BvS The Death of Superman!

[teagone]

It's apparently the only story people know. For batman they just know teh killing joke and the miller stories. Superman only gets doomsday.

He died for our sins. So deep.

It's known because the character of Superman is invincible to most people. How does an invincible man die? It's the mystique behind the title that drives the story in the minds of non-comic book folk who only know generalizations of comic book characters.

The Death of Superman isn't my favorite, but I think it's an interesting progression for the character that would translate well on film if written in a certain way. Like I said though, it'd have to be really... really god damn good writing.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I remember when I was the only person on here to suggest that Bruce retire as Batman at the end of TDKR. I said he would retire and go on to other cities to inspire and train other heroes all over the world...

AT LEAST I got the main part right! Everybody wanted him to stand on the highest building at the end, and stand in the light of the new Bat-Signal, and he'd forever remain as Gotham's hero and protector...

I suggested he retire, and 90% of you hated the idea!
When Nolan did it through the art of story telling, it made sense more and you all praised it!

So, if the story telling that is the key to making an idea successful, then I wouldn't shoot it down. Granted MOS wasn't the greatest film and it's story was a bit messy and I'd be wondering if they're ever going to be capable of giving us the heights of TDKT...

But if Terrio can bring us something to that effect, based on Goyer's story, if it's in, then I'd be fine with Supes croaking it.
It can be done well, and if it is, people would not be complaining.
Fans who can't open their eyes, still have problems with Zod having his neck broke. But most of us accept it, because it made sense and it was well done in the context.
I'd never shoot anything down if a good writer is involved and treats things with TLC.

 

[dhandler01]

It's known because the character of Superman is invincible to most people. How does an invincible man die? It's the mystique behind the title that drives the story in the minds of non-comic book folk who only know generalizations of comic book characters.

The Death of Superman isn't my favorite, but I think it's an interesting progression for the character that would translate well on film if written in a certain way. Like I said though, it'd have to be really... really god damn good writing.

The audience hasnt had a chance to connect to this Superman yet so him dying wont be emotional like you think it will. Hell half the audience doesnt even like this Superman at the moment and you are fixing to kill him off in the hopes that makes people see how awesome he is.

Look at it this way, the narrative makes no sense. Right now the audience is split on Superman in part because he put lives at risk and destroyed a bunch of Smallville and Metropolis in his fight with Zod. Hell we all pretty much assume half the population in the movie wont trust him either. So how do we get the world (and the audience) to trust him...we have him fight another big bad in a fight that will most likely destroy large sections of the city! Wait what!? How will that work? It would literally back up everyone's claim that he is just a big brut that does nothing but put people at risk! He isnt a hero he is a thug. Iron Man's almost sacrifice in Avengers (which I thought was laughable) is more poignant than that because he is taking the danger away from the people and most likely dying while doing it. Superman is just gonna throw down with the big beast in the middle of the city in the hopes that he has enough strength to kill him. (all while Batman and Wonder Woman watch from a distance cause yeah they have no purpose in this fight...so glad that is the first meeting of the Trinity) The detractors will have a field day with this...

Then, to compound the ridiculousness of the narrative you have Batman and Wonder Woman form the Justice League to fill the void of Superman and honor him. Leaving aside the fact that Batman would have no reason to trust other heroes because he is Batman and doesnt trust anyone, why would Clark's death inspire him to be Superbuddies with the likes of The Flash? Bruce hardly knows Clark and probably doesnt trust him thanks to, once again, the destruction he caused and the threat he is. The Doomsday fight does zero to fix that because all it is is Ali/Frazier 2. It would probably make more sense for them to form the Justice League to protect the world FROM Superman since all he does is fight huge monsters and destroy city blocks while doing it. Instead you are gonna force the idea that everyone is inspired by his sacrifice when none of them will really even KNOW him. He is just some alien who fought a huge fight...they dont know anything about who Clark is so really why would they care?

