What is your ideal direction for the next Superman movie?

[Nelliebly]

2) Slow down the romance. I'm not saying remove it, because it's still important, but don't rush into it. Looking over at Marvel (MCU, FOX, Sony), I'd say most of the romance stories felt like paint-by-numbers stuff, as in they had to work romance into the story because casuals want to see romance. I like to joke that Hawkeye's wife is the best superhero WAG/HAB, because there's no need to make her a) someone who constantly needs to be saved or b) someone who unreasonably is involved in the action-heavy sequences and c) isn't forced into the story because, by law, the man and woman have to kiss in the movie. Yup, this would probably hurt box office, but I'm not overly concerning myself (yet) with casuals who won't support Superman in the long run. Also, at least that would give some freedom for Superman to travel to exotic locations and spend more time dealing with the superheroic conflicts. Anyway, this is supposed to be a franchise, so use the sequels to fit it in eventually and within a reasonable pacing.

There is nothing wrong with a slow burn (Smallville's slow burn with Lois and Clark is my favorite iteration of the relationship ever) but some of what you've said here really hits me the wrong way.

Again, looking to Marvel films here and then trying to graph that onto Superman flat out doesn't work. The reason a lot of the romance in the Marvel films feels paint by number and doesn't seem to emotionally hit (it's often been compared by critics as wanting and lacking specifically compared to the Reeve Superman films) is distinctly because the romance is tacked on like a subplot and not actually given the attention it deserves. You are also dealing with male superheroes where, again, the romance is not central to the story the way it is in Superman.

Hawkeye's wife is not Lois Lane and it's silly to compare her to Lois Lane. I love Linda Cardellini but she wasn't playing an iconic character. Even Pepper Potts, bless her heart, is not Lois Lane. Lois Lane is an icon in her own right and an actual part of the spine of a Superman media property.

Not having romance in a Superman movie doesn't just hurt box office for "casuals"---it craps on part of the heart and soul of the franchise. Again, you need to look at the mistakes of Man of Steel. I'm a fan of Man of Steel but one of the most consistent complaints about Man of Steel was that there was not ENOUGH actual romance in the movie and that was a problem for a lot of people who came into that film looking for it to be more like the Reeve movie, or "Lois and Clark" of Smallville and were frustrated when Lois and Clark barely were allowed to talk in the movie. Amy Adams was awesome in the movie but it seemed beyond clear that WB was trying to act "above" traditional romance with MOS and IT DID NOT WORK. The audience missed it. The audience made it SUPER clear that they missed it. There were literal articles asking "What happened to the romance in Superman?"

A slow burn romance is fine. A love story that develops over the course of a few movies but gets ATTENTION in each film is fine. But, On the contrary, one could also argue that, at this point, Superman has been married for almost 30 years and it's dumb at this point to keep retreading his younger years and origin story and that they should just make a Superman movie where he's already MARRIED and move on from there. But comparing Lois Lane to Hawkeye's wife is a comparison that absolutely does not work. A Superman movie that isn't making good use of Lois is not a good Superman movie. If she doesn't have anything to do it's because the script is bad and not fully integrating Clark Kent into the story and therefore the story has bigger problems to start with.

If we are following cues from Man of Steel, then next Superman movie needs to do exactly the OPPOSITE of this and commit fully to a true love story and put romance front and center the way the Wonder Woman movie did. (And the wonder Woman movie was, of course, following the Superman formula.)

Again, this actually isn't guess work. We KNOW what draws audiences into Superman. The love story is part of it for a significant part of the audience. It should never be tacked on and it should never be ignored or downplayed you just lost half your audience. Get it wrong? (Superman Returns and, depending on who you ask, MOS) And you piss people off. Get it right? And you can redeem your show. (Smallville later seasons.) And literally EVERY Superman media property has already figured this out. This is not rocket science. Not if you recognize and understand that women are not "casual" viewers of Superman media---they are literally half the demo.

[Vordan]

I don’t even know where to start with this. You are forcing your own clear biases and preferences on Superman and it’s like a puzzle piece that doesn’t fit.

