Why has WB struggled with Superman on the big screen?

[PhantomStranger]

Bruce Timm?

https://twitter.com/carbo_knight/sta...21681313607680

Yes, Bruce Timm...



Pertinent part starts at 2 minutes

[Osiris-Rex]

They struggled because Supes isn’t an easy character to get right.

Plenty of people have gotten Superman right and made him a beloved character. Kirk Alyn in the 1940s serial. George Reeves in the 1950's TV show. Christopher Reeve in the 1970/80s movies.
Dean Cain in the 1990s TV show. Tom Welling in the 2000s Smallville. Tyler Hoechlin in the 2100s CW verse. The only ones clueless to getting Superman right is the recent WB movie division with
poor Brandon Routh and Henry Cavill. If the WB movie division had given us a Captain America version of Superman I think most people would have been a lot happier. I don't think it is that hard
because it has been done numerous times before.

[Sacred Knight]

Timm got better with Superman as things went on, but better is a relative term here, it was a pretty underwhelming start so the bar was set low to begin with, and even then it was never anything to write home about. The Timmverse has more claim to fame with aspects of Superman's supporting cast/rogues gallery than Superman himself. Timm gets Batman. Anyone else is a huge crapshoot. More often than not he was miss with Superman as opposed to hit, imo.

[Osiris-Rex]

Look, all I want is for Superman to be more than just a vanilla goody-two-shoes who never gets angry, never gets sad, never shows any emotion beyond eagerness to do the right thing, is all-powerful and easily solves every problem he comes across. That's a bad stereotype Superman has endured for years.

So do Superman like they did with George Reeves, who got angry and sad. Christopher Reeve, who got angry and sad. Dean Cain, who got angry and sad. Tom Welling, who got angry and sad. Tyler Hoechlin, who got angry and sad.
But certainly don't do Superman as always angry and sad. Let him find some joy in being Superman once in a while.

[HeroVladimir93]

So do Superman like they did with George Reeves, who got angry and sad. Christopher Reeve, who got angry and sad. Dean Cain, who got angry and sad. Tom Welling, who got angry and sad. Tyler Hoechlin, who got angry and sad.
But certainly don't do Superman as always angry and sad. Let him find some joy in being Superman once in a while.

I'm not attacking those actors and their portrayals of Superman. I'm only saying is that many people think that Superman has no glaring character flaws and is always happy. That's a common misconception, one that can be easily fixed if one watches any Superman movie or TV shows. I'm just tired of people dismissing Superman as a boring character. That is obviously not true; Superman can be done justice on-screen. Henry Cavill always rose beyond the material he was given and delivered an honest performance, and that's why I think his dismissal would be the biggest insult to the character since Superman: Truth. I can only hope Henry can have a chance to play Superman again, with a movie that plays to his strengths as an actor.

[DochaDocha]

Timm got better with Superman as things went on, but better is a relative term here, it was a pretty underwhelming start so the bar was set low to begin with, and even then it was never anything to write home about. The Timmverse has more claim to fame with aspects of Superman's supporting cast/rogues gallery than Superman himself. Timm gets Batman. Anyone else is a huge crapshoot. More often than not he was miss with Superman as opposed to hit, imo.

If you listen to the commentary track of the All-Star Superman BluRay, there's an exchange between Timm and Morrison during the prison riot scene. During the commotion, Clark Kent surreptitiously creates an earthquake, and Morrison explains that Superman often will secretly use his powers during distractions or to create distractions. Bruce Timm said something along the lines about how he never really thought about that during his years heading the cartoon. I remember facepalming at that moment, because that (at least IMHO) seems like one of the obviously quintessential Superman things to do. Incidentally, I was a tad disappointed that they removed that subtle scene from the comics when Clark Kent pretended to bump into an older gentleman on accident, to prevent something from falling on top of him. After berating Lois for her "idiot," the older guy looks for the things Clark made him drop, only to find them neatly piled together. Just little things like that got missed in the cartoons, but I guess to be fair maybe that would've been hard to animate.

Anyway, yeah. Timm's Superman got better, but it started at a bad place. That's why the last season of JL has a watchable Superman, whereas the first season's version of the character really blows (and even the creators admit it).

