Cavill’s Superman is a mix of Post Crisis and Earth One Superman, not New 52.
No way. Siegel and Shuster’s Superman was the exact opposite of Cavill. GA Superman was passionate, confident, incorruptible and valued Superman above Clark Kent. If Lois died that guy wouldn’t have been corrupted no matter how she died. Snyder’s Supes was far too whiny, self-doubting, and reliant on Lois for emotional support to be GA Supes.
Last edited by Vordan; 03-25-2019 at 05:40 PM.
I recently saw someone make the argument that a lot of how people's perceptions shape the way they engage with movies comes from how they felt leaving the theater. If they left the theater feeling happy and energized, it's far more likely they'll be willing to say the movie was good, and vice versa.
I felt Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman both had way bigger problems than the bleak tone, and I think all Shazam getting rave reviews tells me is that Shazam was better made. But, for your average film goer, I can totally see how an upbeat, optimistic superhero romp is preferable to what Snyder was going for with Superman. The person I mentioned in the initial comment went so far as to suggest had Man of Steel ended with a less destructive final battle where Superman saved Metropolis and exiled Zod back into the Phantom Zone instead of brutally executing him, people would have been far more forgiving and the movie would be held in much higher esteem. Obviously, we'll never know if that's true or not, but it does definitely look like with Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Shazam, people are leaning in the more positive direction than the bleak, deconstructionist one (even though Wonder Woman had some quite dark moments as well).
That kind of tone earns a much more forgiving treatment from general audiences. If it's supposed to make you laugh, then the seriousness is lessened, and the expectation for fresh story or strongly developed character are lesser.
But it's an interesting point you make about the feeling leaving the theater.
Snyder has split the fanbase of Superman and potentially now Batman. So much people are arguing whether they should be fine with killing or how their portrayal should be measured.
Ugh Snyder movies were a plague. They weren't worth all this trouble.
Last edited by HandofPrometheus; 03-26-2019 at 09:31 AM.
Again, nobody really understands where he's coming from or what he even meant when he was talking about that ...for one, he was ASKED these questions at a convention Q&A, he wasn't TRYING to make headlines with his different views on Batman and Superman.
Batman killed because Snyder wanted a darker, NON heroic Batman. Snyder himself isn't fine with Batman killing people. When he said people were living in a dream world he meant accepting the very idea of Batman taking a life. Nobody should be okay with Batman killing people.
You guys wanna bash Snyder for dividing fanbases but in reality he's not doing that, you guys are, all you did was assume this dude would normally want Batman to be wielding guns and killing his enemies. That wasn't why he had it in the movie.
I don't know if he's been retired for 20 years. It think it's intimated that he's been Batman for 20 years. In any case, Alfred clearly notes that the harsh treatment (branding) of captured criminals is new, and people in Gotham noticed that Batman had gotten meaner.
I'd take Snyder's movies 10 times vs whedon's abomination of Justice League and the future of everything having to be like Aquaman and failing
Most Batman fans are not anal about how he is depicted. Nobody cared that he killed in the Nolan movies, Nobody cared that he killed in the Burton movies and nobody cared that he killed in BvS. That's 2 trilogies worth of the character killing people and nobody gave Tim Burton or Nolan half has much crap as Snyder gets because "Its not like Mahvel" or whatever
Superman fans on the other hand yeah I think MOS is still argued about today because of how pressed some superman fans are
Any slight deviation from their vision of the character is a problem. Batman fans aren't divided about anything besides Snyder's Batman needlessly being too old to begin a cinematic universe.
Last edited by Nite-Wing; 03-26-2019 at 10:00 AM.
I mean, I don't think the future is everything having to be like Aquaman at least in regards to a "formula" since Shazam looks to be it's own thing and Wonder Woman '84 likely being more in-line with the original as well.
I mean, personally, I'd love more Superhero movies with colorful and comic-accurate costumes, cool fights and visuals, and the hopeful and optimistic tone I more often then not expect from the DCU, but that's just me.
There seems to be a misconception that Batman fans have never complained about Batman’s portrayal in film. They have. They complained about BurtonBats killing, NolanBats being a bit of a moron, and they certainly complained about AffleckBats. Did you forget how “Martha” blew up? DCEU Batman was provoking some VERY divisive arguments.
It is unfortunate that we're debating the same things years later. Some of us liked the Snyderverse, some of us hated it, some of us were in between. Many of us blame WB, but we all have to live with the aftermath. I didn't like Aquaman at all and Shazam looks too weightless for my tastes, but as a DC fan we have to take each movie on a case by case basis and hope for the best while an inept studio tries to repair the pieces. Let's try to look forward no?