1. I don’t need to “study” the MCU movies, thanks. They are formulaic to a fault. Some of them are very good (Winter Soldier, First Avenger, Black Panther) and some of them are extremely mediocre and forgettable. They all follow the same exact formula that often rings hollow and is often pleasing but forgotten about a few months later. WB doesn’t need to follow the MCU formula in order to succeed with Superman. In part, because a lot of Marvel’s success has stemmed from the reality that they don’t ::have:: the same kind of iconic figures heading their franchises. No one “misses” iconic supporting casts with most of these characters because the general public doesn’t KNOW who they are. This is not the case with Gotham City or Metropolis which are on a completely different level of recognition for the general public and so audience expectations are extremely different. The only character Marvel has used with that same recognition is Peter Parker and you only need to read the news right now to understand the cluster**** of controversy going on with that franchise, in part, because Disney removed Peter from his working class roots and his life as the friendly neighborhood hero and made him the protege of a literal billionaire. The presence of MJ is the only thing anchoring Peter right now to his familiar story and that actually ::has:: been a problem for a lot of people.

2. Star Labs is a fine place to occasionally drop in but it should not be the home base of a Superman movie. It’s been the home base of The Flash TV show for the past few seasons and, again, that choice has been met with a ton of criticism as it’s too many cooks in the kitchen and creates a lot of “lots of people standing around spouting jargon” but doesn’t actually engage you in life or provide a sense of Barry’s full life. It’s even worse with Superman as the dual identity is a vital piece of the myth. Star Labs as a random place in the background as seen in”Lois and Clark” and Smallville with Dr. Hamilton as a side character works fine. Making star Labs the home base of your Superman movie is a great way to tank your movie.

3. Journalism is not a dying medium and all you have to do is turn on the news right now to understand that. If anything, honest journalists genuinely willing to stand up against corruption are more important than ever as they are often all that stands between the public and outright Criminal behavior. Journalism is a ::changing:: medium and the Daily Planet would certainly and has certainly evolved with those changes but the job itself is still as vital and relevant as ever even if the execution of that role has slightly evolved.

4. Supergirl’s over reliance on the DEO has, again, been a highly criticized point which is why the show keeps attempting to course correct and re-focus on Kara as a reporter. The problem with Supergirl has everything to do with the fact that she’s living a stolen story. The journalism focus on Supergirl is a stolen story from both Clark and Lois and will never fully work because it doesn’t ::belong:: to her. As opposed to giving Kara her own myth, they simply stole his. So it’s a poor comparison because if anything Supergirl actually points to the iconic comfort found in the role of a reporter which is why the CW tried to steal it.

Brainiac and Darkseid as villains are fine. But what you are suggesting is essentially the elimination of the Clark Kent identity with a focus only on him being Superman all the time dealing only with huge off world threats and that is a great way to not only completely tank the franchise but literally alienate at least half of your audience who do not just show up to a Superman Media property wanting to see him punching aliens. Half of your audience shows up ::specifically:: for Clark Kent. For Lois. For legit romance. For human interactions and human stories. Over 40% of the audience for Man of Steel were WOMEN. Superman has a much higher female demo than Batman does and he has a higher demo than most of the Marvel properties where it’s usually more of a 70/30 split. Superman on television has been sustained by WOMEN. If you don’t make a Superman movie that speaks equally to women, the movie does not succeed. Period. This isn’t even guess work, this is hard fact. Women do not show up for a Superman movie for him to be Superman punching crap 24/7. They show up for Clark Kent equally and importantly. If he’s not truly in your movie, you lose your movie. And WB absolutely needs women to show up for Superman and they KNOW it. They absolutely know it.

Brainiac and Darkseid are fine as threats (Braniac moreso given he’s an actual Superman villain)But they are not the “star power” in the film. Your “star power” for a successful Superman media property is Superman/Clark/Lois as the anchor of your film and they are what you need to actually focus on to make the film work. Stray from that heart or forget one piece of it (as Superman Returns forgot Clark Kent) and your film doesn’t work and doesn’t hit emotionally.

You really need to stop claiming everyone who posts something other than what you prefer is somehow “wrong”. I find the idea that you think more people are showing up for the love story rather incredible. I’ve seen no evidence whatsoever to suggest people are there for the Lois romance.

