Favorite modern Superman movie

[stargazer01]

It's hard for me to give an objective opinion of JL, because my whole outlook is colored by my excitement at Superman acting more like Superman. If I'm being honest, I feel like the film itself is probably mediocre at best, buuuuut....Superman smiles! Like he really, actually means it!

I agree, Superman in JL felt like he was so glad to be alive and start again. His whole attitude changed. Some Snyder fans hated his attitude.. like they got so used to Superman being so serious and melancholy in BvS and some in MOS, they got used to that portrayal, but I never did. I felt like Superman had to change and evolve into the classic version when he knows his place in the world and is firmly established.

[stargazer01]

100% agreed. If DC wants a darker live action Superman movie, this is the perfect template for it. One where Superman stands out as a light in the darkness rather than being consumed by it.

Great post. Fully agree. See, I don't need pure happiness. We need darkness and big danger to, but Superman himself should not be consumed by it but raise above it. He needs to show that there is always hope.

[Godzilla2099]

I voted Justice League. Superman was the icon of hope in that movie. Even Cyborg couldn't help but have optimism in his presence. JL's Superman showed power and compassion. For me, it was a good balance.

Batman may use fear as a weapon, but Superman is the Hero that bad guys wish they never screwed with.

[DrNewGod]

Like others who've commented, I feel this poll is remiss in excluding the animated offerings, all of which (IMO) surpass any live action film since Superman II. My personal fave is Superman: Unbound.

[Adekis]

I really have a hard time choosing between Henry Cavill's three outings in the role. I love Man of Steel. It does a better job than I would have thought possible at selling the idea of "Clark waits over a decade between growing to adulthood and donning the cape," a contrivance which until Man of Steel had often bothered me. It also has a great Clark, a great Lois, a great Martha, a good Zod, a good Jon and a good Krypton. And phenomenal action as well, though I can understand the complaint that it's sort of fatiguing after a while. But Clark the reporter's not in it a whole lot, and yeah, the decision to have late-twenties Cavill play 17 year old Clark in that scene was an error. Plus, I feel like there could have been more back-and-forth between Kal and Zod trying and failing to establish common ground. Ultimately, these are all nitpicks; it's a perfectly good movie.

Then we get Batman v. Superman, in which Adams' amazing Lois Lane finally gets to share her role as the crusading journalist hero with a Clark Kent who really fights for something, carrying over and amplifying Clark's intense care for the marginalized from the previous movie. Add in a manipulative mastermind Luthor who plays all the parties like chess pieces and a brutal, harsh Batman who both serves as a critique of Batman-in-general and undergoes a strong redemption arc, in effect the closest thing to Lonely Place of Dying I'll ever get to see in a movie? Man, yeah, no wonder I love this movie.

At the same time, it has absolutely no interest in being a crowd pleaser. Superman acts concerned and brooding because he's in a state of severe emotional distress over a complex series of questions of justice, apathy toward the suffering of the marginalized, and the horror of unintended consequences for one's actions. Snyder expects the audience to get that, but he doesn't spend a lot of time establishing that Clark isn't concerned and brooding as a person, so a lot of people just saw a concerned and brooding Superman and either didn't understand why, or understand perfectly but just didn't care because they want Superman to be primarily charming and fun, and frankly that's not an unreasonable thing to ask. I also don't think it's unreasonable for Snyder as an artist to want his Superman to engage with meaningful issues, but he didn't do a lot to reach a middle ground - er, at least not in Batman v. Superman. I still love the movie, but it's not a crowd pleaser and it's not trying to be, and it kind of needed to be. Same can be said with Batman and his dark, vengeful path, his showcased brutality. Also, I don't really care for the infamous "Knightmare" scene, or the basic premise of a "Superman quits due to feelings" movie, even though that premise is explored with more depth than any other take on it that I've ever seen.

Then there's Justice League, and we finally get to see the Superman who existed between the two previous movies, but even moreso - the Superman whose existence Snyder expected us to understand, but never took the time to show us. He's back, kicking ass, taking names, cracking jokes, and with the added psychological strength of having resolved, at least to his own satisfaction, the issues causing his brooding in Batman v. Superman, and backed for the first time by a team to boot. The League is a great set of characters, but between the step-down in CGI, the less-than-stellar villain and especially the externally imposed two-hour runtime limit, JL does suffer from a sense of being less complete than the previous two movies. Still, it's also by far the one I get the most absolute delight and joy from watching, BvS having a large lack of interest in at least that kind of joy and Man of Steel generally not having that much of it either.

