DCEU Superman Appreciation 2018

[GreatKungLao]

It seems that Superman in DCEU was even using a diplomatic ways of resolving conflicts



I guess if BvS showed all this stuff in action, people would have been more forgiving about the actual story that movie was trying to tell.

[Lokimaru]

It seems that Superman in DCEU was even using a diplomatic ways of resolving conflicts



I guess if BvS showed all this stuff in action, people would have been more forgiving about the actual story that movie was trying to tell.

They showed him saving people in BvS and people still bitched about the movie so I believe nothing would have turned those people around.

[Powerboy]

They showed him saving people in BvS and people still bitched about the movie so I believe nothing would have turned those people around.

In rewatching MoS, Lois tracked him down by the trail of saving people and, when he threatened to vanish for good, she rightly said, "The only way you could disappear for good would be to stop helping people and I don't think that's an option for you". Yet I immediately find a youtube video about how he "reluctantly" helps people and does so only because there's no risk to him in doing it. Yeah, except the risk of his greatest fear, his existence being discovered before people are ready. It's like, mo matter what actually happened in the movie, there's this huge number of people who remember it in a totally different way. At this point, no matter the actual sequence of events in the movie was, I think there's just a lot of people who dislike the core realistic presentation of the world and human nature existing in a Superman movie and that taints the way they see every event in the movie.

[Osiris-Rex]

In rewatching MoS, Lois tracked him down by the trail of saving people and, when he threatened to vanish for good, she rightly said, "The only way you could disappear for good would be to stop helping people and I don't think that's an option for you". Yet I immediately find a youtube video about how he "reluctantly" helps people and does so only because there's no risk to him in doing it. Yeah, except the risk of his greatest fear, his existence being discovered before people are ready. It's like, mo matter what actually happened in the movie, there's this huge number of people who remember it in a totally different way. At this point, no matter the actual sequence of events in the movie was, I think there's just a lot of people who dislike the core realistic presentation of the world and human nature existing in a Superman movie and that taints the way they see every event in the movie.

I think people just like the idea of Superman being treated like a friendly alien like in "ET" instead of being a scary alien like the ones in "Independence Day". The whole basis of "Man of Steel" is people would be terrified
of an alien so Clark had to stay hidden through his childhood and early adulthood. And when Superman does come out the whole US Army tries to destroy him. Before "Man of Steel" the only people afraid of Superman
were the criminals.

[GreatKungLao]

Great podcast http://www.manofsteelanswers.com/58-illuminated-text/

[manofsteel1979]

In rewatching MoS, Lois tracked him down by the trail of saving people and, when he threatened to vanish for good, she rightly said, "The only way you could disappear for good would be to stop helping people and I don't think that's an option for you". Yet I immediately find a youtube video about how he "reluctantly" helps people and does so only because there's no risk to him in doing it. Yeah, except the risk of his greatest fear, his existence being discovered before people are ready. It's like, mo matter what actually happened in the movie, there's this huge number of people who remember it in a totally different way. At this point, no matter the actual sequence of events in the movie was, I think there's just a lot of people who dislike the core realistic presentation of the world and human nature existing in a Superman movie and that taints the way they see every event in the movie.

Conversely, people seem to have a similar disconnect of the Donner/Lester/Reeve Superman where their memory of him is of a paragon of perfection, alturism and virtue who never ever did anything questionable but if one payed close attention to Superman The Movie and Superman II paints a different picture. I mean, there's no on screen confirmation Donner Clark even used his powers​ to.help others prior to meeting Jor-El and getting his mission.

That's not to say Donner era Superman is some soul-less monster ( which I've seen some critics of Snyderverse Superman call Cavill's Supes a sociopath and worse) . Nor am I saying the Snyder movies were cinematic perfection either.However, at least to me,a Clark Kent who has an instictful drive to help people with his powers BEFORE even knowing for sure he was an alien and before his hologram space dad gave him a suit and told him his name is more consistent to the character as portrayed in the comics than a Clark Kent who pretty much was told to serve humanity by his Space dad and almost threw it all away to be with Lois and thus Doom humanity to rule by the dude in my avatar. He's just lucky that Jor-El was able to restore his powers. If not he would have spent his remaining years enslaved along with the rest of humanity he forsakes.

[GreatKungLao]

I posted this in another thread but copied and pasted it to here because it should have more properly been posted here to begin with.

I think that, physically, Cavill is the best live action Superman yet moving ahead of George Reeves.

