TMOS Set & Official Photo Thread - Discussion Welcome - Part 8

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think Superman's relationships in this trilogy will play out in a way that doesn't majorly clash with DC Comics' New 52.

I wouldn't count on Lois and Superman getting hitched and having an actual future together. DC had good reasons for canning that.

Lois is the love interest though. This Lana role is basically a glorified extra, same with Pete and Whitney.


If they had to kill Lois off, do it in the last film of the MoS franchise, or at least towards the end. I have to admit, the stories where Lois dies "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow," "Kingdom Come," "Infinite Crisis" etc are incredibly epic.


I remember reading that DC is setting up Superman to be with Wonder Woman now.

Somehow, I seriously doubt that this film will follow on how the New 52 has been treating its characters, especially when you consider that this film was envisioned and created before the New 52 came out.

Sure, we have a trunkless Superman like the New 52, but filmmakers have been trying to get rid of the trunks off of Superman for awhile now.

And personally, there are many who would say that they didn't understand DC's logic for separating Superman and Lois because the idea that he needs to be more modern by being available is a load of bull. Frankly, a lot of the ways that DC has been attempting to modernize their characters has been met with a lot of backlash.

I agree with every word :yay:

So you agree that Lana is a glorified extra? Interesting....
 
I think Superman's relationships in this trilogy will play out in a way that doesn't majorly clash with DC Comics' New 52.
I don't think that the DC new 52 universe will have anything to do with DC movies except having some influence on the Justice League line up.


I remember reading that DC is setting up Superman to be with Wonder Woman now.

That has never worked well, I would rather prefer Superman with Lana Lang then Wonder Woman (If Lois is not there for some reason.)

WW should be with Steve Trevor.
 
I don't think that the DC new 52 universe will have anything to do with DC movies except having some influence on the Justice League line up.

I think this is primarily the purpose of DC entertainment. Making sure you have recognizable figures across the differing mediums. So you watch a movie with barry allen as the flash, if you go to a comic you'll find the flash is barry allen is well.

Its why they've been trying to streamline the stuff and eventually did the reboot.

Wouldn't be surprised if they start working on a new justice league cartoon to start reflecting the new comic line-up.
 
Somehow, I seriously doubt that this film will follow on how the New 52 has been treating its characters, especially when you consider that this film was envisioned and created before the New 52 came out.

Sure, we have a trunkless Superman like the New 52, but filmmakers have been trying to get rid of the trunks off of Superman for awhile now.

And personally, there are many who would say that they didn't understand DC's logic for separating Superman and Lois because the idea that he needs to be more modern by being available is a load of bull. Frankly, a lot of the ways that DC has been attempting to modernize their characters has been met with a lot of backlash.



It wasn't about modernizing Superman, DC was always on the fence about the relationship and whether the marriage was a good idea or a horrible one.

Check out The Amazing Story of Superman documentary. There was a major split at DC over this issue Levitz explained.


Many at DC (heavy hitters like Grant Morrison etc) have been looking for ways to end that marriage for years. Now they have it.


The reasons are that it ruins the character of Superman, ruins the suspense of the secret identity and it's ultimately stale and boring. They prefer Superman to have challenges and to be more solitary, and alien. They're trying to play up all the Kryptonian stuff, as Man of Steel is doing.

The marriage was done to draw in women readers according to DC. DC recently made statements that they arent going for that anymore.


DC wants to remove and majorly downplay the romance aspect of Superman that's been weighing down the character for years, and reinvent him as a badass action hero.
 
It wasn't about modernizing Superman, DC was always on the fence about the relationship and whether the marriage was a good idea or a horrible one.

Check out The Amazing Story of Superman documentary. There was a major split at DC over this issue Levitz explained.


Many at DC (heavy hitters like Grant Morrison etc) have been looking for ways to end that marriage for years. Now they have it.


The reasons are that it ruins the character of Superman, ruins the suspense of the secret identity and it's ultimately stale and boring. They prefer Superman to have challenges and to be more solitary, and alien. They're trying to play up all the Kryptonian stuff, as Man of Steel is doing.

The marriage was done to draw in women readers according to DC. DC recently made statements that they arent going for that anymore.


DC wants to remove and majorly downplay the romance aspect of Superman that's been weighing down the character for years, and reinvent him as a badass action hero.

It's definitely sad to think and hear that people consider Marriage to be boring and thus erase a marriage that was well received by a lot of readers, MALE AND FEMALE.

I mean, explain to me on how having a hero romantically attached to someone, let alone them having a stable relationship makes them less of a badass? Unless you're using Batman as an example for every hero to go and live by.:whatever:

Having Superman going around and starting relationships with a woman here and there won't be doing the character favors in the long run either.