Anyway, I voted for BvS, but because I think it's the most sophisticated, the most underrated and the most likely to have too-few votes, rather than because I straightforwardly think it's the best one.

[SiegePerilous02]

MOS is a flawed film, but I'm going with that one. It's the only one that is actually a Superman movie, and was a solid-ish foundation for a Superman trilogy if they had taken more time and care going forward.

I can respect BvS for its ambitions and several individual scenes, but now that time has past I can safely say I feel it was all too much, way too soon. And unfortunately, none of the individual scenes I love have much to do with Superman himself, and the butchered theatrical cut where a chunk of his material was left on the cutting room floor ended up as the one the vast majority of the movie seeing public saw. Wonder Woman and her theme song are the MVPs of this thing, which is glorious for her but awful for a movie not built around her (and one which she didn't really need to be in).

JL was a shit show from start to finish. Cavill's ability to play the traits most of us love about Superman elevate it somewhat...but he's barely in it, he has the grotesque CGI lips, and the personality switch (while welcome on its own) doesn't mesh with what came before at all. So that undermines all of it. We basically need THAT Superman in a solo film, sans horrible CGI face, and we'll be good.

[KC]

Justice League. Don't get me wrong, it isn't a good movie. but MoS and BvS are badly written and boring.

[stargazer01]

I agree that BvS had great ambition and I respect it for that, but Snyder failed in the execution of some of those ideas, imo. His biggest error was to double down on the things people didn't like about Man of Steel like Superman being too grim and serious.

BvS is a good movie with great ideas, but it tries to cram so much in and it became something too complex, convoluted and grim for mainstream audiences. I didn't have a problem understanding it, but the casual fans seemed to want something lighter and more fun. Oh well. I just wanted the movie to also show more of Superman as a beacon of hope, but this felt more like Lex, Batman and Lois' movie. I still love some scenes very much. One of my faves is Lex vs Superman when Lex tried to kill Lois. Also the Martha scene. yes I like it, it makes me tear up because I can feel his pain. And when Batman saves Martha. It's like he has a little chance to save his own mother. When he tells Martha that he is friends with Superman, it brings a smile to my face. If only the movie had more lighthearted moments like this.

Any way, I guess I'm lucky that I like all these Superman movies to some degree. I honestly do. Maybe I'm too big of a Superman fan but I think all the movies have things to like.

My score for each:

SR B+
MOS A
BvS B+
JL B+

I enjoy JL more than BvS, but BvS is the more complete movie. I still won't watch it often because 3 hours is too long.

Note: MOS is still the biggest selling DCU movie in home media in the new continuity, with Wonder Woman close behing. I checked recently and it's up to $112 mill. A lot more than Civil War and the new Spider-Man, for instance.

[RepHope]

Man of Steel hands down. However the real star is Shannon's Zod not Cavill's Superman. We really get a sense of why Zod is the way he is, his mindset, his motives, and we also get to see that he's not the hammy over the top villain of Superman II. Conversely Cavill's Superman, while still likeable, feels underdeveloped. I never felt like I understood why he wanted to put on the cape and be a hero beyond "Jor-El told him he should". The Kents are woefully characterized here, with Cavill being Superman in spite of their influence rather than because of it. Adams Lois is well-characterized here, although she's not given much to do once Zod and the rest show up.

Superman Returns is too obsessed with homaging the Donner films rather than actually standing on it's own, despite Routh being a good Superman. The deadbeat dad part is also a mark against that movie. Spacey's Lex is decent if cliched.

BvS is just awful. Despite Supes name in the title he's little more than window dressing, a plot device for the rest of the characters. He gets even less development here than he did in MoS, and then he dies. He dies killing a monster he's indirectly responsible for same as Zod. So nothing has really changed despite Zod's death supposedly being the foundation of his no-kill rule. JL is handicapped with this plot and the 180 is jarring if welcome. I understand what Whedon was trying to do. While Snyder was busy making Jesus parallels and portraying Supes as a disappointed god, Whedon tried to have him actually interact with normal people aside from his Mom and Lois and show he was approachable.

Overall the modern era hasn't been that great for Supes on the big screen. Hopefully the 2020s will change that.

[Arsenal]

One thing that always bothered me about Justice League was how over the top the love and importance for Superman was said to be in the beginning of the movie. It just felt so... forced and over the top that it kinda hurts it. I just wish they took the time to flesh him out some more before killing him so that the impact of it would feel earned.