[DochaDocha]

Do we really KNOW what works specifically for Superman and what brings in wide audiences today? When was the last time a Superman film was a blockbuster smash hit, or a TV show was a ratings monster? I'd in fact argue that because we DON'T know the exact formula for Superman, we're stuck with a lot of throwing stuff against the wall and seeing what will stick, and nothing in the last 40 years really nailed it. We all know (or have an idea) of what we like, but I can't say we know what would be a massive box office Superman movie, beyond theorycrafting, before we actually see it happen. Maybe you can piece together elements and commonalities between successful superhero movies, and avoid the trends in unsuccessful movies, and figure out what to do and what not to do, but that's all on the theoretical level. Sadly, the answer might be very simple: Superman, as we know and love him, might not be a big box office draw. I hope not, but at this point I don't discount the possibility.

[Vordan]

Do we really KNOW what works specifically for Superman and what brings in wide audiences today? When was the last time a Superman film was a blockbuster smash hit, or a TV show was a ratings monster? I'd in fact argue that because we DON'T know the exact formula for Superman, we're stuck with a lot of throwing stuff against the wall and seeing what will stick, and nothing in the last 40 years really nailed it. We all know (or have an idea) of what we like, but I can't say we know what would be a massive box office Superman movie, beyond theorycrafting, before we actually see it happen. Maybe you can piece together elements and commonalities between successful superhero movies, and avoid the trends in unsuccessful movies, and figure out what to do and what not to do, but that's all on the theoretical level. Sadly, the answer might be very simple: Superman, as we know and love him, might not be a big box office draw. I hope not, but at this point I don't discount the possibility.

Well there’s the fact that Justice League made less than Man of Steel. You can claim people don’t care about Superman anymore, I’d disagree, but if we’re going down that route what’s the take away from Justice League, a movie that positioned Batman and WW as the leaders with Superman nowhere to be found, doing even worse critically and commercially? Do people not care about DC anymore? Or do people not care about Zack Snyder’s versions of these characters. I have no trouble believing people don’t care about Cavill’s Superman, it’s why I prefer a reboot so we can ditch Snyder’s baggage. But if Superman was the problem JL should not have been selling less tickets during its prerelease than BvS did.

[DochaDocha]

Well there’s the fact that Justice League made less than Man of Steel. You can claim people don’t care about Superman anymore, I’d disagree, but if we’re going down that route what’s the take away from Justice League, a movie that positioned Batman and WW as the leaders with Superman nowhere to be found, doing even worse critically and commercially? Do people not care about DC anymore? Or do people not care about Zack Snyder’s versions of these characters. I have no trouble believing people don’t care about Cavill’s Superman, it’s why I prefer a reboot so we can ditch Snyder’s baggage. But if Superman was the problem JL should not have been selling less tickets during its prerelease than BvS did.

I'm actually somewhat glad to see that JL was a commercial flop, but I fear that someone in WB is thinking the reason it didn't do well was because it didn't feature Batman more... But I would guess that JL did terribly because people soured on BvS and Snyder's vision in general, the commercials and trailer look crappy and overall the marketing wasn't good, it got bad word-of-mouth, and maybe moviegoers in general just look at DC heroes as discount, wannabe Avengers (something that makes my inner fanboy weep). Oh yeah, and the movie wasn't good enough (at all?) to generate buzz post-debut.

I've argued before that Superman is the superhero that seems most weighed down by (unreasonable) expectations. You can't move the needle without making changes, but then when you make the changes then you lose a lot of the core audience. And the fact that there are so many superhero movies these days, many of which, if not all, heavily borrowing concepts from classic Superman, that it's hard for Superman to stay relevant and distinctive. I'll always like Superman, or at least I'll like the concept of the character, but I do wonder if we've already seen the last megahit Superman movie.

[Doctor Know]

Do we really KNOW what works specifically for Superman and what brings in wide audiences today? When was the last time a Superman film was a blockbuster smash hit, or a TV show was a ratings monster? I'd in fact argue that because we DON'T know the exact formula for Superman, we're stuck with a lot of throwing stuff against the wall and seeing what will stick, and nothing in the last 40 years really nailed it. We all know (or have an idea) of what we like, but I can't say we know what would be a massive box office Superman movie, beyond theorycrafting, before we actually see it happen. Maybe you can piece together elements and commonalities between successful superhero movies, and avoid the trends in unsuccessful movies, and figure out what to do and what not to do, but that's all on the theoretical level. Sadly, the answer might be very simple: Superman, as we know and love him, might not be a big box office draw. I hope not, but at this point I don't discount the possibility.

