The Daily Planet - Superman News and Speculation Thread

[Spider-Fan]

I mean, we do see video of Thomas Wayne in the film though dont we? Or am I remembering that wrong?

I think it's different with the Kents though because its hard to really create a sense of the Smallville upbringing, the small town morals, the simple aporeciation for and respect for life that they instill, by including a few lines of description.

I know the Wayne's aren't devoid of personality/actual influence on Bruce, but he lost them so young that their death was sort of more influential on his development than their lives/who they were. In fact, as happened in The Batman, its often revealed he didn't really know them well at all.

That's not a flashbacks, though. That's archival footage. So sure Clark can have family photos or something, that's fine. I am fine with flashbacks when they add something we cannot get any other way. Looking at the Guardians films, Gunn doesn't use them a lot. We have the brief scenes at the beginning of GOTG and GOTG2 before we hit the present day timeline to start those movies. Gamora talking about Thanos doesn't prompt flashbacks or Drax and his family, or even Ego talking about Merideth Quill. We understand all these characters and how those experiences effected them without seeing it. Now, GOTG3 we get many of them. But I think the context of Rocket's relationship and history with the High Evolutionary was relevant to the plot. So we needed it. I think we can humanize Superman and emphasize his upbringing without seeing the Kent family physically.

The Kents also may very well be in the movie in the end. I am just saying I don't think we 100% need them in it physically.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Let me show my point this way:

GOTG2, Drax tells Mantis he reminds him of his daughter. She asks if it's cause she is ugly, and he replies with innocent. She then touches him while he silently stares with sad eyes and she cries.

You could have inserted a shot of Drax laughing with a woman watching and he pick up a laughing child and he laughs with her then they hug or something. You COuULD have done that....but what does it add? The idea is conveyed more than effectively without the flashback. In fact, I love this scene more cause it DOESN'T do that. Both Mantis and Drax tell us the story with their reactions.

Flashbacks need to add something visual language won't covey or plot points we need or some kind of vital info we only get with the flashback. That's my point

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Let me show my point this way:

GOTG2, Drax tells Mantis he reminds him of his daughter. She asks if it's cause she is ugly, and he replies with innocent. She then touches him while he silently stares with sad eyes and she cries.

You could have inserted a shot of Drax laughing with a woman watching and he pick up a laughing child and he laughs with her then they hug or something. You COuULD have done that....but what does it add? The idea is conveyed more than effectively without the flashback. In fact, I love this scene more cause it DOESN'T do that. Both Mantis and Drax tell us the story with their reactions.

Flashbacks need to add something visual language won't covey or plot points we need or some kind of vital info we only get with the flashback. That's my point

I mean, that's exactly my point though. I don't think language alone can convey the impact The Kents/Smallville had on the development of Clark's personality.

I do think that should be conveyed visually.

And personally, I'd like this visual, whether present day or memory.

 

[herolee10]

We're already in the last week of March and the photos we've gotten are several snowy shots, the Superman emblem, and a few paparazzi photos of the Engineer.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I mean, that's exactly my point though. I don't think language alone can convey the impact The Kents/Smallville had on the developm

I dont agree with that sentiment. I don't think we need to see it anymore than we need to see a scene of Thanos forcing Nebula and Gamora to fight as kids and then he replaces her or eye or something. Especially if it's a Superman who isn't new. In Superman: The Movie, it makes more sense cause that's a movie about a young man trying to find his place in the world and where he starts as a person is relevant to who he becomes. It is the same hero's journey they used for Luke in Star Wars. But if Superman is already Superman and he is saving people and doing his thing, then I don't think it's as necessary to see that

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I dont agree with that sentiment. I don't think we need to see it anymore than we need to see a scene of Thanos forcing Nebula and Gamora to fight as kids and then he replaces her or eye or something. Especially if it's a Superman who isn't new. In Superman: The Movie, it makes more sense cause that's a movie about a young man trying to find his place in the world and where he starts as a person is relevant to who he becomes. It is the same hero's journey they used for Luke in Star Wars. But if Superman is already Superman and he is saving people and doing his thing, then I don't think it's as necessary to see that

Agree to disagree there then.

For me it'd be like GTG not showing Peter's mom and only talking about her - it would lose so much of its emotional core.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Agree to disagree.

For me it'd be like GTG not showing Peter's mom and only talking about her - it would lose so much of its emotional core.

My counter to that would be that scene was at the very beginning and we need to explain how Peter got abducted. So it served a story purpose as well. Also, Starlord is a much less well known character than Superman is. After that first scene, the next time we see Peter's mom physically is as a figment of his mind when he has the power stone. Most of the time Peter mentions his mom or how much he meant to him and such, it's all implied in dialogue and reactions in GOTG. Again, I am not saying you cannot put the Kents in the movie. But what I am saying is if they're in the movie, they need to add something we don't get another way. I don't think just....having scenes of them giving him advice on being a good person in a flashback would be enough IMO. But I also have no idea if they're alive in this world, dead, etc. Just as a general concept, I don't think the movie falls apart if they're not in it. It depends on if the story requires them. The story always comes first

 

[hopefuldreamer]

My counter to that would be that scene was at the very beginning and we need to explain how Peter got abducted. So it served a story purpose as well. Also, Starlord is a much less well known character than Superman is. After that first scene, the next time we see Peter's mom physically is as a figment of his mind when he has the power stone. Most of the time Peter mentions his mom or how much he meant to him and such, it's all implied in dialogue and reactions in GOTG. Again, I am not saying you cannot put the Kents in the movie. But what I am saying is if they're in the movie, they need to add something we don't get another way. I don't think just....having scenes of them giving him advice on being a good person in a flashback would be enough IMO. But I also have no idea if they're alive in this world, dead, etc. Just as a general concept, I don't think the movie falls apart if they're not in it. It depends on if the story requires them. The story always comes first

By your own logic, why couldn't they have just explained verbally that Peter was abducted from earth and his mom was dying?

