Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 184
  1. #61
    Mighty Member Electricmastro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    You are not understanding the problem, here. What you term as "classic" ain't the original. What i believe he wants is more of the goldenage take on the character. Golden age superman is fun, even to this day. Morrison's take on tshirt and jeans superman was great modern interpretation of the goldenage supes, who was the "champion of the oppressed".what you term as classic superman isn't @SiegePerilous02 's superman take.
    Goldenage superman did bully those who let their power corrupt them. And before "superman" was a hero or a superhero. He was a vigilante strongman.

    His opinion are as valid as yours. He wants a superman that is more golden age in attitude. And in action,He is more like

    This is all might. The symbol of peace. Golden age superman action scenes should be like this.Getting upperhand on batman is besides the point."classic" version doesn't satisfy his tastes. Wanting captain america to punch hitler is reasonable in my opinion. So, saying his prefered version of superman(new52) is too edgy to be "superman" when the original take on "superman" is the above, will make you wrong.i know characters evolve and all. But, golden age superman will always be siegel and shuster's superman. And should be regarded as such. So, Morrison's tribute in New52 should have been given more due in my opinion.
    Also, a Batman that has rules, but at times ignores them in favor of justice.


  2. #62
    ...of the Black Priests Midnight_v's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    875

    Default

    Jesus, man... I've awoken the super hive.
    ...
    Okay so.. The 90's actually happened. And I feel like the the great change that mad him "dad" was there.

    In that Era... kingdom come,
    and
    Whatever happened to truth, jusitce, and the American way
    were essentially the best super man tales that are examples of this.
    1. Being superman vs cable...(and the 90s really)
    And
    2. Being superman vs the authority.

    By "Dad" what I meant was something closer to "Patriarch"

    He sets the rules for all the heroes. He's "the nail"

    But most of all he personally is more powerful than all the other heroes in a way that cap is NOT...

    Cap... "shares" power with Tony and Thor.
    There's no speech about the warrior-born NOT killing, drinking... whatever. When he throws the Hammer thats it.
    And I mean Tony... the Illuminati... Caps not "Dad"
    When hes not leading the avengers hes out killing terrorists (i.e. espionage/military shock troop)is his gig.

    He doesn't run ANY of the Mutant affairs.
    Cap doesn't have a secret Identity! Much less Lois Lane etc...

    So basically the "what about cap" thing is way off.

    Bats is mostly only Dad to the bat people... and he generally lacks the power be such... in paper
    My priority is enjoying and supporting stories of timeless heroism and conflict.
    Everything else is irrelevant.

  3. #63
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeeguy91 View Post
    I'd say overly angsty is anyone who is looking for an excuse to fight with the world. That is something New 52 Supes did multiple times.
    He's ready to fight the corrupt. And more importantly help people. Often with a smile on his face and people rallying behind him.


    Quote Originally Posted by Zeeguy91 View Post
    It was mostly the fact that he just overly aggressive in general. Heck, the entire JL Origin arc is just him punching things, and attacking random strangers on first sight. The point is, I could never imagine New 52 Superman taking the reigns of the superhero community and being a figure of leadership. He acted more like Namor than classic Superman.
    That is, as usual, Geoff Johns not doing that great with the Trinity characters regardless of what is going in their own books. He doesn't need the excuse of a new universe or origin to dio it, he did it pre-Flashpoint as well. Look at how Diana treats Cassie and Kon in his TT run, vs. how Rucka does in his WW run. It's two completely different people.
    Compare it to the scene later in the Morrison run where he is meeting with the League, is having a discussion but being civil, and asking any of them they want to adopt some hamsters.

    What a miserable SOB he is in that scene, huh?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeeguy91 View Post
    Burton's and Nolan's versions weren't really that different.
    Nolan's Batman tried to adhere to a no-kill code and saved the Joker.
    Burton's Batman killed the Joker and then deliberately set a villainous circus man on fire. And then stuffed dynamite down another's pants.

    C'mon. The differences between the Supermen are nowhere near that extreme and you know it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeeguy91 View Post
    Again, Pre-Flashpoint Superman was the Superman who was deemed an enemy of the state for defying Luthor while he was President and renounced his U.S. citizenship when he felt he should stand for more than just U.S. interests. He didn't just blindly follow authority. He wasn't some vanilla, one-note patriot just like MCU Cap was not a one-note patriot. So, the question stands: why would bringing THAT Superman to the screen be against the characters' long-term interests???
    Nothing wrong with bringing that stuff to screen. I don't think that's the perception people already have of Superman though if we're talking "Truth, Justice and the American Way."
    If anything, that is moving away from what Byrne established and back towards the character's roots. More of that, but other shake ups are needed. It doesn't even have to be anything discussed here, but we need to remind people he's still relevant and can do other things besides rehash what was done with Reeve.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeeguy91 View Post
    I'd say he's probably the one most people are familiar with.
    Doubtful, it's not like the pre-vs.-post crisis divide is some new thing. And wider audiences haven't really been given an opportunity to know anything else, despite being able to with Batman.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeeguy91 View Post
    And Superman can touch on his narrative of being the ultimate immigrant...without being the "edgy" and morose guy we've seen in the DCEU or New 52 comics. I mean, he really had to go to a priest to ask whether or not humanity was worth saving.

