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

[Herolee10]

Exactly. It's the biggest problem I have with it.

TFA introduces us to the newest SW heroes, Rey, Finn, and Poe, in a special and spectacular way. Luke can be a minor character here, a plot point, a macguffin. He's not necessary because we don't need to get to know him at all. He's not really important to the narrative.

However, the Superman of this generation is being shunted to one side in favor of other characters post-MoS. It's almost like after the negativity/lack of buzz following MoS, WB/DC had this attitude that Superman was no longer a relevant character, or that he was too boring because he was too overpowered, or whatever criticisms have been levied at the character over the years, and they said, "Oh well, nothing we can do with him, let's just make him a piece of the JL instead of the central character."

I don't see how this poll is so close. I don't see how people really believe the character of Superman is being done justice.

Agreed.

From everything that I read, it seems like there is quite a few people who are perfectly fine with superman just having his one moment of glory in the final battle, even if it means that he has very little screen time as long as the story itself is good. I mean if that is what makes them happy then I guess they will be fine when this film comes out.

As for the fans that waited several years to see Superman be a member of a live action justice league, well I guess they are going to have to wait a lot longer.

The sad thing here is that Smallville will probably be the ONLY live action take of the character where he was portrayed best when it came to his 8nteractuons and place with other heroes.

 

[DeadPresident]

It's literally the same theme, but played two notes are higher. Someone that knows music theory, help me out with this.

I'm tone deaf but I can corroborate your statement It is the MoS theme but it's also slowed down from what I can tell, in addition to being higher.

 

[Herolee10]

I know it's a big deal to Superman-specific fans that their guy is a founding member. I don't know if you read team books a lot. I've been a fan of the main ones for decades and these teams not only go on, but feature many, many issues without their no.1 or no.2 or no.3 character (sometimes that character is dead for eg t. The show goes on and in a team the idea is that the team is bigger than any individual and no member is indispensable (same goes for sports teams).

Teams with rotating rosters are my favourite. Many of my favourite characters have been given this 'shaft' you speak of when it comes to translating these teams to comic-films. But that doesn't mean I can't enjoy the films (if they are good). At least Supes is one of the only Leaguers to have had a solo film, as well as featuring as half of the other main event film. I hope you get a JL sequel or MoS2 and everything you want from Supes in those films, but thought I'd try and give you an idea of how I look at it when my favourites don't make it in at all or get severely gimped.

Honestly, at this point, it isn't about how many film's he has been in.

It just boils down to ONE simple truth: superman isn't promoted as one of the stars of the film and isn't a member of this version of the group.

It doesn't matter who he inspired. It doesn't matter what he means to this world. It's a film about the Justice League, a group which superman was supposed to be a part of but isn't.

That is the whole basis of this thread's argument and topic. And when you take that to consideration, then superman is without a shadow of a doubt getting the shaft in this film.

 

[writer0327]

Yeah but Bruce is a fictional character. The creators have complete control over what he says and does. You're coming across like no one has any control as to what the characters say or think. The cognitive dissonance is coming from the people who are creating and marketing the film. They are fully aware of the response this Superman has gotten but are acting, through the characters, like they are talking about a Christopher Reeve like version of Superman and not one who audiences saw. It's a disengenuous attempt to try and control the real world narrative about how this Superman is seen through the film itself. This is similar to them addressing the destruction in MoS in BvS. The problem is you can't dictate how the character is perceived in the real world once it's seen on film. You can say all you want that how the audience feels doesn't matter but the financial reality is it does matter.

This goes back to their utter dismissal of the character as being materially unimportant to their narrative. The audience is just expected to accept that Superman has been this type of character because the logic of the narrative says he has to be. This is poor storytelling every single time we see it, and we see it often enough to know it when we see it, and I'm shocked there are people who continue to defend it.

 

[Herolee10]

This goes back to their utter dismissal of the character as being materially unimportant to their narrative. The audience is just expected to accept that Superman has been this type of character because the logic of the narrative says he has to be. This is poor storytelling every single time we see it, and we see it often enough to know it when we see it, and I'm shocked there are people who continue to defend it.

Superman has been a plot device since bvs.

If I had to choose between superman having a compelling character arc that led into him founding the league versus the world loving him and people being inspired by him as he is regulated to a more off screen persona then I'd go with the first option in a heartbrat.

 

[Marvin]

... and I'm shocked there are people who continue to defend it.

you're shocked people don't agreee with you eh? oh well.

It's a film about the Justice League, a group which superman was supposed to be a part of but isn't.

Is that what this boils down to? Cause the raving about wanting your favorite character on the team hanging out with the rest of them, not being left out..as dare I say petty as it was(to me), i could get behind. But this appeal to some sort of authority of source detractors so often cling to, I really can't agree with.

simply put, according to whom exactly? I mean beast was a founding member of the x men and he wasn't there in the 2000. They pretty much retconned alot of the key players in, in some fashion. Then there is avengers. But that's all beside the point. There is no rule as to whether he's supposed to be there or not, not officially, it's a roster you like. That being said, he's gonna be there. And certainly going forward.
just saying.

joker in tdk is a plot device, doesn't mean he doesn't think feel and arc. Though with joker that last part may be a bad example. Point stands.