 

[Spider-Fan]

By your own logic, why couldn't they have just explained verbally that Peter was abducted from earth and his mom was dying?

Again, Starlord isn't exactly as well known as Superman. His origin isnt a known thing Superman or Spider-Man or Batman and we havent seen it in a bunch of other movies. But also on a functional level as a stroyteller, Starlord is a character plucked from his home that goes on a fantastic adventure, so starting on Earth and having him get taken and swept up into the cosmos takes the audience along for the ride. You're living the experience with Starlord. You're getting sweptnup in the experience. It's also the key moment the entire rest of the movie, and it's sequels, are hinged on. So showing that makes sense.

Right now we're having a purely hypothetical discussion, but really the only one who knows what Superman story they're trying to tell and if the Kents are necessary for that story is James Gunn. So, we shall see how he decides to approach the issue of backstory.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Again, Starlord isn't exactly as well known as Superman. His origin isnt a known thing Superman or Spider-Man or Batman and we havent seen it in a bunch of other movies. But also on a functional level as a stroyteller, Starlord is a character plucked from his home that goes on a fantastic adventure, so starting on Earth and having him get taken and swept up into the cosmos takes the audience along for the ride. You're living the experience with Starlord. You're getting sweptnup in the experience. It's also the key moment the entire rest of the movie, and it's sequels, are hinged on. So showing that makes sense.

Right now we're having a purely hypothetical discussion, but really the only one who knows what Superman story they're trying to tell and if the Kents are necessary for that story is James Gunn. So, we shall see how he decides to approach the issue of backstory.

I hear what you are saying, but I guess my issue with a Superman film without the Kents, is that if the story that's being told doesn't require them... that's potentially a red flag.

Because any Superman story that is concerned with showing its audience who Clark Kent is, should, IMO, absolutely need to show us the Kents to do that.

I'm not saying I'd boycott the film 😅 but itd be really sad to hear.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I hear what you are saying, but I guess my issue with a Superman film without the Kents, is that if the story that's being told doesn't require them... that's potentially a red flag.

Because any Superman story that is concerned with showing its audience who Clark Kent is, should, IMO, absolutely need to show us the Kents to do that.

Superman's actions should be telling us who he is. How he handles danger, how he approaches saving people, how he handles people in general, the beliefs he conveys, the actions he takes, etc. The backstory stuff isn't as important to that equation. Actions speak louder than words.

 

[Fran-el]

We're already in the last week of March and the photos we've gotten are several snowy shots, the Superman emblem, and a few paparazzi photos of the Engineer.

I'm starting to think that we won't see the suit until June or July.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Superman's actions should be telling us who he is. How he handles danger, how he approaches saving people, how he handles people in general, the beliefs he conveys, the actions he takes, etc. The backstory stuff isn't as important to that equation. Actions speak louder than words.

What can I say? I want all of that, AND I want at least one scene, with Ma or Pa Kent, or both, that visually contextualises their influence.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I'm starting to think that we won't see the suit until June or July.

😭

 

[Glassjaw]

I know Gunn didn't want to do an origin story, but Supes needs some sort of set up. He needs a reintroduction for the kids of today who haven't had a quintessential version for a while . And the Kents fit into that big time. I hope his set up / motivations arnt skipped over too quickly in order to tackle the film's big bad.

He's a good enough writer that we can have it both ways.

 

[Black Narcissus]

The Snyder Cut cost us Ava DuVernay's New Gods film... Actually WB's total mishandling of DC did, but still.

So be it.

 

[flickchick85]

The Kent’s are such a huge part of Clark’s character, I would definitely miss them if they weren’t featured at all.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Avoiding the Kent's and Jor-El/Lara gives me bad Tom Holland Spider-Man vibes. It won't be as bad because Gunn isn't, you know, a hack but still runs a bit of a risk if you avoid major Superman details too much.

 

[Kane52630]

 

[Spider-Fan]

I honestly never missed Uncle Ben in the Tom Holland movies. Not for a second

 

[SwordOfMorning]

I don't miss him being on screen but the total absence of any reference to the backstory contributes to Holland's Spidey straight up not feeling like the character at all to me. That's not the only example though: there's a ton of vital Spider-Man stuff just totally absent from those movies that makes them barely feel like Spider-Man movies. Probably a topic for another thread though!

 

[emielaen]

They should let Jonathan kill himself in a different way this time.

 

[Lily Adler]

I honestly never missed Uncle Ben in the Tom Holland movies. Not for a second

Neither did Aunt May.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Neither did Aunt May.

God those movies are so upsettingly bad in so many ways lol

 

[Alien Anal]

They should let Jonathan kill himself in a different way this time.

Geez I don't remember Jonathan's death being so morbid.

Clark enters the shed and spots the bottom of a pair of work boots feet above the air "oh wow pa you can fly!?"