    The point is that the New 52 and the DCEU took the wrong track with Superman. They made him more alien than human, constantly viewing himself as the outsider and not trusting humans. That's the thing: Clark doesn't see himself as an outsider. He sees himself as part of the human race and has adopted Earth as his home. He protects Earth because he loves Earth. Its his home. He grew up here. That was a fundamental misstep that DC made when they made the New 52 the template for their movies. People don't really want to root for a guy who needs convincing that they're worth saving.
    Don't equate the New 52 and the DCEU as the same takes. At no point did Morrison's Clark ever need to consult a priest or need to be convinced the world needed saving. He was not mororse or angsty. You are describing things that are nowhere on the page, which makes your argument very unconvincing.

    The DCEU take didn't work, but even then, despite how divisive and flawed MOS was, it was successful for what it was. They didn't use the New 52 as a template at all. Nobody who has watched/read both and understood them would say that. A film based on the New 52 wouldn't be a rehash of what Snyder did, you have no idea if it would succeed or fail based on how that did. The only similarity between them is that they do not conform to what YOU think Superman should be.

  4. #64
    ...of the Black Priests Midnight_v's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    875

    Default

    Thing is hes an all powerful force for
    good.
    DC knows how this character works.

    Problem is there are too many versions of him.
    So many versions stretched about so many generations
    and media forms... in a way the Tulpa of him has been affected.
    Hes a lot of things to people. No one really agreeing what's best.
    My priority is enjoying and supporting stories of timeless heroism and conflict.
    Everything else is irrelevant.

  5. #65
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,648

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    I don't think they understand wally either, seeing as hic exists. For some wierd reasons they just want barry to act like wally. Then why did they decide to return barry allen. And the only reason i heard snyder writes barry as wally is because wally was his flash. The one he is familiar with.
    From what I hear, the artist on Flash Rebirth (EVS) had been badgering DC about bringing Barry back for a while. And he finally brought an idea to Didio that Didio liked, and with GL Rebirth a fresh success (and Wally's book suffering from creator burnout) they decided it was time to get Barry back in the game. And I'm not sure if DC doesn't have a handle on Wally's character so much as they don't know how he fits into things now that Barry's back (they *do* give Barry a lot of Wally-isms, so I think they must get Wally, otherwise they'd screw even that up yknow?). That's why he getting this HiC stuff; not because DC doesn't get his character so much as they just view his character as semi-partially the de-facto Flash personality and have somehow forgotten how to handle two speedsters. Or perhaps they still fear Wally's popularity will be detrimental to the business (splitting sales) so they're trying to figure out how to use him in a diminished capacity that'll still turn a profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Midnight_v View Post
    I also think there's a bit of a problem with superman and his universal appeal... and How he seems to comic readers who aren't 30+... He's just not their hero.

    There's no more evolution to be had with this guy. He's Dad. He's dad and ... he's there to tell everyone that they're wrong, and that they need to be more like him.
    Or he'll spank you ... and believe me he can.

    He's not Saitama, nor Goku in appeal anymore and I often wrack my brain trying to figure that out but I boil it down to he's not that fun? Not sure. but d.c. has trouble bridging that gap.
    Hard disagree on that one. I think people's natural inclination is to like Superman. Show me a little kid who doesnt (Im sure there's some, Im speaking generally) People have to be given a reason to dislike him; it's learned behavior. And regretfully DC has given them plenty of reasons over the years.

    Also, I'm guessing you're not reading his current books. Galactic politics, organized crime, secret societies, genocide, there's a ton of crazy stuff happening in those books that's advancing the characters' overall narratives and also setting up stuff that could benefit and impact the entire DCU. There's plenty of gas left in the tank. DC just forgot how to drive.

    Meanwhile... this...

    Thats... kinda uncool.
    Ah, sorry man. Wasn't trying to be a d-bag or anything. Just making a comment about how this management team (and those before it, true) have failed to capitalize on characters like Cass and have struggled with achieving representation. They try, gods bless them, they really do and I appreciate the hell out of their effort, but let's be real, they come up short more often than not.

    I don't agree about, Grayson... I think the batman beyond is cartoon was a good comparative example of how it could easily be a thing, but Nitewing the brand really isn't bright and shiny even if his personality is.
    No, that's exactly my point. Nightwing's got the soul of a Super (personality) in the body of a Bat (skillset/powers, setting, general story tones). And the Bat office cannot figure the character out. Because he's not really a Bat. He's just living in a Bat world.

    No matter WHAT Nitewing does... he's partially owned by batman and so his successes are batmans successes.
    Oh absolutely. I say Dick's a Super, and his characterization is, but his home is still Gotham and his success reflects well on Bruce. I'm not disputing that, I'm saying that Dick, as a character (personality stuff), has more in common with people like Clark and Wally than he does Bruce, and that's why they cant get Nightwing to work; because DC only really gets Batman and seem confused by everyone else.

