DC Studios THREAD - GunnVerse Begins - Chapter ONE: Gods & Monsters

[silverbackhoney]

and they came to this realization based on what exactly?

You think American audiences would flock to see boy scout superman? Using your knowledge of pop culture would you invest millions of dollars into that?

 
they dont realize, they think. the writers think that old-timey superman wont work and under these writers who have shown to be terrible at writing superman, they are probably right.

however, take a different (not even better) writer who loves the character and has a good concept of how superman can fit into the "real" world and it can totally work. 

superman is not only a shining beacon of morality, but he also personally needs to be seen by the public as a good person. that is what makes the character interesting, that because he is so powerful, he constantly needs to maintain his relationship with the general public to make sure they trust him to be the great person that he is. This is why lex is the perfect foil to him, lex is someone who superman knows is "evil" yet he can't do anything about lex because to the rest of the world lex is a business owner who has done a lot of good for the world. The world would turn on superman if he flew in and beat up lex luthor. lex who is a genius takes advantage of this in this "battles" with superman. 

if you focus on what he is physically capable of doing then yeah, he can do anything and its boring. but superman's limits are not physical, they are sociocultural. He can't do whatever he wants with his powers because he needs to maintain a positive image and be that shining beacon of mortality. 

so yes, under the right director and writing team I totally believe that it's possible to make a good superman movie that focuses on the complexities of superman's relationship with the "real world" while maintaining the "boy scout" persona. in fact making him undoubtably good is the only way to make this work. 

A lot of valid points

but 100% good guy superman all the time would fail to draw tons of audiences to the theatre because people aren't interested in 100% positive energy and happiness all the time anymore

 

[sea manup]

 

 
they dont realize, they think. the writers think that old-timey superman wont work and under these writers who have shown to be terrible at writing superman, they are probably right.

however, take a different (not even better) writer who loves the character and has a good concept of how superman can fit into the "real" world and it can totally work. 

superman is not only a shining beacon of morality, but he also personally needs to be seen by the public as a good person. that is what makes the character interesting, that because he is so powerful, he constantly needs to maintain his relationship with the general public to make sure they trust him to be the great person that he is. This is why lex is the perfect foil to him, lex is someone who superman knows is "evil" yet he can't do anything about lex because to the rest of the world lex is a business owner who has done a lot of good for the world. The world would turn on superman if he flew in and beat up lex luthor. lex who is a genius takes advantage of this in this "battles" with superman. 

if you focus on what he is physically capable of doing then yeah, he can do anything and its boring. but superman's limits are not physical, they are sociocultural. He can't do whatever he wants with his powers because he needs to maintain a positive image and be that shining beacon of mortality. 

so yes, under the right director and writing team I totally believe that it's possible to make a good superman movie that focuses on the complexities of superman's relationship with the "real world" while maintaining the "boy scout" persona. in fact making him undoubtably good is the only way to make this work. 

A lot of valid points

but 100% good guy superman all the time would fail to draw tons of audiences to the theatre because people aren't interested in 100% positive energy and happiness all the time anymore

its not a character who is always happy and positive. its a character who always know's whats right and cant be corrupted. its a character that we as the audience knows will do (what he thinks) is the right thing. 

he can still have real relationships, get angry, have personal goals, ect.. but above all that we know that he is a good person with strong morals. 

in fact, like what they did in captain america WS, it is very interesting to put someone who has a strong personal understanding of right and wrong into a world where everything is grey.

especially since a major criticism for these DC movies is that they are dark and no fun. like you cant take a character who is literally a symbol for hope, throw him in something super dark and depressing and use it as an example of why superman doesnt work. 

 

[Fresh Like Will]

Just my own worthless opinion, but I feel like it would be tough to sell to a general audience someone that was perfectly good and had flawless character in this day and age. I mean, Bill Cosby was date raping women. At the same time. I've never gotten the vibe that this Superman would ever be bad. Every decision he has made has been for good.

Also, saving cats in trees is a really unnecessary use of Supes powers. That's like getting a SWAT team or the DEA to handle a jaywalker. They just rang the dinner bell for Darkseid. Any one of us could prop a ladder and climb up it.

 

[sea manup]

Just my own worthless opinion, but I feel like it would be tough to sell to a general audience someone that was perfectly good and had flawless character in this day and age. I mean, Bill Cosby was date raping women. At the same time. I've never gotten the vibe that this Superman would ever be bad. Every decision he has made has been for good.

