Cavill no longer will play Superman according to Hollywood Reporter.

[HeroVladimir93]

Agreed. This is not a "You're either with Supergirl or against her" situation. A lot of us on here love Supergirl and want her to be in a movie. We just want Clark to get an all around hit movie of his own again as well. Frustration at this should not be framed as automatically crapping on Supergirl. That's not fair.

Yes, we have no guarantee that this studio won't find some way to screw up Kara as well. They don't deserve full trust on anybody except WW yet, and she is only due to Jenkins. Yeah, Shazam looks great and I hope it is great, but they've suckered us with great looking trailers before.

At first I was angry that Supergirl got a movie, but you're right, we should be glad she is getting a chance to shine, TV show or not. I just have to wonder; wouldn't be easier to get Henry to cameo in the movie? Superman is obviously the protagonist of the entire saga and sidelining him in such a significant manner is not gonna do him or Supergirl any favors.

[SiegePerilous02]

At first I was angry that Supergirl got a movie, but you're right, we should be glad she is getting a chance to shine, TV show or not. I just have to wonder; wouldn't be easier to get Henry to cameo in the movie? Superman is obviously the protagonist of the entire saga and sidelining him in such a significant manner is not gonna do him or Supergirl any favors.

Henry seemingly doesn't want to do it without the guarantee that the cameos will lead to anything like an actual solo movie. It's kind of sensible on WB to want to build him back up, but they also dug the ditch themselves, and I can't blame Cavill for not wanting to continue without assurance that it will not just be the same old shit. And even if he did the cameo, I think the first meeting between the two warrants more than a cameo. That's like an A-plot. Whenever they introduce/revamp Supergirl in the comics or in something like S:TAS, he's always a major part of the plot. Except in the old movie, which is not an ideal. The TV series, as an episodic serialized thing, can get away with not showing him right away and only hinting at him, but they still had to get around to bringing him in and having them interact.

I just can't believe they say they have no immediate ideas or direction for Superman currently, and yet Supergirl with Brainiac is being floated around. That's the fucking plot for MOS 2 right there.

[HeroVladimir93]

Its all about the framing. If the idea was "look, we have some issues in the Superman department, and we've got some ideas for a Supergirl flick so we're gonna work on that". Fine. Understandable. The way its being framed though is that in a DCEU capacity they're dropping Superman entirely and that they want Supergirl to be the "Super" face of the U, if they even are able to salvage their universe (of which I have major doubts in the first place but I digress). Framed like that? Its BS, plain and simple. Developing a Supergirl film is fine. Part of the mission statement being that she will replace the character of Superman entirely in their attempt to salvage their DC film verse on the other hand is an absolute insult.

This is tantamount to them eventually wanting to replace Diana with Donna Troy in the WW mythos. These are not replacement characters, they are spin-offs which share the mythos with the epicenter of the larger franchise. Kal-El, Superman, is the character that this particular mythos revolves around, and I'm not going to buy in to changing that. I don't care what the reasons are.

I'm pretty sure SJWs will write on Tumblr that Supergirl is the heroine of this generation and Superman is an outdated relic of a bygone era. Then, they are gonna criticize DC for not being "woke" enough.

Henry seemingly doesn't want to do it without the guarantee that the cameos will lead to anything like an actual solo movie. It's kind of sensible on WB to want to build him back up, but they also dug the ditch themselves, and I can't blame Cavill for not wanting to continue without assurance that it will not just be the same old shit. And even if he did the cameo, I think the first meeting between the two warrants more than a cameo. That's like an A-plot. Whenever they introduce/revamp Supergirl in the comics or in something like S:TAS, he's always a major part of the plot. Except in the old movie, which is not an ideal. The TV series, as an episodic serialized thing, can get away with not showing him right away and only hinting at him, but they still had to get around to bringing him in and having them interact.

I just can't believe they say they have no immediate ideas or direction for Superman currently, and yet Supergirl with Brainiac is being floated around. That's the fucking plot for MOS 2 right there.

Henry is obviously the victim here. DC is very reluctant in doing a Superman movie, but a Supergirl movie is fair game? I'd be upset too.

[SiegePerilous02]

If they want to redeem the DCEU take on Superman/the brand, showing a more optimistic story with the two cousins finding each other and triumphing over evil is like the perfect way to do it. If they can get a great director with a great vision and leave them alone to do their thing, it should take care of itself.