I mean, does every hero need to be single/available/moody/alone just so that they can be considered as "badass"?

Some people clearly have a strange way of perceiving things.
 
Silly. Why does every superhero have to trend towards this? It works very well for Batman as that is the nature of his character. If you want to show Superman like this just do it with an alternative universe Supes (& it could certainly be interesting), just not the one that's been with us all this time.

Also can Grant Morrison write stuff without completely changing and destroying the history of established characters. How about just a regular good story within the confines that most people are expected to work with.
 
Silly. Why does every superhero have to trend towards this? It works very well for Batman as that is the nature of his character. If you want to show Superman like this just do it with an alternative universe Supes (& it could certainly be interesting), just not the one that's been with us all this time.

Also can Grant Morrison write stuff without completely changing and destroying the history of established characters. How about just a regular good story within the confines that most people are expected to work with.

Exactly. I mean if a person writes Superman in the same manner that they would when writing for Batman, then what's the point of calling him Superman? I mean, you might as well call him a Batman Redux if you choose to incorporate every bit of Batman's dark demeanor into Superman's character.

I think one of the reasons why these two (Batman and Superman) work so well together is that they're such polar opposites from each other. They both want the same thing, but they go about it in different ways.

I mean, do we really live in a time where heroes that actually stand for hope and justice is considered to be out-of-date, where the only heroes accepted are the ones that are more anti-heroes or the ones that brood a lot and have no happiness in their personal lives?

As much as Nolan has changed when it comes to his take on Batman, he's still stayed true to who Batman is in essence and I think that's one of the reasons why his take is so well received.

Now, granted we're in for some changes to the story with MOS, but as long as Superman is presented as someone that we can all recognize, then that's definitely a step in the right direction.

And honestly, in regards to RockStar's post again, there's nothing "unreachable" about a hero being Married or being happily involved with someone. In fact, there are many who could relate to that as well.

Lois's relationship with Superman was actually done well for the most part where the character served a real purpose in Superman's own journey as she would often be his confidante and strongest connection to his own humanity in ways that no other character could.

If it's wrong and considered boring to have one of those, then I'd honestly hate to see a comic book world where every hero was freaking miserable and depressed.
 
Superman and Wonder Woman appears to be have been scrapped. They had a little moment in "Justice League #3", and that's it.
 
Exactly. I mean if a person writes Superman in the same manner that they would when writing for Batman, then what's the point of calling him Superman? I mean, you might as well call him a Batman Redux if you choose to incorporate every bit of Batman's dark demeanor into Superman's character.

I think one of the reasons why these two (Batman and Superman) work so well together is that they're such polar opposites from each other. They both want the same thing, but they go about it in different ways.

I mean, do we really live in a time where heroes that actually stand for hope and justice is considered to be out-of-date, where the only heroes accepted are the ones that are more anti-heroes or the ones that brood a lot and have no happiness in their personal lives?

As much as Nolan has changed when it comes to his take on Batman, he's still stayed true to who Batman is in essence and I think that's one of the reasons why his take is so well received.

Now, granted we're in for some changes to the story with MOS, but as long as Superman is presented as someone that we can all recognize, then that's definitely a step in the right direction.

And honestly, in regards to RockStar's post again, there's nothing "unreachable" about a hero being Married or being happily involved with someone. In fact, there are many who could relate to that as well.

Lois's relationship with Superman was actually done well for the most part where the character served a real purpose in Superman's own journey as she would often be his confidante and strongest connection to his own humanity in ways that no other character could.

If it's wrong and considered boring to have one of those, then I'd honestly hate to see a comic book world where every hero was freaking miserable and depressed.

agreed.

Being married brings another level of maturity and growth to the character(s).

the same thing happened to Peter and MJ. Once they retconned the marriage with that whole One More Day or whatever it was called, I lost all interest. In fact, I refuse to pick up a Spidey book until the marriage gets reinstated.........:o

CK/Lois and Peter/MJ are my two favorite comic marriages. And now, they are both gone in the comics.......:csad:
 
agreed.

Being married brings another level of maturity and growth to the character(s).

the same thing happened to Peter and MJ. Once they retconned the marriage with that whole One More Day or whatever it was called, I lost all interest. In fact, I refuse to pick up a Spidey book until the marriage gets reinstated.........:o

CK/Lois and Peter/MJ are my two favorite comic marriages. And now, they are both gone in the comics.......:csad:

Maybe marriage was considered a sign of maturity in previous generations. But now that the world has discovered that divorce is a solution to the problem that is marriage, I don't believe it is mature to marry at all. Superman needs to change with the times. Marriage is an act of stupidity now.
 