I also started watching MoS again and this is only the third time I've ever seen it. But I've really paid attention to the details this time and it causes me to find most of the criticisms, my own included, absurd and unfounded. I got through the first hour tonight. But alas couldn't finish it tonight as morning is coming awful early. But a quick couple of points is that people just get to where Jonathan Kent says "Maybe" and then get so fixated on that that they ignore the rest of the conversation between him and Clark and pretty much ignore anything and everything good about the rest of the movie when, in fact, the conversation between Jonathan and Clark is a wonderful talk and makes some fantastic points about who each of them is, about the ramifications of Clark's existence being far bigger than their immediate lives and who lives and how it's going to change everything: philosophy, religion, how humanity sees itself in the universe.

I could go on about how great this Lois Lane is and how they are actual adults who are drawn to each other for real reasons as opposed to a previous version of the story in the movies.

But the main thing I thought about is the accusation of how joyless this movie was which was a very common one. I even remember Richard Roeper saying that. But I thoroughly enjoyed the conversation between Jonathan and Clark and saw a father trying to protect his son in a very harsh and realistic world and I heard Lois Lane say that the only way he could really vanish would be to stop helping people and her every instinct tells her that's not an option for him and I saw a woman, a reporter, willing to drop a story for the greater good and to protect someone and a flight sequence that made me smile and smile because he was having fun, enjoying the thrill of having the power of flight and his laughter and joy were contagious.

I was enjoying all of this, a Lois who is a real person and who I can see why Superman falls for her, real interactions between characters in a realistic world. I was enjoying all of it.

I have a strong feeling that with time Man of Steel might become Superman The Movie to history as it is right now for us and once there will be another Superman movie in 22nd century with another actor and director, people would compare it to Man of Steel and miss that version. You know how it works, you start cherish something for real once it is taken from you. Though I wish people learned to cherish all versions of the character equally, the reason why they are different is because of times they came out and Man of Steel was and still is a really actual movie to our current time and situations in the world. Man of Steel shows Clark Kent who becomes Superman in a realistic environment, which was something great to see in times where Superman was fading to the background with Smallville's finale and nothing to be seen on the horizon. It was also refreshing, because as great as comic books are, the problems there are just a soft version of what our world is going through, where violence looks "fun" and lacks impactful consequences that Superman would have to deal with. DCEU is a whole new thing in that regard.

[GreatKungLao]

Zack Snyder's introduction quote to Man of Steel: Inside the Legendary World of Superman artbook

[Powerboy]

I think people just like the idea of Superman being treated like a friendly alien like in "ET" instead of being a scary alien like the ones in "Independence Day". The whole basis of "Man of Steel" is people would be terrified
of an alien so Clark had to stay hidden through his childhood and early adulthood. And when Superman does come out the whole US Army tries to destroy him. Before "Man of Steel" the only people afraid of Superman
were the criminals.

To be honest, I think every version of Superman that has shown him growing up has an element of needing to keep what he can do a secret because of how people would react. In StM, Martha Kent says she and Jonathan were so afraid that people (probably the government) would show up and take him away from them because of how they found him. In MoS, Jonathan Kent says the same thing.

Man of Steel 79:

Conversely, people seem to have a similar disconnect of the Donner/Lester/Reeve Superman where their memory of him is of a paragon of perfection, alturism and virtue who never ever did anything questionable but if one payed close attention to Superman The Movie and Superman II paints a different picture. I mean, there's no on screen confirmation that Donner Superman ever used his powers to help people before he went to the north and his holographic space dad gave him a mission, a mission he was ready to abandon to knock boots with a woman he had just met at most like 5 months prior ( sooner in Donner's version). And don't get me started on amnesia kissing.

Oh I know. While I haven't noticed anything bad in StM and while I think that, structurally and overall, it's better than MoS, the whole thing just goes downhill in II and only gets worse.

Not to get into bashing because I love Reeve's acting as Superman and, like all efforts with Superman, it was an honest one. But as others have pointed out, there's no real reason for him to love this version of Lois Lane in the first movie other than that he's been isolated for 12 years and she's an attractive woman he works with. But she's rude and petty to him before she has any reason to be other than that he's a competitor.

He has Daddy issues in the first movie having been indoctrinated for a dozen years but he breaks that conditioning at the end and becomes his own man. Granted it's for a woman that we've seen little reason he loves her except juvenile infatuation but at least he breaks free. Then, after having sex with her in II while still having his powers (at least in the Donner version though I cannot remember if that was while having his powers in the theatrical version) he asks Dad's permission to have a relationship with her and, for some reason, just accepts Dad's ruling that he must give up his powers to do it because, for some equally unfathomable reason, he cannot commit to a woman and also help other people but do it a bit less. So his Daddy issues win again and he just does what Dad says as if he has no choice and cannot "Just say no". The theatrical version just switches it to Mommy issues to save 3 million dollars paying Brando. But the whole things is just the stock television mentality of the time that the town marshall can't get married and divide his duties.