I'd say if they want to overhaul the brand that getting rid of Cavill to signify the end of the DCEU era would be the logical thing (from their perspective) to do...but they're not doing that for some reason. So building that version of the character back up appears to be what they want to do, but doing it slowly through cameos that are not an absolute guarantee is creating problems as well. In their attempts to get around Cavill with the tougher Supergirl bargaining tactic, they stumbled upon the perfect middle ground IMO to put Superman back out there and introducing a supporting character that could boost him back up as he boosts her. They are not doing this for some reason.

[HeroVladimir93]

If they want to redeem the DCEU take on Superman/the brand, showing a more optimistic story with the two cousins finding each other and triumphing over evil is like the perfect way to do it. If they can get a great director with a great vision and leave them alone to do their thing, it should take care of itself.

I'd say if they want to overhaul the brand that getting rid of Cavill to signify the end of the DCEU era would be the logical thing (from their perspective) to do...but they're not doing that for some reason. So building that version of the character back up appears to be what they want to do, but doing it slowly through cameos that are not an absolute guarantee is creating problems as well. In their attempts to get around Cavill with the tougher Supergirl bargaining tactic, they stumbled upon the perfect middle ground IMO to put Superman back out there and introducing a supporting character that could boost him back up as he boosts her. They are not doing this for some reason.

In other words, they are rebuilding their franchise without the protagonist. It doesn't take a genius to know that's not a winning strategy.

[stargazer01]

Its all about the framing. If the idea was "look, we have some issues in the Superman department, and we've got some ideas for a Supergirl flick so we're gonna work on that". Fine. Understandable. The way its being framed though is that in a DCEU capacity they're dropping Superman entirely and that they want Supergirl to be the "Super" face of the U, if they even are able to salvage their universe (of which I have major doubts in the first place but I digress). Framed like that? Its BS, plain and simple. Developing a Supergirl film is fine. Part of the mission statement being that she will replace the character of Superman entirely in their attempt to salvage their DC film verse on the other hand is an absolute insult.

This is tantamount to them eventually wanting to replace Diana with Donna Troy in the WW mythos. These are not replacement characters, they are spin-offs which share the mythos with the epicenter of the larger franchise. Kal-El, Superman, is the character that this particular mythos revolves around, and I'm not going to buy in to changing that. I don't care what the reasons are.

If they want to redeem the DCEU take on Superman/the brand, showing a more optimistic story with the two cousins finding each other and triumphing over evil is like the perfect way to do it. If they can get a great director with a great vision and leave them alone to do their thing, it should take care of itself.

I'd say if they want to overhaul the brand that getting rid of Cavill to signify the end of the DCEU era would be the logical thing (from their perspective) to do...but they're not doing that for some reason. So building that version of the character back up appears to be what they want to do, but doing it slowly through cameos that are not an absolute guarantee is creating problems as well. In their attempts to get around Cavill with the tougher Supergirl bargaining tactic, they stumbled upon the perfect middle ground IMO to put Superman back out there and introducing a supporting character that could boost him back up as he boosts her. They are not doing this for some reason.

I agree with all you guys say. I'm not a Supergirl fan. I don't hate her but she does nothing for me so far.

She's ok, and she definitely is NOT Superman and never will be.

I won't support her movie if WB are going to ignore Superman and try to replace him with her. I fkin hate WB. I won't support their DCU until they show true respect to Superman. And a big screen movie with Brainiac without Superman is the ultimate insult for me. It breaks my heart.

[HeroVladimir93]

I agree with all you guys say. I'm not a Supergirl fan. I don't hate her but she does nothing for me so far.

She's ok, and she definitely is NOT Superman and never will be.

I won't support her movie if WB are going to ignore Superman and try to replace him with her. I fkin hate WB. I won't support their DCU until they show true respect to Superman. And a big screen movie with Brainiac without Superman is the ultimate insult for me. It breaks my heart.

As bad as we as fans feel about this whole think, I think it's an even worse experience for Henry. He is a huge Superman fan and getting to play the character in movies must have been a dream come true for him. That dream was squandered by the hugely overt corporate agenda Warner has been operating on lately and Superman may never appear in movies for the foreseeable future. Hopefully, this will not diminish Henry's love for Superman.

[Osiris-Rex]

Agreed. This is not a "You're either with Supergirl or against her" situation. A lot of us on here love Supergirl and want her to be in a movie. We just want Clark to get an all around hit movie of his own again as well. Frustration at this should not be framed as automatically crapping on Supergirl. That's not fair.