Aren't you the cynic?

I'm not sure that changing with the times is a strength of Superman's. He remains a pretty old fashioned kind of guy, with old fashioned values. I think the biggest strength of the Superman "brand" is that he reflects the most comforting version of American idealism.
 
It's definitely sad to think and hear that people consider Marriage to be boring and thus erase a marriage that was well received by a lot of readers, MALE AND FEMALE.

I mean, explain to me on how having a hero romantically attached to someone, let alone them having a stable relationship makes them less of a badass? Unless you're using Batman as an example for every hero to go and live by.:whatever:

Having Superman going around and starting relationships with a woman here and there won't be doing the character favors in the long run either.

I mean, does every hero need to be single/available/moody/alone just so that they can be considered as "badass"?

Some people clearly have a strange way of perceiving things.


I see DC's line of thinking with this. Look at all the great fictional American male heroes (not just Batman). None are really tied down with relationships and marriage.

In fact, it was extremely controversial when George Lucas made Indiana Jones get married at the end of the last film.

It makes their lives more adventurous if they are single, to readers and viewers.

There was definitely a pull to draw in younger readers too and the idea of a domesticated Superman is unappealling. There's only so much you could do with it and DC tapped it all out within the last decade.
 
Aren't you the cynic?

I'm not sure that changing with the times is a strength of Superman's. He remains a pretty old fashioned kind of guy, with old fashioned values. I think the biggest strength of the Superman "brand" is that he reflects the most comforting version of American idealism.

I guess it depends on which decade the Man Of Steel Superman is born in..
 
I think it is more a product of the values that the Kents instilled in him.
 
I'm not so much concerned about the marriage. What I'm more concern about its Lois Lane. Is he really right for her? I was never a big fan of Lois Lane.
 
I'm not so much concerned about the marriage. What I'm more concern about its Lois Lane. Is he really right for her? I was never a big fan of Lois Lane.

I agree she looks too superficial, like most reporters... devoid of morals. Also she tends to be fast-talking and annoying.
 
Somehow, I seriously doubt that this film will follow on how the New 52 has been treating its characters, especially when you consider that this film was envisioned and created before the New 52 came out.

Sure, we have a trunkless Superman like the New 52, but filmmakers have been trying to get rid of the trunks off of Superman for awhile now.

And personally, there are many who would say that they didn't understand DC's logic for separating Superman and Lois because the idea that he needs to be more modern by being available is a load of bull. Frankly, a lot of the ways that DC has been attempting to modernize their characters has been met with a lot of backlash.



So you agree that Lana is a glorified extra? Interesting....

Except publishers like DC and Marvel would "alter" the canon in the comics to match the movies. Yes, the film was envisioned and created after new 52. Doesn't mean it wont take influences from the film.
What snippets of leaked info seems to coincide with what we have.
We were told Krypton wont be "icy" and in new 52, he came from this advanced society of beings.
I'm sure editors and writers would be given the script for references. Perhaps not 100% would be according to the film. Pa and Ma Kent is already dead. But I can totally imagine a brasher superman on screen. A more "depowered" superman on screen. A Superman fighting for social justice on screen.
 
I agree she looks too superficial, like most reporters... devoid of morals. Also she tends to be fast-talking and annoying.

I guess for me, I just don't find her very likeable. Except for the several few good stories she is in. Also she seems to be a better love interest outside of the marriage.
After they got married, its like she is never out in the field anymore. She just became a trophy wife.
 
I agree she looks too superficial, like most reporters... devoid of morals. Also she tends to be fast-talking and annoying.

I'm hoping Man of Steel reinvents her character as a more serious respectable journalist.

I can't imagine Adams playing the Lois Lane who smokes and sleeps around with half of Metropolis.

I'm actually glad it sounds that they've given Lois more to do in Man of Steel than go 'gaga' over Superman. Sounds like she has her own investigation subplot I'm hoping.

She needs to really be defined as a character in her own merit, than simply a love interest associated with the romance subplot, and the one Superman always saves. The damsel in distress.

That was one of the biggest issues I had with her portrayal in the previous films.

I never believed or bought why Reeve's Superman even liked Lois. It was poorly handled.
 
I'm hoping Man of Steel reinvents her character as a more serious respectable journalist.

I can't imagine Adams playing the Lois Lane who smokes and sleeps around with half of Metropolis.

I'm actually glad it sounds that they've given Lois more to do in Man of Steel than go 'gaga' over Superman. Sounds like she has her own investigation subplot I'm hoping.

She needs to really be defined as a character in her own merit, than simply a love interest associated with the romance subplot, and the one Superman always saves. The damsel in distress.