That's an excellent point. You've articulated my thoughts.

With my approach, I look at the characters who got their start or a helping hand from Supes to launch. The New Gods, Black Lightning, Vixen, Dr. Light, Steel, Atom, Nightwing, etc. And I look at how the MCU used low-teir Avengers to bolster the ranks of their movies for their main stay Avengers. Notably, Thor (Valkyrie, Hulk, who is never getting another solo movie), Captain America (Black Widow, Falcon, Bucky, Ant-Man) and Iron Man (Vision, Spider-Man, War Machine). The same thing could work for Supes on film, as it worked for him in the comics and the MCU properties. The Phase 2 and 3 films of Marvel brought variety with their minor Avenger characters. It made the action scenes more creative and engaging. Supes could use that going up against Darkseid, Brainaic or any other big hitter yet to be introduced. New personalities, powers and resources is what gets the audience intrigued and scores those rewatch dollars at the BO.

Well there’s the fact that Justice League made less than Man of Steel. You can claim people don’t care about Superman anymore, I’d disagree, but if we’re going down that route what’s the take away from Justice League, a movie that positioned Batman and WW as the leaders with Superman nowhere to be found, doing even worse critically and commercially? Do people not care about DC anymore? Or do people not care about Zack Snyder’s versions of these characters. I have no trouble believing people don’t care about Cavill’s Superman, it’s why I prefer a reboot so we can ditch Snyder’s baggage. But if Superman was the problem JL should not have been selling less tickets during its prerelease than BvS did.

I think people want more Superman. The marketing didn't push him, but instead pushed WW as the face of the League. Reviews all said Supes' parts were the best part of the movie. The behind the scenes drama and WB forcing the movie to hit their bonuses for the quarter, helped to sabotage the film.

I'm actually somewhat glad to see that JL was a commercial flop, but I fear that someone in WB is thinking the reason it didn't do well was because it didn't feature Batman more... But I would guess that JL did terribly because people soured on BvS and Snyder's vision in general, the commercials and trailer look crappy and overall the marketing wasn't good, it got bad word-of-mouth, and maybe moviegoers in general just look at DC heroes as discount, wannabe Avengers (something that makes my inner fanboy weep). Oh yeah, and the movie wasn't good enough (at all?) to generate buzz post-debut.

I've argued before that Superman is the superhero that seems most weighed down by (unreasonable) expectations. You can't move the needle without making changes, but then when you make the changes then you lose a lot of the core audience. And the fact that there are so many superhero movies these days, many of which, if not all, heavily borrowing concepts from classic Superman, that it's hard for Superman to stay relevant and distinctive. I'll always like Superman, or at least I'll like the concept of the character, but I do wonder if we've already seen the last megahit Superman movie.

JL fell into the same trap that TASM2 fell into. In a year filled with superhero movies, all the air in the room had been sucked up by other IPs. Everyone knew JL was coming but there was no hype for it. Like TASM2, JL failed to meet expectations. It one of those situations where if JL/TASM2 had come out 10 years ago, as is, it would've been fine. But now, it just wasn't competitive enough.

[Vordan]

I'm actually somewhat glad to see that JL was a commercial flop, but I fear that someone in WB is thinking the reason it didn't do well was because it didn't feature Batman more... But I would guess that JL did terribly because people soured on BvS and Snyder's vision in general, the commercials and trailer look crappy and overall the marketing wasn't good, it got bad word-of-mouth, and maybe moviegoers in general just look at DC heroes as discount, wannabe Avengers (something that makes my inner fanboy weep). Oh yeah, and the movie wasn't good enough (at all?) to generate buzz post-debut.

I've argued before that Superman is the superhero that seems most weighed down by (unreasonable) expectations. You can't move the needle without making changes, but then when you make the changes then you lose a lot of the core audience. And the fact that there are so many superhero movies these days, many of which, if not all, heavily borrowing concepts from classic Superman, that it's hard for Superman to stay relevant and distinctive. I'll always like Superman, or at least I'll like the concept of the character, but I do wonder if we've already seen the last megahit Superman movie.

I don’t know how it could’ve possibly featured Batman more lol. He was the main character, the founder of the League, he WAS the protagonist. WW was his love interest, Aquaman, Flash, and Cyborg were his sidekicks, and Superman was a plot device. I think as dumb as WB is they knew there wasn’t a hope in hell of JL doing well after BvS.