Yes, we have no guarantee that this studio won't find some way to screw up Kara as well. They don't deserve full trust on anybody except WW yet, and she is only due to Jenkins. Yeah, Shazam looks great and I hope it is great, but they've suckered us with great looking trailers before.

One thing going in favor of a Supergirl movie is Zack Snyder won't be directing it and probably won't have any involvement with it. It will probably have more in common with Shazam than Man of Steel.

If they want to redeem the DCEU take on Superman/the brand, showing a more optimistic story with the two cousins finding each other and triumphing over evil is like the perfect way to do it. If they can get a great director with a great vision and leave them alone to do their thing, it should take care of itself.

I'd say if they want to overhaul the brand that getting rid of Cavill to signify the end of the DCEU era would be the logical thing (from their perspective) to do...but they're not doing that for some reason. So building that version of the character back up appears to be what they want to do, but doing it slowly through cameos that are not an absolute guarantee is creating problems as well. In their attempts to get around Cavill with the tougher Supergirl bargaining tactic, they stumbled upon the perfect middle ground IMO to put Superman back out there and introducing a supporting character that could boost him back up as he boosts her. They are not doing this for some reason.

Perhaps a new Superman could be introduced in a Supergirl 2 movie. If the Supergirl movie does take place in the 1970s then maybe switch things up a bit and have Kara be the one who brings the baby Kal-El to Jonathan and Martha.
Maybe at the end of Supergirl 1. Then skip 20 years and Supergirl now gets in touch with the adult Clark and inspires him to wear the cape in Supergirl 2. No reason to do the same thing over and over again, where it is the adult Clark
who find the child Kara. Then a Superman movie could be spun off from the Supergirl movie. And enough time would have passed in real time that it wouldn't seem so odd someone other than Cavill is playing Superman.

[SiegePerilous02]

Perhaps a new Superman could be introduced in a Supergirl 2 movie. If the Supergirl movie does take place in the 1970s then maybe switch things up a bit and have Kara be the one who brings the baby Kal-El to Jonathan and Martha.
Maybe at the end of Supergirl 1. Then skip 20 years and Supergirl now gets in touch with the adult Clark and inspires him to wear the cape in Supergirl 2. No reason to do the same thing over and over again, where it is the adult Clark
who find the child Kara. Then a Superman movie could be spun off from the Supergirl movie. And enough time would have passed in real time that it wouldn't seem so odd someone other than Cavill is playing Superman.

I'm sorry, but that doesn't sound appealing at all. Supergirl is the spin off character, she does not inspire Superman, he inspires her. They do that over and over again because that's the lore, there are other things to tweak, but that (along with the Kents finding the rocket, not Kara delivering him to them) are not to be touched. There is no valid creative reason to tweak them in a mainstream movie production that is meant to represent the source material.

This is the equivalent of Barbara Gordon becoming Batgirl and inspiring Bruce while he is still a kid and fighting Ra's al Ghul. WB would never dare do that. The fact that they are considering it with Superman speaks volumes about their priorities.

[Sacred Knight]

Yeah, HARD rejection on that one. Jonathan and Martha are Clark's inspirations in regards to tangible people, not another earlier superhero, I don't care how its spun.

[Francisco]

No one would ever even consider doing that to Batman.
Yeah Let's have Jason Todd's Robin been the one who trains young Bruce Wayne.

[Sacred Knight]

Hey at least they waited till after Superman's birthday to break up with him.

[Flash Gordon]

I love Kara Zor-El, but a ridiculously hard pass on her predating Superman or inspiring him or anything akin to that.

[Flashback]

As bad as we as fans feel about this whole think, I think it's an even worse experience for Henry. He is a huge Superman fan and getting to play the character in movies must have been a dream come true for him. That dream was squandered by the hugely overt corporate agenda Warner has been operating on lately and Superman may never appear in movies for the foreseeable future. Hopefully, this will not diminish Henry's love for Superman.

He wanted more money and refused to do a cameo on Shazam. Guessing playing Superman wasn't enough for him.

[SiegePerilous02]

He wanted more money and refused to do a cameo on Shazam. Guessing playing Superman wasn't enough for him.

More like playing this version of Superman under their creative direction hasn't worked out for him. He wants to play Superman, but the reality of the situation is the studio has jerked him and the character around and they have no plans to change the situation.