That was one of the biggest issues I had with her portrayal in the previous films.

I never believed or bought why Reeve's Superman even liked Lois. It was poorly handled.

I agree, the Lois character always had the potential to be the premier role-model for young girls. A wasted opportunity up until now. Watch this space.
 
Eh, Lois was characterized pretty perfectly in STAS.
 
Oh for sure, in the context of it being a TV show for children. Obviously some of LL's less desireable traits wouldn't make it into the cartoon.

The film is really the biggest forum to define the character for all audiences worldwide.

I really want to like the Lois Lane character, I just haven't had a reason to thus far (outside TAS to an extent). I think Nolan's style of storytelling could make it happen though.
 
Maybe marriage was considered a sign of maturity in previous generations. But now that the world has discovered that divorce is a solution to the problem that is marriage, I don't believe it is mature to marry at all. Superman needs to change with the times. Marriage is an act of stupidity now.

:whatever::whatever::whatever:

That may be for you, but the last time I checked, there were still a hell of a lot of people who still believed that Marriages meant something special in a persons' journey through life.

I see DC's line of thinking with this. Look at all the great fictional American male heroes (not just Batman). None are really tied down with relationships and marriage.

In fact, it was extremely controversial when George Lucas made Indiana Jones get married at the end of the last film.

It makes their lives more adventurous if they are single, to readers and viewers.

There was definitely a pull to draw in younger readers too and the idea of a domesticated Superman is unappealling. There's only so much you could do with it and DC tapped it all out within the last decade.

I personally think that it has more to do with how those given characters have been presented throughout their lives as a single person. Some people got so used to the idea that those characters would stay single that by the time a "marriage" was introduced, it felt foreign to them.

Personally, I think Superman is one of those characters where having a stable relationship, let alone getting married someday, would add another layer to his character.

I agree she looks too superficial, like most reporters... devoid of morals. Also she tends to be fast-talking and annoying.

That may be for you, but I know plenty of people who have found Lois's personality in the comics and other mediums to be very endearing, and a breath of fresh air compared to how other female characters in comics have been potrayed.

Except publishers like DC and Marvel would "alter" the canon in the comics to match the movies. Yes, the film was envisioned and created after new 52. Doesn't mean it wont take influences from the film.
What snippets of leaked info seems to coincide with what we have.
We were told Krypton wont be "icy" and in new 52, he came from this advanced society of beings.
I'm sure editors and writers would be given the script for references. Perhaps not 100% would be according to the film. Pa and Ma Kent is already dead. But I can totally imagine a brasher superman on screen. A more "depowered" superman on screen. A Superman fighting for social justice on screen.

Given on how controversial Superman's portrayal has been received from his New 52 reboot as far as I've seen, I think the writers will only take on what had worked best for the character overall from that take, along with other interpretations.

I'm hoping Man of Steel reinvents her character as a more serious respectable journalist.

I can't imagine Adams playing the Lois Lane who smokes and sleeps around with half of Metropolis.

I'm actually glad it sounds that they've given Lois more to do in Man of Steel than go 'gaga' over Superman. Sounds like she has her own investigation subplot I'm hoping.

She needs to really be defined as a character in her own merit, than simply a love interest associated with the romance subplot, and the one Superman always saves. The damsel in distress.

That was one of the biggest issues I had with her portrayal in the previous films.

I never believed or bought why Reeve's Superman even liked Lois. It was poorly handled.

Where in the blue hell did you ever get that idea? Yeah, Lois has been involved with some male characters in the past..Big deal, and granted, I can understand on how her portrayal in the New 52 has been unflattering, but in terms of the past portrayal, I see nowhere where it states that Lois was as promiscuous as you make her out to be.

And furthermore, I do understand on how her treatment of Clark was less than flattering in today's standards for the past films, but then again, the past films don't really show her that well to begin with.

Other versions, specifically the comics, have shown her to be much better, and she's had bigger role than what you say of her just being a love interest.

Lois can hold her own and normally only needs saving when it really counts. Not to mention there's the fact that she's a reporter and was the one to name Clark's persona as Superman, let alone on how she fights to the truth about Superman's actions to the public so that people don't smear his good name, along with exposing criminals and corrupt people as well.
 
Maybe marriage was considered a sign of maturity in previous generations. But now that the world has discovered that divorce is a solution to the problem that is marriage, I don't believe it is mature to marry at all. Superman needs to change with the times. Marriage is an act of stupidity now.

:doh:
 
LOL this is gonna turn into a morality debate thread. Just like the SR days. Nice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,392
Messages
22,096,733
Members
45,894
Latest member
DooskiPack
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"