Then, the final insult to injury is that you dont even have Superman stay dead for long making the death just poor. Some are even saying he rises at the end of BvS! Holy beating us over the head with Jesus imagery Batman! Not only that, but what is the point of a death that is wiped away minutes later? At least do the character the honor of being dead for a bit and let the audience digest it and see the world without Superman before you show them he was never truly dead all along.

I happen to love the DOS story even with its faults and it can be adapted into a movie that will work but you have to have a character that is beloved for it to work. This version of Superman is not there yet and the world is way too new. Not only that but the whole story backs up almost every complaint people have about MOS. It also robs the audience of the chance to grow and really love this Superman because he is dead and once again Batman rules the roost. Even with a perfect script acted flawlessly with a Spielberg like director I am not sure you could pull this off...

 

[Gu3ree]

Just not in Batman v Superman, and not as the cliffhanger, please. And I don't want a cliffhanger.

 

[dhandler01]

Oh and one more thing...how exactly do you show how destructive a force Doomsday is in a two hour movie where you also have to show Superman meet Batman, fight him and ultimately befriend him? Are Clark and Bruce gonna slug it out while Doomsday runs around destroying cities? Very heroic! It would be better to wait a bit, have Doomsday destroy the League (like in the comics, though that was the JLI era League I do believe) and THEN have Clark go into a final battle with him. A whole movie where Doomsday wreaks havoc and pummels heroes with a final of Clark making a sacrifice actually WILL make people cry when Supes bites the big one...

Plus what about Lex...what is his purpose in this story and how much time will he get for characterization?

There simply isnt enough time in one movie to do everything that needs to be done.

 

[Human Torch]

Says who? Another user made a good comparison of how we're introduced to the character of Gandalf in The Fellowship of the Ring and he "dies" by sacrificing himself because the character knows are bigger things than him happening in Middle-Earth, only to return in The Two Towers in epic fashion.

The point that makes is if written properly and well, the death of any given character that is important to the narrative can be a really good on a number of levels. That said, despite not being the most compelling comic arc, The Death of Superman is pretty well known I think, so it also has the positive of being somewhat familiar in the collective mind of the general audience (e.g., like Cap understanding that "reference" in The Avengers... it'd be an endorphin boost, haha).

That's not really the best example.The LOTR was a three part story with multiple characters,whereas Superman is a lead character in his own franchise.There are a lot more places they can (and need to ) go with the character before going to his death.

Going by MOS alone at this point,who the heck is going to care about a world without Superman?They haven't earned that story.Not yet.

 

[Human Torch]

I remember when I was the only person on here to suggest that Bruce retire as Batman at the end of TDKR. I said he would retire and go on to other cities to inspire and train other heroes all over the world...

AT LEAST I got the main part right! Everybody wanted him to stand on the highest building at the end, and stand in the light of the new Bat-Signal, and he'd forever remain as Gotham's hero and protector...

I suggested he retire, and 90% of you hated the idea!
When Nolan did it through the art of story telling, it made sense more and you all praised it!

So, if the story telling that is the key to making an idea successful, then I wouldn't shoot it down. Granted MOS wasn't the greatest film and it's story was a bit messy and I'd be wondering if they're ever going to be capable of giving us the heights of TDKT...

But if Terrio can bring us something to that effect, based on Goyer's story, if it's in, then I'd be fine with Supes croaking it.
It can be done well, and if it is, people would not be complaining.
Fans who can't open their eyes, still have problems with Zod having his neck broke. But most of us accept it, because it made sense and it was well done in the context.
I'd never shoot anything down if a good writer is involved and treats things with TLC.

I always hated it.I think I was more relieved Nolan (or TPTB) had the good sense not to have Bat's die at the end,to be too angry about it at the time.

 

[teagone]

The audience hasnt had a chance to connect to this Superman yet so him dying wont be emotional like you think it will. Hell half the audience doesnt even like this Superman at the moment and you are fixing to kill him off in the hopes that makes people see how awesome he is.