[RepHope]

One thing that always bothered me about Justice League was how over the top the love and importance for Superman was said to be in the beginning of the movie. It just felt so... forced and over the top that it kinda hurts it. I just wish they took the time to flesh him out some more before killing him so that the impact of it would feel earned.

I remember that being a common complaint. Superman was extremely controversial after he killed an alien who caused massive destruction and death, and that Supes himself was indirectly responsible for. Then he kills the exact same guy again except mutated into the 5th Ninja Turtle and now everyone agrees he was a modern Jesus. It doesn't gel at all that people would suddenly completely embrace him for doing the exact same thing he did before.

[stargazer01]

Man of Steel hands down. However the real star is Shannon's Zod not Cavill's Superman. We really get a sense of why Zod is the way he is, his mindset, his motives, and we also get to see that he's not the hammy over the top villain of Superman II. Conversely Cavill's Superman, while still likeable, feels underdeveloped. I never felt like I understood why he wanted to put on the cape and be a hero beyond "Jor-El told him he should". The Kents are woefully characterized here, with Cavill being Superman in spite of their influence rather than because of it. Adams Lois is well-characterized here, although she's not given much to do once Zod and the rest show up.

Can I ask you? Why did the Donner Superman want to be a superhero? We never got into his mind. It seems that he became Superman because he had these powers and because Jor-El told him so. Similar to Clark in MOS. At least in MOS we saw his journey as a young man looking for his true destiny and looking for answers. He finally got them when he met Jor-El. He learned about Krypton and about his true potential as a Kryptonian on Earth. I also really liked that he always saved people and did the right thing even when he felt mistreated and bullied growing up. We never saw that part in Superman The Movie. I feel MOS developed Clark more and we saw him accepting his powers to help mankind. MOS humanized him a bit more. He didn't have to, but he surrendered to mankind instead of hiding. To me that was heroic and a choice he made. I mention Superman The Movie because it seems to be so well regarded and loved by many comicbook readers.

Also, for me Lois in MOS had a lot to do throughout the movie. She was an active part to help defeat Zod and company. Jor-El instructed her. BTW, I found Jor-El so awesome in MOS. He was another hero like his son.

[Adekis]

Cavill's Superman, while still likeable, feels underdeveloped. I never felt like I understood why he wanted to put on the cape and be a hero beyond "Jor-El told him he should".

Can I ask you? Why did the Donner Superman want to be a superhero? We never got into his mind. It seems that he became Superman because he had these powers and because Jor-El told him so.

I don't think Jor tells Kal to become Superman in either movie, as unhappy as I am to pass up an opportunity for spearing Superman the Movie, nitpicky heretic that I am. In Superman's special edition, Kal goes to Metropolis and becomes a journalist as Clark first, and then reveals that he's Superman only when Lois is in danger. After he flies around doing a saving-people montage, he discusses it with Jor's ghost, who basically regards Kal's creation of "Superman" with fond resignation. Kal never meant to be Superman, he just kind of started saving people and then got carried away. Jor understood that and had in fact anticipated it, but Kal's bashful, almost ashamed reaction indicates that by no means did he instruct his son to undertake such a super-task, and if anything had entreated him to stay under cover of secrecy.

Strangely, Brando's Jor-El instead seems more fixated on Clark Kent, entreating Kal to keep his secret identity. Additionally, I cannot for the life of me figure out why Clark started working a normal job and living a normal life in the first place. We can see why Clark chooses to become Superman, but not why Superman chooses to become Clark Kent again. I have to assume that returning to the Clark Kent role was Jor's idea, which is I suppose a version of Jor telling him to be Superman.

By contrast, in Man of Steel we first have a Clark who basically, already behaves as Superman when danger arises, but who otherwise constantly lives in hiding, not even using his real name as Clark Kent. While Jor tells Clark lots of important information, his own reason for conceiving Kal in the first place was the absence of "the element of choice" from Krypton's society. Obviously he's not going to go through all that effort just to tell Kal how to live his life! While Clark chooses to reveal himself to the world as Superman in a crisis and not in a vacuum, that's not at all different from Superman the Movie with the helicopter crash. People are in danger and he takes the time to focus on helping them. Crucially, unlike the Donner'verse Clark who spent over a decade studying in the Fortress prior to his accidental and then initially regretted public debut, the Snyder'verse Clark has constantly been making the choice between remaining unobtrusive and helping people in need, after which he must disappear, for a decade and a half. For him, "Superman" is just a way to help people without having to disappear afterward - which perhaps most importantly of all finally allows "Clark Kent" to put down roots and live as a normal man.

