 'agreeing' with someone that was speaking for the audience threw me.

That being said I see flowers laid often, it's usually a personal thing. I see city statues(like the one he was given in the comic) to people that inspire and touch en mass. Especially in film. Like the rocky one.

Lastly showing said things and showing 'grounds' for said things is very different. Batman however isn't talking about all the people that do or don't leave flowers, he's talking about what he himself has seen and experienced. There is nothing hollow about that especially when what he is saying is actually shown and when we are talking 'grounds'. Now if aquaman said it..that would be neat.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

^ Oh i get that it's a personal preference fine. I mean u did say for me at the top of ur chime in. However 'agreeing' with someone that was speaking for the audience threw me.

That being said I see flowers laid often, it's usually a personal thing. I see city statues(like the one he was given in the comic) to people that inspire and touch en mass. Especially in film. Like the rocky one.

Lastly showing said things and showing 'grounds' for said things is very different. Batman however isn't talking about all the people that do or don't leave flowers, he's talking about what he himself has seen and experienced. There is nothing hollow about that especially when what he is saying is actually shown and when we are talking 'grounds'. Now if aquaman said it..that would be neat.

I think that's where we disagree. I hear Bruce's comment as broad and in reference to how the everyday man feels about Superman (because he used the words 'world' and 'people'), not just how he feels about him having actually met and experienced him first hand.

 

[misslane38]

The statements from Bruce are tools that the creative team who made the film/trailer are using to paint a picture of the role Superman has taken in 'inspiring' the league to form.

In that sense alone, they are absolutes. They are there for a specific purpose, designed to tell the audience that this is how the world feels about Superman.

Which I personally think was a big leap from what they actually SHOWED in the previous 2 films.

The world never feels anything absolutely about anything. There are no absolutes when it comes to worldwide opinion. I can't think of a single idea or person who has inspired universal worldwide consensus.

The use of Bruce's statements in the trailer is not wholly relevant to the use of his statements in the film. The context of his statements may be a little different than the one you are assuming.

Perhaps his words follow members of the team sharing their stories of how Superman inspired them. Did Arthur see Superman destroying the World Engine in the Indian Ocean and start giving back to the world ("He comes in the winter when people are hungry and brings fish"). Was Barry inspired by Superman?

It's even possible there's a build up to what Bruce says that includes revisiting characters like Pete Ross, Captain Ferris, Perry White, the boy in Gotham, or the people of Juarez. The fact that the statement is one very close to Bruce's own heart and experience is significant, too.

What the previous two films showed is that Superman inspired both hope and hate. And the hate came from those who struggle to believe in hope or purely good things anymore. And that is a state of conflict that exists for all leaders, heroes, and inspirational figures.

I don't think anyone, including Bruce, is trying to suggest Superman was a beacon of hope for everyone in the DCEU.

 

[Flemm]

And I'm not disagreeing with you about the other aspect of what made the film a success. But people love her in a way they don't love this Superman.

In essence, the in-universe story seems to want to ascribe to Superman the type of reaction that Diana actually inspired.

I'm not sure how much that cognitive dissonance will affect the movie, because I haven't seen the movie.

But it could get a little weird. That's because Jenkins and Co. showed how it is supposed to work, and that is going to be fresh in everyone's mind.

 

[Legendver2]

I'd rather they'd done a better job of showing them to be true over the course of the last two films.

But perhaps in the context of what we have, a line from Bruce about his own personal inspiration from Superman rather than making a broad statement about him being inspirational to the world and 'people' in general, would have been easier to swallow.

That's fine and all, but I see that line as their initial attempts at springing this in a new more hopeful direction after the reception BvS got. Yea, maybe it is shallow considering the previous two movies. But at the end of the day, it's just two lines that's going to help shape the future of the universe to fit what most of you guys wanted to see anyway, yet a good lot of you guys are crucifying them for even putting it in. I don't get it