[Yoda]

You really need to stop claiming everyone who posts something other than what you prefer is somehow “wrong”. I find the idea that you think more people are showing up for the love story rather incredible. I’ve seen no evidence whatsoever to suggest people are there for the Lois romance.

The audience scores and numbers for Aquaman would be solid evidence that not including those elements would be a good way to cut off a significant avenue for success.

https://deadline.com/2018/12/aquaman...er-1202525963/

When it came to Warners attracting women to Aquaman, it was all about the hunk factor in leading man Jason Momoa, not to mention selling the maternal and romance storylines of Nicole Kidman’s Atlanna character.

Warners’ marketing plan worked: Aquaman grossed $105.7M over the five-day holiday (including previews), winning females over in a big way with F25+ giving the DC superhero pic its best gender score of 84% on ComScore/Screen Engine’s PostTrak plus its best definite recommend of any gender demo at 71%. Moms turned out in greater numbers than Dads, 56% to 44% and enjoyed Aquaman more, 91% to 85%. Women also graded Aquaman with an A- CinemaScore, a number that was equal to men.

Warners noticed early on in test screenings that the James Wan-directed feature played well with women who gave the pic a 90% score in the top two boxes. And even though the studio was building a four-quad event for the holiday season, completely sold on its own merits as a standalone DC film, the Warners marketing team led by Blair Rich, took a talent-led approach with Aquaman, leveraging Momoa as well as Kidman and star Amber Heard, who respectively play the two strong female characters at the heart of the film.

And look at Wonder Woman. The general consensus was that the movie's weakest portion was the end - the generic action set piece. While the first two thirds - which focus on Diana and Steve (an inverted romantic subplot) as it's strongest. Marvels movies also don't shy away from the romantic subplots - Peggy & Steve and Tony & Pepper are two the better received ones. While the GotG romance angle actually was a major plot point in Infinity War. Ant-Man & Wasp are heist movies, but they have a really central romantic subplot as well.

CGI action scifi movies are a dime a dozen. Superman, particularly mass media Superman, has always had a strong women fanbase. The Donner movies were very much romantic in nature and are considered the gold standard for Superman movies. There's 14 years of Superman live action TV shows that also kinda support that idea. And the CW shows all have soap elements and pretty strong women fanbases as well. I think there's more evidence for the romantic elements of Superman being integral to the formula for a successful Superman movie than turning it into some CGI scifi fest. It has this stuff built into the mythos so much so that it's part of the general public consciousness associated with the character.

Use Morrison's Action run as a loose template, but amp up the romance subplot with Clark & Lois being rivals and cast some young actors and actresses that have ridiculous chemistry and just print the money. Or honestly, get Henry Golding and Constance Wu as Lois & Clark.

[Vordan]

Well you brought the stats so maybe I WAS wrong. Curious to think about romance being such a key part of superhero movies though. But that could explain why the DCEU Superman suffered given that one of the main criticisms was always that Cavill and Adams had no chemistry together. And the Nolan Batman movies romances were all terrible, the villains and Bale carried those movies. So I can buy that maybe the romance is a stronger component to a Superheroes movie success than I initially thought but I still don’t think it’s the main factor, nor do I think women would be up in arms if Clark dated someone else before ending up with Lois.

(Do people really care about Pepper and Tony?)

[DochaDocha]

I don’t know how it could’ve possibly featured Batman more lol. He was the main character, the founder of the League, he WAS the protagonist. WW was his love interest, Aquaman, Flash, and Cyborg were his sidekicks, and Superman was a plot device. I think as dumb as WB is they knew there wasn’t a hope in hell of JL doing well after BvS.

Yeah, I think that's why the marketing sucked. They saw the movie was a loser and weren't going to polish a turd.

As for the Batman bit, don't challenge the WB guys. Like Liefeld tweeted, "Thank God [DC has] Batman to act as their Tylenol, Asprin, laughing gas... 'more Batman will fix it!'" Whereas many of us figured that 43 lines of dialogue was not enough for Superman in BvS, some suit at WB probably thought the movie had too much Superman and not enough Batman.

[SiegePerilous02]

An installment in a Superman film series can get by without Lois or him having another ship tease. There are plenty of Superman stories you can tell where Lois doesn't need to appear or lack romance entirely.