Look at it this way, the narrative makes no sense. Right now the audience is split on Superman in part because he put lives at risk and destroyed a bunch of Smallville and Metropolis in his fight with Zod. Hell we all pretty much assume half the population in the movie wont trust him either. So how do we get the world (and the audience) to trust him...we have him fight another big bad in a fight that will most likely destroy large sections of the city! Wait what!? How will that work? It would literally back up everyone's claim that he is just a big brut that does nothing but put people at risk! He isnt a hero he is a thug. Iron Man's almost sacrifice in Avengers (which I thought was laughable) is more poignant than that because he is taking the danger away from the people and most likely dying while doing it. Superman is just gonna throw down with the big beast in the middle of the city in the hopes that he has enough strength to kill him. (all while Batman and Wonder Woman watch from a distance cause yeah they have no purpose in this fight...so glad that is the first meeting of the Trinity) The detractors will have a field day with this...

Then, to compound the ridiculousness of the narrative you have Batman and Wonder Woman form the Justice League to fill the void of Superman and honor him. Leaving aside the fact that Batman would have no reason to trust other heroes because he is Batman and doesnt trust anyone, why would Clark's death inspire him to be Superbuddies with the likes of The Flash? Bruce hardly knows Clark and probably doesnt trust him thanks to, once again, the destruction he caused and the threat he is. The Doomsday fight does zero to fix that because all it is is Ali/Frazier 2. It would probably make more sense for them to form the Justice League to protect the world FROM Superman since all he does is fight huge monsters and destroy city blocks while doing it. Instead you are gonna force the idea that everyone is inspired by his sacrifice when none of them will really even KNOW him. He is just some alien who fought a huge fight...they dont know anything about who Clark is so really why would they care?

Then, the final insult to injury is that you dont even have Superman stay dead for long making the death just poor. Some are even saying he rises at the end of BvS! Holy beating us over the head with Jesus imagery Batman! Not only that, but what is the point of a death that is wiped away minutes later? At least do the character the honor of being dead for a bit and let the audience digest it and see the world without Superman before you show them he was never truly dead all along.

I happen to love the DOS story even with its faults and it can be adapted into a movie that will work but you have to have a character that is beloved for it to work. This version of Superman is not there yet and the world is way too new. Not only that but the whole story backs up almost every complaint people have about MOS. It also robs the audience of the chance to grow and really love this Superman because he is dead and once again Batman rules the roost. Even with a perfect script acted flawlessly with a Spielberg like director I am not sure you could pull this off...

This is all based around assumptions that stem from the idea that Snyder/Terrio will mishandle the character. Which is entirely possible (so many people seem to think that already and have a negative predisposition towards Snyder's iteration of Superman). Like I said though, if the writing is good, and the script is lean with little to no fat on it, implementing PARTS of The Death of Superman and not adapting it verbatim in the same way they're implementing parts of The Dark Knight Returns, has the potential to be really, really good in Dawn of Justice.

I just want to say that my basis for this "Clark dies in Dawn of Justice" theory stems from the photo leaks of that giant Superman statue and what looked to be a funeral procession. It had me thinking that the film might begin a few years ahead in the cinematic timeline where Clark has already died and is being honored by the likes of Lois, Diana, Bruce, and thousands of people, and will flashback a few years/months/whatever leading up to the event that caused the Man of Steel to die. Maybe the Justice League is actually already formed at the beginning of the film? Or maybe those set photos are being shot for the Justice League film and not Dawn of Justice? Who knows.

 

[Reiter]

I remember when I was the only person on here to suggest that Bruce retire as Batman at the end of TDKR. I said he would retire and go on to other cities to inspire and train other heroes all over the world...

AT LEAST I got the main part right! Everybody wanted him to stand on the highest building at the end, and stand in the light of the new Bat-Signal, and he'd forever remain as Gotham's hero and protector...