Then he crushes the hand of a helpless enemy and possibly kills him depending on your view. But certainly crushes his hand. Then goes back and gets petty revenge on a guy who beats him up and, yes, the Amnesia Kiss. Not only pulling a new power out of his wazoo and not only hitting the reset button instead of moving forward but robbing his alleged love of her very memories. S II should have ended with him proposing to her and I said that in 1981. That's really where it lost my interest was when they hit the reset button like that.

Lana Lang in S III was kind of sweet and I loved Annette O'Toole but where would it ever go? It could only lead to another Amnesia Kiss had it led anywhere.

Then, in the ugliest Superman movie ever made, Superman IV, he uses Lois like a toy, letting her remember so he can get things off his chest and then stealing her memories again as soon as he got what he wanted.

So while I loved StM, I have a very different opinion of everything that happened after that. His actions in the rest of the movies, especially his treatment of Lois, makes B vs S look like a standup comedy routine.

TheGreatKungLao said:

I have a strong feeling that with time Man of Steel might become Superman The Movie to history as it is right now for us and once there will be another Superman movie in 22nd century with another actor and director, people would compare it to Man of Steel and miss that version. You know how it works, you start cherish something for real once it is taken from you. Though I wish people learned to cherish all versions of the character equally, the reason why they are different is because of times they came out and Man of Steel was and still is a really actual movie to our current time and situations in the world. Man of Steel shows Clark Kent who becomes Superman in a realistic environment, which was something great to see in times where Superman was fading to the background with Smallville's finale and nothing to be seen on the horizon. It was also refreshing, because as great as comic books are, the problems there are just a soft version of what our world is going through, where violence looks "fun" and lacks impactful consequences that Superman would have to deal with. DCEU is a whole new thing in that regard.

I think some of the stuff like the Amnesia Kiss, as horrible as it was, may be a lesser social conscience at the time, sort of like Ralph Kramden threatening to hit his wife in "The Honeymooners" in the 1950s and few people having a problem with it or taking it seriously. But yes, I do wish more people could just love and respect all versions or most of them and accept that each one was what Superman was in that time and place. I wish people didn't think Chris Reeve blew away all previous versions like George Reeves and Kirk Alyn or, for that matter, that George Reeves blew away Kirk Alyn, that Chris Reeve may have been the better actor but he also was in a big budget production. It would also be nice if people could accept Chris Reeve as the Superman of that time, quasi-serious and quasi- cartoonish, instead of locking Superman in as needing to always stay in that mode.

Maybe Superman in the movies will move towards being more lighthearted again or maybe, eventually, in another century, it will be so dark by our standards that MoS is considered an unrealistic children's cartoon. Who knows?

[adkal]

In rewatching MoS, Lois tracked him down by the trail of saving people and, when he threatened to vanish for good, she rightly said, "The only way you could disappear for good would be to stop helping people and I don't think that's an option for you".

That's true, but...

He also, at the very least, 'hid' for several months when he was working at that road stop bar-thingie.

It doesn't make it very clear in the movie but there's quite a bit of time that passes from the oil rig rescue to the trucker incident, and Clark seems to be 'off-radar' at that point.

Clark being cautious is totally understandable, though.

[adkal]

He's just lucky that Jor-El was able to restore his powers. If not he would have spent his remaining years enslaved along with the rest of humanity he forsakes.

It wasn't luck.

Jor-El knew exactly what his son was going to do and recorded all his responses etc accordingly

He knew Kal would want to be human - and so incorporated a molecule chamber into the basic make up of the Fortress - and he knew he would regret it, so placed his own life essence into the crystal (and, just like Crowe-Jor, didn't tell Lara ).

The 'way back', though, was sneaky because, at the end of it, 'the father becomes the son'.

It's not Kal-El crushing Zod's hand


It's Jor-El

Dun-dun-duuuuuunnnnn

Jor is then layered into the Kal-Clark persona but Clark (post diner revenge) has no clue... until he comes across a man-made mineral...

[GreatKungLao]

Zack Snyder posted new BTS photo from Man of Steel

[Last Son of Krypton]

[Netherman14]

HD version of Superman meeting Alfred face-to-face for the first time.

[manofsteel1979]

HD version of Superman meeting Alfred face-to-face for the first time.

I'm confused.That Alfred scene with Supes was shot by Snyder, but how can that possibly be when it's a known fact that Snyder's Superman never ever smiled ever or acted like classic Superman and was a scowling man of murder? Yeah, Snyder claimed that Superman in JL was always going to be more like his classic self, but we all know that's a lie and that Snyder's Superman was going to be evil and fry puppies with his heat vision for fun.


Well, at least that's what day internets told me...