 

[Master Zik]

Why would Lex randomly coming in and killing Superman be a good thing? Unless Superman had previously done something to warrant such an action it would just make me think Lex was a ****, like always Can't think of any world where just killing someone out of the blue is a good thing.

Presumably if Lex had another way of killing Supes and did it in MOS he'd most likely kill Zod and his crew too and they'd all be killed for being alien invaders that are a threat to humanity.

Lex Luthor: Savior of Mankind.

Whats more likely Superman a character who has manage to persist in popularity for 80 years through multiple mediums is suddenly inherently flawed.


Or


Two film makers of questionable talent made 3 bad to mediocre movies



Zach Snyder who has made a whopping total of 1 good movie (300; essentially a shot for shot remake of the comic)

and Bryan Singer who is fine or terrible depending on who you ask.

A lot has changed since the 1980s, The last good film adaptations of Superman were well-received because the time period they took place in (Reagan president, everything is good, America is awesome superpower, pre-9/11, etc). Now we're in an era where people distrust those who are viewed as perfect saviors, people in power, too good to be true, etc. etc.  People would rather see movies with morally ambigious characters (ex: Batman, hell, Deadpool especially wouldn't have been anywhere near the blockbuster it was this year 10 years ago.) A bunch of things have changed that make it harder for a director to attempt to write a story about a character who is goody-goody Ned Flanders-y and perfect like Supes is.
The only good comparison to him is Captain America, who is more popular in the modern cinematic world because...
1. He was a scrawny dude who, because of his morals etc, was made into a hero by a random event - People can identify with this
2. He was goody-goody because of the era he was around in. Then he got frozen and brought back in this drastically different world. His character has evolved since it's inception
3. He has more than one facial expression
It's not impossible to write a good Superman movie in 2016, but it is incredibly difficult compared to (pretty much) every other superhero.  DC has a really bad track record of making good movies. This isn't something new.  The characterization of 20th century heroes in the 21st century definitely contributes.

Understandable argument.

Only counter I think is the argument given the current gloomy, cynical post 9/11 world we live in Supes provides a perfect and maybe only counter balance to all of that by representing hope, optimism, etc.

Goody-goody Ned Flanders Supes? No but a Superman that in his core believes in humanity and a better tomorrow can work in a realistic dark setting that reflects our world. If the ppl distrust him cuz he's so powerful he should be out there striving to show he's there to help. Through show and tell he can accomplish that with his actions and one monologue/speech. Could really make it a me against the world thing. Ape the X-Men if you have to and have it be a superhero protecting a world that fears and hates him at first. Then just when they're about to trust/love you throw in Lex to manipulate your message and be his natural perfect foil and arch nemesis since Lex represents some of the best humanity has to offer intellectually speaking (but just a really twisted individual) and even he doesn't measure up to Supes. That's like the core of their (Supes and Lex) dynamic. Then I dunno have Bats represent the cynical questioning growing group that sees Supes as a threat and have Superman prove them wrong via his actions after a period of confusion (that's where they get to fight cuz they don't know each others motives).

but how do you know it would be very hard to make a superman movie that stays true to the core themes of the superman mythos? you cant use these past two movies as examples because they are not superman, the classic character from the comics. In fact these two movies are an example of why not sticking to the essence of superman doesnt work.

like you cant blame the character of superman for only having one facial expression when he's being directed by a guy who bans smiling

The reason why these past few movies have been *** is because the writers realize that an old-timey Superman just wouldn't connect with today's casual audience. The movies end up being children's movies if they straight up follow golden boy superman. They're going the same way and trying to make it Batman-y when the truth lies somewhere inbetween stoic stoneface Superman and everything is dandy all the time Superman.
The directors/writers have yet to realize this.

You can't honestly think following overpowered shining beacon of morality Superman would make a succesful movie in 2016, right?

I can do it.

 

[KingdomFlatbush]

The final battle in BvS should have been Lex in his mecha suit.

Could have had him using Kryptonian tech to develop battle armor as opposed to creating some immortal monster he had no intention of controlling

 

[Fresh Like Will]

Just my own worthless opinion, but I feel like it would be tough to sell to a general audience someone that was perfectly good and had flawless character in this day and age. I mean, Bill Cosby was date raping women. At the same time. I've never gotten the vibe that this Superman would ever be bad. Every decision he has made has been for good.