 

[vantheman77]

I can't defend the idea of Superman popping up in the 3rd act being revived and saving the day in the final battle without buildup to it. There are ways to execute his return and joining the group.

 

[writer0327]

Honestly, at this point, it isn't about how many film's he has been in.

It just boils down to ONE simple truth: superman isn't promoted as one of the stars of the film and isn't a member of this version of the group.

It doesn't matter who he inspired. It doesn't matter what he means to this world. It's a film about the Justice League, a group which superman was supposed to be a part of but isn't.

That is the whole basis of this thread's argument and topic. And when you take that to consideration, then superman is without a shadow of a doubt getting the shaft in this film.

Exactly, agreed 100%. He isn't a member of the group. He'll apparently arrive at the end ("Let's hope it's not too late," says Alfred) to save the day in heroic fashion. A mere story element as far as I'm concerned. The T-Rex in Jurassic Park.

 

[Herolee10]

you're shocked people don't agreee with you eh? oh well.


Is that what this boils down to? Cause the raving about wanting your favorite character on the team hanging out with the rest of them, not being left out..as dare I say petty as it was(to me), i could get behind. But this appeal to some sort of authority of source detractors so often cling to, I really can't agree with.

simply put, according to whom exactly? I mean beast was a founding member of the x men and he wasn't there in the 2000. They pretty much retconned alot of the key players in, in some fashion. Then there is avengers. But that's all beside the point. There is no rule as to whether he's supposed to be there or not, not officially, it's a roster you like. That being said, he's gonna be there. And certainly going forward.
just saying.

joker in tdk is a plot device, doesn't mean he doesn't think feel and arc. Though with joker that last part may be a bad example. Point stands.

There is one big difference here though. None of those characters were actually in the first team up film's for their respective franchises. And with all due respect, none of them can be compared to Superman who has more significance to the JL in canon than they do.

Plus, I hate how the producers lied about there being no league without Superman. Such bull.

 

[Herolee10]

Exactly, agreed 100%. He isn't a member of the group. He'll apparently arrive at the end ("Let's hope it's not too late," says Alfred) to save the day in heroic fashion. A mere story element as far as I'm concerned. The T-Rex in Jurassic Park.

Yes exactly. It's the reason why I still can't understand on how any superman fan can be okay with this idea, especially when every other hero is gett8ng their due in the film.

 

[vantheman77]

I agree that whatever Superman did in MoS and BVS means ultimately nothing. I can't accept the Justice League without Superman.

Looks like they're banking on Wonder Woman to make the JL movie a success.

 

[writer0327]

you're shocked people don't agreee with you eh? oh well.

I'm shocked that people continue to defend shoddy writing and poor storytelling. We are effectually being told "you should feel this way about Superman because that's how our story needs you to feel about him..."

That's just hack writing.

 

[Marvin]

There is one big difference here though. None of those characters were actually in the first team up film's for their respective franchises. And with all due respect, none of them can be compared to Superman who has more significance to the JL in canon than they do.

Plus, I hate how the producers lied about there being no league without Superman. Such bull.

not sure what you are meaning about the other characters in the franchises, my point was more along the lines of superman isn't part of the league as some rule. If anyone is getting the shaft it's martian manhunter.

and they didn't lie, not only is he a part of the league in this and in this film but the league clearly isn't complete without him. There is like a double meaning there. I mean what am i missing?

 

[I Am The Knight]

It's wack.

 

[Marvin]

I'm shocked that people continue to defend shoddy writing and poor storytelling. We are effectually being told "you should feel this way about Superman because that's how our story needs you to feel about him..."

That's just hack writing.

oh right that.
Better people than me have argued why that's not the case a page back. I'm sure they too are "shocked" you are still at it even after they proved their point.

 

[writer0327]

There is one big difference here though. None of those characters were actually in the first team up film's for their respective franchises. And with all due respect, none of them can be compared to Superman who has more significance to the JL in canon than they do.

Plus, I hate how the producers lied about there being no league without Superman. Such bull.

I mean.....ITS THE FREAKIN HOLY TRINITY OF SUPERHEROES!!! This is what they do with one of the members of the Trinity, arguably the biggest and most important member???

Are we really comparing this situation to Beast and the X-Men or any one of the Avengers? I get it that Superman doesn't mean as much to some folks, as he does to others, but trust me, those who care about this plot and this franchise, its a slap in the 75+ year old face of one of the preeminent American icons.

 

[Herolee10]

I agree that whatever Superman did in MoS and BVS means ultimately nothing. I can't accept the Justice League without Superman.

Looks like they're banking on Wonder Woman to make the JL movie a success.

Pretty much. I would not be sad or surprised if Henry left after this film. There is no reason to be invested in this take of the character anymore. They have already given most of his rights to Batman and Wonder Woman anyway.