However, I do not think it would be wise to do without Lois in some capacity in at least the first of the new films. And not featuring her at all in a new film continuity is an idea that should never even be suggested. Tell a Ragnarok-type story with Superman and away from his usual cast for at least one story, but don't do a whole film series that way.

[DochaDocha]

An installment in a Superman film series can get by without Lois or him having another ship tease. There are plenty of Superman stories you can tell where Lois doesn't need to appear or lack romance entirely.

However, I do not think it would be wise to do without Lois in some capacity in at least the first of the new films. And not featuring her at all in a new film continuity is an idea that should never even be suggested. Tell a Ragnarok-type story with Superman and away from his usual cast for at least one story, but don't do a whole film series that way.

Which is what I was suggesting. He would know her professionally, and then personally, and then even more intimately. Just don't rush it like MoS.

[Yoda]

Well you brought the stats so maybe I WAS wrong. Curious to think about romance being such a key part of superhero movies though. But that could explain why the DCEU Superman suffered given that one of the main criticisms was always that Cavill and Adams had no chemistry together. And the Nolan Batman movies romances were all terrible, the villains and Bale carried those movies. So I can buy that maybe the romance is a stronger component to a Superheroes movie success than I initially thought but I still don’t think it’s the main factor, nor do I think women would be up in arms if Clark dated someone else before ending up with Lois.

(Do people really care about Pepper and Tony?)

I think generally, Pepper and Tony were pretty popular. I think Peggy & Steve were probably more popular, but Pepper Potts appears to have been a pretty well liked character. MCU has no qualms about cutting unpopular characters or plots out. If they weren't I doubt they'd have included her all the way through. RDJ actually pushed for the more from them, including the kid, per Bendis.

I say go full on action/romance myself. I think the romantic arc of Superman is kinda a coming of age type thing. Lana was his hometown high school girlfriend. He has to grow beyond that in his character arc. Plus, as soon as Lois shows up it becomes a "when" not "if" they are going to get together. That romantic tension is part of it. Having a fourth party (to Clark, Lois, and Superman) kinda seems weird given the context of the characters. Spider-Man kinda did that with Liz and MJ. You knew the MJ romance was coming, so we also knew the Liz thing was going nowhere even without the Vulture reveal. You're going to run into the same thing with Clark, whoever, and Lois.

[DochaDocha]

I don't think people were strongly invested in Pepper and Tony in 2008, but by 2019 they were staples of the MCU that people were going to miss her if Tony "moved on," which seemed like a possibility in 2016.

If Pepper isn't popular, it might just be because somehow people seem to dislike Gwyneth Paltrow, in general.

[Gaelforce]

Well there’s the fact that Justice League made less than Man of Steel. You can claim people don’t care about Superman anymore, I’d disagree, but if we’re going down that route what’s the take away from Justice League, a movie that positioned Batman and WW as the leaders with Superman nowhere to be found, doing even worse critically and commercially? Do people not care about DC anymore? Or do people not care about Zack Snyder’s versions of these characters. I have no trouble believing people don’t care about Cavill’s Superman, it’s why I prefer a reboot so we can ditch Snyder’s baggage. But if Superman was the problem JL should not have been selling less tickets during its prerelease than BvS did.

There's a reason I didn't go to see JL a second time (or more) in the theater, and no, it's not that Batman and/or Wonder Woman were the leaders.

I didn't go to see it again because that portrayal of Superman completely ruined the movie for me. I watch it at home now when it rolls around on TV and just stop watching as soon as Superman shows up.

Keep in mind, I love Superman, and I loved the Trinity battle at the end of BvS.

JL was billed as a sequel to BvS, btw, and, like Avengers vs Age of Ultron, the sequel dipped significantly. It still had the Big Three as well as a famous baddie, but still took about a hundred million dollar dip from the first film.

I also heard a lot of complaints about the Flash (compared to the TV version), Cyborg (people didn't know who he was) and Aquaman being a frat boy.

Pretty much all of my friends who saw JL had similar issues, so for a number of us (I can't say most/some/majority) it wasn't that Superman didn't lead the JL, it was that he trashed the JL.

[And please don't turn this into a JL thread I'm just pointing out that the claim that Superman's absence from JL was the reason it didn't do as well is not the reason that I and a number of other people didn't go to multiple viewings as we do with most superhero films]