EDIT: Also, Superman's one of those weird characters in which it seems half his haters complain he's OP, while the other half complain he sucks because he's a wuss. Go figure.

[Osiris-Rex]

I'm not attacking those actors and their portrayals of Superman. I'm only saying is that many people think that Superman has no glaring character flaws and is always happy. That's a common misconception, one that can be easily fixed if one watches any Superman movie or TV shows. I'm just tired of people dismissing Superman as a boring character. That is obviously not true; Superman can be done justice on-screen. Henry Cavill always rose beyond the material he was given and delivered an honest performance, and that's why I think his dismissal would be the biggest insult to the character since Superman: Truth. I can only hope Henry can have a chance to play Superman again, with a movie that plays to his strengths as an actor.

I don't get where people come up with the idea Superman is a boring character. Who are these people? None of the actors I named played a boring Superman. I think perhaps these people are fans of other characters
and just resent Superman for getting more attention than their pet character. So no characterization of Superman would change their minds. They would always find excuses to not like Superman. Superman is just fine
the way he is and people that love Superman will always love the "boring" Superman and people that hate Superman will always hate Superman no matter how much someone tries to change him to make Superman be
more "exciting" and "relevant".

[manofsteel1979]

One thing that occured to me today...Warner Bros technically didn't start making Superman movies until the Tim Burton project in the 90's that eventually through development hell and evolution became Superman Returns. The Chris Reeve era films with the exception of IV were all made and put together by the Salkinds. All WB did was invest some money and distribute them. IV was largely a Canon films production that WB distributed.

WB didn't really own the Superman film rights until the Salkinds sold them back to WB in 1992 ish.

So technically counting SR, MOS, BvS and JL, Warners has only been in the business of making Superman movies in the last decade or so with over a decade of development purgatory leading up to it. And of those four films only two were actual honest to God Superman solo movies.

Meanwhile WB has been pretty much involved at every level (in partnership with Uslan and Melniker) on Batman since the mid 80s and has made 7 solo Batman movies and essentially turned a Superman sequel into an 8th movie.

That alone sort of explains a lot.

[HeroVladimir93]

I don't get where people come up with the idea Superman is a boring character. Who are these people? None of the actors I named played a boring Superman. I think perhaps these people are fans of other characters
and just resent Superman for getting more attention than their pet character. So no characterization of Superman would change their minds. They would always find excuses to not like Superman. Superman is just fine
the way he is and people that love Superman will always love the "boring" Superman and people that hate Superman will always hate Superman no matter how much someone tries to change him to make Superman be
more "exciting" and "relevant".

Being the OG superhero, Superman is held to a very high standard; one that, more often than not, he fails to live up to, and in my opinion, has never even tried to. Fans often put too much pressure on Warner and DC to make good Superman stories, which backfires and leads to further conflict.

[Ascended]

One thing that occured to me today...Warner Bros technically didn't start making Superman movies until the Tim Burton project in the 90's that eventually through development hell and evolution became Superman Returns. The Chris Reeve era films with the exception of IV were all made and put together by the Salkinds. All WB did was invest some money and distribute them. IV was largely a Canon films production that WB distributed.

WB didn't really own the Superman film rights until the Salkinds sold them back to WB in 1992 ish.

So technically counting SR, MOS, BvS and JL, Warners has only been in the business of making Superman movies in the last decade or so with over a decade of development purgatory leading up to it. And of those four films only two were actual honest to God Superman solo movies.

Meanwhile WB has been pretty much involved at every level (in partnership with Uslan and Melniker) on Batman since the mid 80s and has made 7 solo Batman movies and essentially turned a Superman sequel into an 8th movie.

That alone sort of explains a lot.

I did not know any of that.

Yeah, that does explain quite a bit.

Being the OG superhero, Superman is held to a very high standard; one that, more often than not, he fails to live up to, and in my opinion, has never even tried to. Fans often put too much pressure on Warner and DC to make good Superman stories, which backfires and leads to further conflict.

It seems that there are people who think that if they don't walk out of a Superman movie having their entire lives changed, the movie was a failure. Apparently Superman has to be an almost religious experience.