 

[vantheman77]

Pretty much. I would not be sad or surprised if Henry left after this film. There is no reason to be invested in this take of the character anymore. They have already given most of his rights to Batman and Wonder Woman anyway.

If Henry's contract does end with Justice League, I hope he doesn't renew it after this BS!!

 

[writer0327]

oh right that.
Better people than me have argued why that's not the case a page back. I'm sure they too are "shocked" you are still at it even after they proved their point.

Nope, disagree. No one proved anything it at all. All I saw was folks efficiently talking around the issue, saying that you cannot conflate the feelings in a fictional narrative to the feeling of audience members watching said narrative. And that's fine, you can certainly make that argument, but it doesn't mean the narrative isn't shoddy, stale tripe.

 

[Herolee10]

and they didn't lie, not only is he a part of the league in this and in this film but the league clearly isn't complete without him. There is like a double meaning there. I mean what am i missing?

But he isn't. You don't promote a film with posters and trailers with a incomplete group. Name one film where an supposed important member of an ensemble film wasn't promoted at all but had an important role in the actual film?

And the group are fine on their own from the looks of the footage that we have seen. The only thing that they need from superman is his strength and not his character.

 

[vantheman77]

Whatever Superman's role in the JL film is, it could have been anybody else.

 

[The Guard]

Yeah but Bruce is a fictional character. The creators have complete control over what he says and does. You're coming across like no one has any control as to what the characters say or think. The cognitive dissonance is coming from the people who are creating and marketing the film. They are fully aware of the response this Superman has gotten but are acting, through the characters, like they are talking about a Christopher Reeve like version of Superman and not one who audiences saw. It's a disengenuous attempt to try and control the real world narrative about how this Superman is seen through the film itself. This is similar to them addressing the destruction in MoS in BvS. The problem is you can't dictate how the character is perceived in the real world once it's seen on film. You can say all you want that how the audience feels doesn't matter but the financial reality is it does matter.

Christopher Reeve's Superman didn't really make people look for the best in themselves, at least not that I recall. Jor-El sort of tells him that he can help humanity to be a great people, but do we ever actually see it? What, does he inspire Lois and Jimmy to be more reckless?

Second, you say that Bruce is a fictional character, and say that writers can have him say whatever they want. Well, the writers have now had Bruce present his opinion about Superman as someone who could inspire others based on the fact that Batman himself was directly inspired by Superman. Superman made Bruce look for the best in himself, therefore Bruce believes this is something Superman is capable of. This isn't something they've just decided is in place now for JUSTICE LEAGUE. It was clearly developed and part of the resolution of BVS.

Nevermind that Superman also clearly inspired at least thousands of people in BVS. He is given a hero's funeral and memorialized in grand fashion.

If the real world audience chooses to perceive that Superman is not an inspirational figure because he had some trouble getting to that point, and cannot take away from the events of BVS that Superman has become an inspirational figure through his sacrifice, then that's their problem. It is not reflective of the actual state of the film universe and the characters within it.

I really don't see the issue here.

 

[The Guard]

Plus, I hate how the producers lied about there being no league without Superman. Such bull.

They're not a "Justice League" just because they are in the same place at the same time fighting against a foe. The "Justice League" is a concscious decision to remain together as a team to protect against future threats.

Agreed. Plus, for those that like to use the Luke Skywalker example from TFA, someone else brilliantly pointed out that TFA wasn't so much about Luke as a character but about introducing a new generation of characters and heroes, hence why his absence for 99% of the film works. Over here, not so much

How is this film not also introducing new heroes?

Is it somehow less valid an approach because it's not "a new generation" of them?

But he isn't. You don't promote a film with posters and trailers with a incomplete group. Name one film where an supposed important member of an ensemble film wasn't promoted at all but had an important role in the actual film?

So let's say it's never been done. They can't try something new?

And the group are fine on their own from the looks of the footage that we have seen. The only thing that they need from superman is his strength and not his character.

You don't know that.

And even if that was the case...so?

Most of these characters are able to contribute because of their vast powers, skills and resources, not just because of their character or the goodness of their hearts. Their character is what makes them USE these powers, skills and resources to help, but it is not all they have to offer.

 

[The Guard]

I'm shocked that people continue to defend shoddy writing and poor storytelling. We are effectually being told "you should feel this way about Superman because that's how our story needs you to feel about him..."

That's just hack writing.

Project much?

No one told you how to feel about Superman.

The film, or in this case, the trailer, told you how BATMAN feels about Superman. Because it's key to his motivations for both seeking redemption and forming the league.

 

[writer0327]

No one told you how to feel about Superman.

The film, or in this case, the trailer, told you how BATMAN feels about Superman.

And, by extension, how WE are to feel about Superman. It's the writer telling us through the dialogue of Batman that "You, audience member, are to view Superman through the eyes of these statements of this particular character." It's the classic storytelling no-no, "Show, Don't Tell".

The sad thing is it's not even subtle. They're just hitting us over the head with it.