I suggested he retire, and 90% of you hated the idea!
When Nolan did it through the art of story telling, it made sense more and you all praised it!

So, if the story telling that is the key to making an idea successful, then I wouldn't shoot it down. Granted MOS wasn't the greatest film and it's story was a bit messy and I'd be wondering if they're ever going to be capable of giving us the heights of TDKT...

But if Terrio can bring us something to that effect, based on Goyer's story, if it's in, then I'd be fine with Supes croaking it.
It can be done well, and if it is, people would not be complaining.
Fans who can't open their eyes, still have problems with Zod having his neck broke. But most of us accept it, because it made sense and it was well done in the context.
I'd never shoot anything down if a good writer is involved and treats things with TLC.

You wanted the final batman movie to end with him retiring. This is different to having having Superman in his second film (one he will share with other heroes) fake dying for cheap feels and then coming back with the allspark.

His final movie? Do whatever you like. Kill him, have him fix the sun, retire, go evil, whatever. This isnt his final movie. We've barely seen him as Superman and you guys want to see the stupidest death of them all. The fake one where the hero comes back a little later.

 

[Reiter]

[YT]0PlwDbSYicM[/YT]

Go to 5:28 and watch that small point he makes about this whole event being a bar fight. Superman just fights Doomsday like it's a drunk bet they made in a bar about who can take the most punches. The good Superman stories have him win by using his brains, despite all the powers he has. Or he uses his morality to inspire people to help him, or prove to the villain the error of his ways. In All Star for example Lex uses a serum to give himself SM's powers and it is Superman who defeats him with a gadget and he does it in a very clever way.

Since the biggest complaint people have about MoS was the the overbearing action and destruction, why would you show a massive fistfight that just kills Superman for a little while? Where is the point? How is death inspirational? Didnt you get the message from Last of the Samurai? "Tell me how he died". "I'll tell you how he lived!"

I want to be inspired by Superman's actions, by his unwavering courage against all odds and his belief that he can win the day.

If you can though, watch the entire thing. It's very funny and has many famous actors popping in, like Mandy Moore as Lois.

 

[teagone]

You wanted the final batman movie to end with him retiring. This is different to having having Superman in his second film (one he will share with other heroes) fake dying for cheap feels and then coming back with the allspark.

His final movie? Do whatever you like. Kill him, have him fix the sun, retire, go evil, whatever. This isnt his final movie. We've barely seen him as Superman and you guys want to see the stupidest death of them all. The fake one where the hero comes back a little later.

It'll only be cheap if it's written poorly and handled without care. There's a difference in execution when a lot of variables come in to play.

I want to be inspired by Superman's actions, by his unwavering courage against all odds and his belief that he can win the day.

Is self-sacrifice in the face of persecution against a seemingly impossible threat not a display of inspiring, unwavering courage? Even more so if its sacrificing oneself to save and win the day for the persecutors? Such an arc would show that Clark does very much see the best in everyone, and is willing to give his life to protect that as a force for good.

 

[Rodrigo90]

DC comics didn't kill Superman...it killed death!

If we kill Superman, we gotta kill him for good...and his life story, has got to be the most important thing.

 

[N7 Joseph Shepard]

Big hell ****ing no, it's beyond way to early for it to happen and besides DOOMSDAY should not be a Justice League problem, if he's in a movie it needs to be a solo Superman film since that's Double D's main purpose....to kill Superman.

Another reason why it's not a good idea is because this movie is already cluster ****ed with ppl as it is and we have 2 Spider-Man movies that prove that's not a good idea no matter how you spin it (no pun intended).

 

[Rodrigo90]

The Justice League fight Doomsday though with Superman

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I liked CHRONICLE a lot, but... Yeah that guy is a *****e with seemingly little knowledge of superhero comics (characters were dying and coming back long before the 1990's) and he recently wrote a truly stupid Superman and Joker story where Batman "allows" the Joker to go to Metropolis to "test" Superman. The more I see of Landis, the more I think CHRONICLE was what it was because of Trank. Max is quite glib in his thinking and an off putting jackass to my ears.