Both films present concrete, clear motivations for Clark becoming Superman, and each based on the same basic principle: when people are in danger, do what you can to help.

Also, for me Lois in MOS had a lot to do throughout the movie. She was an active part to help defeat Zod and company. Jor-El instructed her. BTW, I found Jor-El so awesome in MOS. He was another hero like his son.

Yeah, absolutely. Jor was awesome and Lois was absolutely stellar!

[Powerboy]

I don't think Jor tells Kal to become Superman in either movie, as unhappy as I am to pass up an opportunity for spearing Superman the Movie, nitpicky heretic that I am. In Superman's special edition, Kal goes to Metropolis and becomes a journalist as Clark first, and then reveals that he's Superman only when Lois is in danger. After he flies around doing a saving-people montage, he discusses it with Jor's ghost, who basically regards Kal's creation of "Superman" with fond resignation. Kal never meant to be Superman, he just kind of started saving people and then got carried away. Jor understood that and had in fact anticipated it, but Kal's bashful, almost ashamed reaction indicates that by no means did he instruct his son to undertake such a super-task, and if anything had entreated him to stay under cover of secrecy.

Strangely, Brando's Jor-El instead seems more fixated on Clark Kent, entreating Kal to keep his secret identity. Additionally, I cannot for the life of me figure out why Clark started working a normal job and living a normal life in the first place. We can see why Clark chooses to become Superman, but not why Superman chooses to become Clark Kent again. I have to assume that returning to the Clark Kent role was Jor's idea, which is I suppose a version of Jor telling him to be Superman.

By contrast, in Man of Steel we first have a Clark who basically, already behaves as Superman when danger arises, but who otherwise constantly lives in hiding, not even using his real name as Clark Kent. While Jor tells Clark lots of important information, his own reason for conceiving Kal in the first place was the absence of "the element of choice" from Krypton's society. Obviously he's not going to go through all that effort just to tell Kal how to live his life! While Clark chooses to reveal himself to the world as Superman in a crisis and not in a vacuum, that's not at all different from Superman the Movie with the helicopter crash. People are in danger and he takes the time to focus on helping them. Crucially, unlike the Donner'verse Clark who spent over a decade studying in the Fortress prior to his accidental and then initially regretted public debut, the Snyder'verse Clark has constantly been making the choice between remaining unobtrusive and helping people in need, after which he must disappear, for a decade and a half. For him, "Superman" is just a way to help people without having to disappear afterward - which perhaps most importantly of all finally allows "Clark Kent" to put down roots and live as a normal man.

Both films present concrete, clear motivations for Clark becoming Superman, and each based on the same basic principle: when people are in danger, do what you can to help.



Yeah, absolutely. Jor was awesome and Lois was absolutely stellar!

If I remember the scene in the Special Edition correctly, AI Jor-El states that Kal needs a secret identity to be able to relax and have friends, to lead something resembling a normal life. If he tries to have friends openly as Kal-El, there will be enemies who would strike at him through his friends, presumably because the things he is doing interfere with them. This is even more true once he publicly reveals his existence.

In my opinion the whole "I'm going to become a reporter so I'll hear news of crimes and catastrophes right away" explanation hasn't been believable since he was retroactively given the vision and hearing powers as if he always had them in the 1940s.

[Adekis]

If I remember the scene in the Special Edition correctly, AI Jor-El states that Kal needs a secret identity to be able to relax and have friends, to lead something resembling a normal life. If he tries to have friends openly as Kal-El, there will be enemies who would strike at him through his friends, presumably because the things he is doing interfere with them. This is even more true once he publicly reveals his existence.

In my opinion the whole "I'm going to become a reporter so I'll hear news of crimes and catastrophes right away" explanation hasn't been believable since he was retroactively given the vision and hearing powers as if he always had them in the 1940s.

Well me, I'm mostly horrified by any use of the super-hearibg and vision which firstly defies the laws of physics (if Superman can defy them physically, it's different from if he imposes that defiance externally on sound waves) but more importantly makes Superman an Orwellian figure. For example, Bendis' first Man of Steel issue really creeper me out. I don't like hearing about disasters as Clark's primary motivation to be a journalist, but I do value Clark's ability to investigate corruption.

As for Brando's Jor, he definitely references Clark's need for a normal life, but doesn't he only say that after Kal reveals himself as Superman?