What do you guys mean then? Is it because Supes killed Zod? Is slaughtering hundreds of Chitauri threatening humanity better than a couple Kryptonians? If Supes didn't do that, Zod straight up told him he was going to kill everyone. I don't see how Supes isn't as good.

 

[battousai701]

finally saw Batman v Superman last night. wore my false god tee while the gf had her ww tee on point

LOVED IT!!

wasnt a perfect film. definitely had some flaws in the screenplay. transistion from david goyer to chris terrio was evident to me. felt like terrio rewrote the script originally written by goyer to "save" it. hopefully the screenplay for the justice league films will be for the better.

henry cavill as superman was great. better acting from him than in man of steel. i like his juxtaposition of doing heroic things doesnt always result in a good outcome.

ben affleck as batman was phenomenal. best batman in film.

jeremy irons as alfred was cool. had the best bruce and alfred relationship in film. their dynamic felt like how a cool dad and son would interact in a way. hope to see more of that in the solo batman film.

gal gadot was surprisingly good. she had a minor role and thats ok. dialogue was average. her fight scene as wonder woman was amazing. her smiling during the fight, wow BADASS!

jesse eisenberg as luthor was the one that took me a while to like. sometimes i liked him sometimes i didnt care. more positive than negative though. he did play that scary eccentric role well.

holly hunter was great as senator finch. her final scene was a surprise. that grannies peach tea part was so disturbing. shows how siniter lex is. poor mercy

amy adams was pretty as usual. she even admits that they dumb down her look in the film. that bathtub scene was nice though

diane lane as martha was very motherly. played well humanizing superman. i like her reaction in the end with batman.

lawrence fishburn as perry white was even better in this film than man of steel.

zack synder's take of Superman is very different from past films and cartoons. thats probably why a lot of people are not used to his version of the character. i like how he puts Superman in a more realistic perspective in our world. an alien with god like powers will have an extreme reaction from everyone whether it be a positive or negative one.

 

[Master Zik]

Just my own worthless opinion, but I feel like it would be tough to sell to a general audience someone that was perfectly good and had flawless character in this day and age. I mean, Bill Cosby was date raping women. At the same time. I've never gotten the vibe that this Superman would ever be bad. Every decision he has made has been for good.

What do you guys mean then? Is it because Supes killed Zod? Is slaughtering hundreds of Chitauri threatening humanity better than a couple Kryptonians? If Supes didn't do that, Zod straight up told him he was going to kill everyone. I don't see how Supes isn't as good.

#ChitauriLivesDon'tMatter

 

[Fresh Like Will]

#ChitauriLivesDon'tMatter

Guess not.

 

[sea manup]

 

 

Just my own worthless opinion, but I feel like it would be tough to sell to a general audience someone that was perfectly good and had flawless character in this day and age. I mean, Bill Cosby was date raping women. At the same time. I've never gotten the vibe that this Superman would ever be bad. Every decision he has made has been for good.

What do you guys mean then? Is it because Supes killed Zod? Is slaughtering hundreds of Chitauri threatening humanity better than a couple Kryptonians? If Supes didn't do that, Zod straight up told him he was going to kill everyone. I don't see how Supes isn't as good.

I just mean captain america is an example of being able to write a good story and sell a character who is (from his point of view) perfectly good and incorruptible. 

it just doesnt make sense to say something wont work for general audiences because of terrible writing

 

[Fresh Like Will]

How has this Superman not been perfectly good or incorruptible? Because he went to fight Batman because of Lex? Who he wasn't going to kill and basically put himself in a position to potentially die so he could save his mom.

 

[Fresh Like Will]

I'm just saying Superman who can't neutralize a real threat because of public perception wouldn't play well with people living in the real world. That would of received way more hate. Even the Avengers receive flack for their heroics and the aftermath of it. It's just what would happen.

 

[jays25]

Just my own worthless opinion, but I feel like it would be tough to sell to a general audience someone that was perfectly good and had flawless character in this day and age. I mean, Bill Cosby was date raping women. At the same time. I've never gotten the vibe that this Superman would ever be bad. Every decision he has made has been for good.

What do you guys mean then? Is it because Supes killed Zod? Is slaughtering hundreds of Chitauri threatening humanity better than a couple Kryptonians? If Supes didn't do that, Zod straight up told him he was going to kill everyone. I don't see how Supes isn't as good.