 

[lc23]

DC comics didn't kill Superman...it killed death!

If we kill Superman, we gotta kill him for good...and his life story, has got to be the most important thing.

So you want to get of Henry Cavill as Superman then.

 

[teagone]

Another reason why it's not a good idea is because this movie is already cluster ****ed with ppl as it is and we have 2 Spider-Man movies that prove that's not a good idea no matter how you spin it (no pun intended).

How many characters were in Days of Future Past again? The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was bad because the writing was atrocious, not because it featured multiple characters.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Indeed, taking out Rhino and Electro from TAS-M2 wouldn't make it a better film if Harry was still written in such a haphazard way. More screen time probably still wouldn't polish that turd.

And for the millionth time, we don't have a clue to how any of this is actually going to be put together or what elements are even going to be there. All the "dread" and hand wringing is way premature at this point.

 

[herolee10]

A bit of sanity will speak in here for me, but isn't this all based off of a rumor first created by latino review, a place that supports guys like el maybe? Lol

Plus, didn't we like hear from other sites on how they've been hearing that the staue is there to honornsuperman for his deeds in mos as opposed to his death?

 

[teagone]

A bit of sanity will speak in here for me, but isn't this all based off of a rumor first created by latino review, a place that supports guys like el maybe? Lol

Plus, didn't we like hear from other sites on how they've been hearing that the staue is there to honornsuperman for his deeds in mos as opposed to his death?

No idea, but I've been saying that everything I'm suggesting is purely speculation and "in theory". No need to get worked up about it

 

[dhandler01]

Indeed, taking out Rhino and Electro from TAS-M2 wouldn't make it a better film if Harry was still written in such a haphazard way. More screen time probably still wouldn't polish that turd.

And for the millionth time, we don't have a clue to how any of this is actually going to be put together or what elements are even going to be there. All the "dread" and hand wringing is way premature at this point.

No one is saying they know what will or will not be in the movie but if someone brings up a possible plot point what is so wrong with discussing it? Isnt that the point of every thread about every movie on this and other sites? Would you prefer we write 7500 words about random ambulance pictures?

I mean seriously if we arent allowed to discuss what we might not like or might like then what the hell are we all doing here? There is no handwringing as you say but some people are gonna be passionate about ideas like killing Superman off in a movie...

 

[Rodrigo90]

So you want to get of Henry Cavill as Superman then.

I know I can get him off

At the end of his journey, I've had a vision that he'd be killed off.
Not by Doomsday. Nothing as brutal as that.
I loved how he ended in All Star.
That was better than what we got in TDOS. All his affairs were tied up and he there was something really fitting about him entering the sun and powering it back up for us. I loved that.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Read the last part of the All Star Superman part 2 and listen to the Flight music from the MOS soundtrack.
Moves me to tears man

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

No one is saying they know what will or will not be in the movie but if someone brings up a possible plot point what is so wrong with discussing it? Isnt that the point of every thread about every movie on this and other sites? Would you prefer we write 7500 words about random ambulance pictures?

I mean seriously if we arent allowed to discuss what we might not like or might like then what the hell are we all doing here? There is no handwringing as you say but some people are gonna be passionate about ideas like killing Superman off in a movie...

Forgive me. I just feel the need to remind people of the fact that we have precious few FACTS at hand. Passion is fine. But let's keep that passion at a level appropriate to what we actually know, which aint much, rumors and "script leaks" seemingly flowing out regularly but real info scant to come by at this point.

 

[Bathead]

I have to ask - This report that the rumor about Supes dying and the appearance of Doomsday is based on something about people leaving flowers at his statue? Is there a pic of this? A link to an official source? Where was this first reported?