[SiegePerilous02]

Timm got better with Superman as things went on, but better is a relative term here, it was a pretty underwhelming start so the bar was set low to begin with, and even then it was never anything to write home about. The Timmverse has more claim to fame with aspects of Superman's supporting cast/rogues gallery than Superman himself. Timm gets Batman. Anyone else is a huge crapshoot. More often than not he was miss with Superman as opposed to hit, imo.

Also, he said they brought in the Fourth World lore because Superman's own rogues gallery was limited and they wanted to supplement it with Kirby stuff.

Keep in mind these people saw fit to only do one episode with the Legion of Superheroes, but we have an entire saga about unrelated Darkseid.

[Ascended]

A lot of people hated the portrayal of Jonathan Kent, particularly the bit where he suggested that Clark should maybe consider letting people die rather than reveal his powers to the world. But much like Superman is forced to be an ideal, the same has applied to the Kents as well. They HAVE to be this kind, humble farmer couple who literally raise their alien adoptive son to be a superhero and dedicate his life to saving the world. They can't be a couple of fundamentally decent human beings, but with flaws like everyone else, put into an extraordinary situation and trying to do the best they can to help their extraordinary son lead a normal life. Honestly, I kinda relate to Costner's Jonathan, who, rightly or wrongly, wanted his son to hide his abilities from the world and was prepared to sacrifice his life for that, over the Jonathan who lectures Clark on how he needs to be the world's savior. And yes, tha latter is an exaggeration of the 'classic' idea of Jonathan Kent, but its also how a lot of people think the character should be.

I adore MoS' Johnathan Kent. F*cking *adore* him (other than the death scene, obvs). Because he isn't perfect. Because he doesn't have the answers. He's as clueless and in the dark as Clark is, maybe even more so. And he's caught in a struggle every parent understands. Sure, none of us have raised super-powered aliens as our own, but we've all struggled to find the balance between protecting our children from the world, and letting the world get in so our kids can grow up prepared for the challenges they'll face. I cannot imagine the stress John Kent lived his life under, knowing that Clark would, no matter what, not only change the world but everything we think we know about the universe. The next paradigm shift for the entire human race lies on the shoulders of one couple and their ability to raise their son to be a good man. You're damn straight John Kent didn't immediately rule out letting other kids die so his could stay safe a little bit longer. I wouldn't have even said "maybe" if it had been my son.

[HeroVladimir93]

I adore MoS' Johnathan Kent. F*cking *adore* him (other than the death scene, obvs). Because he isn't perfect. Because he doesn't have the answers. He's as clueless and in the dark as Clark is, maybe even more so. And he's caught in a struggle every parent understands. Sure, none of us have raised super-powered aliens as our own, but we've all struggled to find the balance between protecting our children from the world, and letting the world get in so our kids can grow up prepared for the challenges they'll face. I cannot imagine the stress John Kent lived his life under, knowing that Clark would, no matter what, not only change the world but everything we think we know about the universe. The next paradigm shift for the entire human race lies on the shoulders of one couple and their ability to raise their son to be a good man. You're damn straight John Kent didn't immediately rule out letting other kids die so his could stay safe a little bit longer. I wouldn't have even said "maybe" if it had been my son.

I loved this portrayal of Jonathan as well. He might not be perfect, he might not have the answers, but he loved his son. That's all that matters.

[SiegePerilous02]

It was always clear to me from the context that even Jonathan himself didn't mean the "maybe." He just didn't have the answers and didn't know what to say. He has the instinct to keep his child safe over all else, but knows morally that he should absolutely have saved those kids and is proud of him.

Whatever problems the DCEU has, the Kents aren't among them.

[HeroVladimir93]

It was always clear to me from the context that even Jonathan himself didn't mean the "maybe." He just didn't have the answers and didn't know what to say. He has the instinct to keep his child safe over all else, but knows morally that he should absolutely have saved those kids and is proud of him.

Whatever problems the DCEU has, the Kents aren't among them.

Even his death, hasty as it was, can simply be justified as Jonathan not wanting people to see his son as a freak. He wanted his son to be free to choose his own fate, to be a good person, not out of obligation, but out of his own free will. He respected Clark's right to privacy so much that his own life was a small price to pay if it meant Clark having more time to choose what to do with his life, in his own terms.