#ChitauriLivesDon'tMatter

They do if you're Ultron

 

[sea manup]

 

[Master Zik]

A lot of valid points
but 100% good guy superman all the time would fail to draw tons of audiences to the theatre because people aren't interested in 100% positive energy and happiness all the time anymore

There we go though, just cuz he's 100% good guy doesn't mean that's all who he is. Give Superman a human personality matching the every man of our current times. He's 33 or 35 so he aint even that far removed from millennials. He grew up on Earth and being an American is all he really knows for like half of his life.

It's doesn't have to be card board cut out stiff as hell do the right thing at all times, don't jay walk, never lie, etc.

 

[jays25]

Being a good person certainly doesn't mean that an interesting story can't be crafted around the character. Just like a character that's dull as a bag of rocks and dumb as a post (See Steve Rogers) can still be a part of an interesting film.

 

[sea manup]

I'm just saying Superman who can't neutralize a real threat because of public perception wouldn't play well with people living in the real world. That would of received way more hate. Even the Avengers receive flack for their heroics and the aftermath of it. It's just what would happen.

no. it makes the story more interesting because he has to solve the problem within the context of the story rather than just using his powers and neutralizing a threat in .1 seconds. 

its like the same concept that makes jessica jones interesting. she can straight up kill anyone she wants because she's powerful but because of the new rules that come with dealing with someone like kilgrave, its an interesting story of how she cant just overpower him, she has to outsmart him. 

it would allow for the development of a more dynamic superman character where he can show off more than just his raw power. 

and at the end of the day movies are an excape from the real world. we are willing to believe a tree, a talking racoon and a dude from the 80s is flying around space listening to micheal jackson music. a superman movie doesnt need to be dark and gritty. people dont only want to see things that are gritty and realistic. 

people who grew up loving superman for the past 50 years all lived in the real world, what made comics and movies enjoyable was that it was fantasy. it was an escape from their normal lives into something wonderful. you are supposed to feel good about yourself after watching a superman movie, that's why he's a sign of hope.

walking out of BvS depressed at all the darkness you just had to sit though is not a sign that superman doesnt work, its a sign that the director totally missed the point of the character.

even the montage of superman doing good in the world was shot in a way that was slow, depressing and made it seem like doing these things was a great chore to superman. 

 

[sea manup]

the mindset of this type of character will never work is just such a lazy way to look at movies.

with good writing you can make anything interesting

i remember people talking about how no one will be interested in a movie where all the characters are legos and it ended up being one of the best movies of the year

 

[Amel Always Gets the W]

Being a good person certtainly doesn't mean that an interesting story can't be crafted around the character. Just like a character that's dull as a bag of rocks and dumb as a post (See Steve Rogers) can still be a part of an interesting film.

I know deep inside you love me

 

[illmatic34]

Also it was so dumb when bruce went from hellbent on wanting kal dead to wanting to help him out just because of their mothers' first names in the span of a second. I can't believe of all my years warching the cartoons and movies that I never realized they had the same name. Kinda cool that bruce's parents are both from supernatural.

I don't mind it but I felt it was terribly executed (like a lot of the movie). I thought they should have one or two more exchanges of Clark trying to convince Batman that they are one and the same; it was just the beginning of the fight where Supes even tried to reason with him and they spend the rest of the fight trying to beat the **** outta each other. The movie missed the small things like that and it adds up. Eventually you realize that the film is not polished and is just hastily put together.

 

[sea manup]

wait wouldnt the logical reaction from batman to be "why does superman have a human mom?" 

 

[everysingletime]

Good writing and solid writing can make anything interesting. Just depends on the executor.


Just looking at a character and thinking you can't make him work just means you lost before you got started.

One day a director who is in love with Superman will make him flourish and you guys will see.

 

[jays25]

Being a good person certtainly doesn't mean that an interesting story can't be crafted around the character. Just like a character that's dull as a bag of rocks and dumb as a post (See Steve Rogers) can still be a part of an interesting film.

I know deep inside you love me

My man the only people that love you consist of a one-armed former friend you let fall off a train and a senile old woman who you couldn't even be bothered to meet on time for a date. You're out here crashing planes into the ground and starting civil wars. You're lucky that you're not in the DCEU or Batman would have neutralized you years ago.

 

[sea manup]

one of the most creative and best written movies of 2015 had a protagonist that was quite literally "Joy"