    They did seem really excited about Constantine, and I get it. He's a fun character. But also? He's basically kinda-sorta broad stroke British magic Batman.

    Period. Even his spin offs keep the lights on
    If DC gets a decent cut of the merchandise, I bet Harley keeps the lights on all by herself. (the heating bill, payroll, and everything else? Maybe not. But the lights? She got it covered!)
    Higher, Faster, Further....More.

    Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow!

    Bridge Four!

  6. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Midnight_v View Post
    Thing is hes an all powerful force for
    good.
    DC knows how this character works.

    Problem is there are too many versions of him.
    So many versions stretched about so many generations
    and media forms... in a way the Tulpa of him has been affected.
    Hes a lot of things to people. No one really agreeing what's best.
    Well, that isn't a weakness. That's his strength.As for standard version, In comics there are only three versions that matter as they are canon/influenced other takes. they are golden age, silverage guy and postcrisis superman. These three should be the basis of any superman in other media in my opinion. During the two thousands many of the silverage characteristics of silverage superman started returning and mixing with postcrisis version ala secret origins, birthright.. Etc. Creating blended superman. I have made post on the difference in takes. There is a constant in all the version's. Clark kent/kal l decides to help those weaker than himself. Those people(started by lois in post crisis ) decides to call him "superman" for doing so.there was never a specific motivation for it other than inherent altruism and upbringing.

    As for him, being really powerful guy that sets the rule. I never ever seen him set any rules for others. He sets rules for himself. He has expectations of the others. In 90s they really did have him throw tantrum because others didn't respond to the expectations. Which was an idiotic take.keep in mind, the "dad" take you are talking about is strictly post crisis thing. The other two was less interested what others should do. Clark the golden age was a "man of action". He rarely gave out "speeches". Silverage guy similar to allstar superman. your problem with the character is that he is a dead end. Saitama is on a journey to find someone to fight and to increase his ranking. Superman on the otherhand has achieved everything. He loved/respected by everyone and he is powerful. That isn't true at all. You are just seeing the end of arcs/stories also known as climax or happy endings of superman and believing the character to be that always. Superman isn't respected or loved by the people nor the most powerful when starting out.

    Bear in mind, this isn't can't be an either/or situation. The powerful thing is part of the characters gene. He was created by jewish creators to show a powerful guy doesn't necessarily exploit those weaker than him.

  7. #67
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    He's ready to fight the corrupt. And more importantly help people. Often with a smile on his face and people rallying behind him.




    That is, as usual, Geoff Johns not doing that great with the Trinity characters regardless of what is going in their own books. He doesn't need the excuse of a new universe or origin to dio it, he did it pre-Flashpoint as well. Look at how Diana treats Cassie and Kon in his TT run, vs. how Rucka does in his WW run. It's two completely different people.
    Compare it to the scene later in the Morrison run where he is meeting with the League, is having a discussion but being civil, and asking any of them they want to adopt some hamsters.

    What a miserable SOB he is in that scene, huh?



    Nolan's Batman tried to adhere to a no-kill code and saved the Joker.
    Burton's Batman killed the Joker and then deliberately set a villainous circus man on fire. And then stuffed dynamite down another's pants.

    C'mon. The differences between the Supermen are nowhere near that extreme and you know it.



    Nothing wrong with bringing that stuff to screen. I don't think that's the perception people already have of Superman though if we're talking "Truth, Justice and the American Way."
    If anything, that is moving away from what Byrne established and back towards the character's roots. More of that, but other shake ups are needed. It doesn't even have to be anything discussed here, but we need to remind people he's still relevant and can do other things besides rehash what was done with Reeve.



    Doubtful, it's not like the pre-vs.-post crisis divide is some new thing. And wider audiences haven't really been given an opportunity to know anything else, despite being able to with Batman.



    Don't equate the New 52 and the DCEU as the same takes. At no point did Morrison's Clark ever need to consult a priest or need to be convinced the world needed saving. He was not mororse or angsty. You are describing things that are nowhere on the page, which makes your argument very unconvincing.

    The DCEU take didn't work, but even then, despite how divisive and flawed MOS was, it was successful for what it was. They didn't use the New 52 as a template at all. Nobody who has watched/read both and understood them would say that. A film based on the New 52 wouldn't be a rehash of what Snyder did, you have no idea if it would succeed or fail based on how that did. The only similarity between them is that they do not conform to what YOU think Superman should be.
    Clark consulted a priest when he wasn't sure if Zod was a hostile threat or not. He didn't need convincing to save the world so much as he didn't know the world needed to be saved.

  8. #68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Clark consulted a priest when he wasn't sure if Zod was a hostile threat or not. He didn't need convincing to save the world so much as he didn't know the world needed to be saved.
    Regardless, zack's superman isn't based on golden age supes. It is based on amalgamation of postcrisis(man of steel byrne reboot) , for tomorrow , earth one, donner movie, couple of lines from allstar with alterations and maybe birthright (i say maybe because waid isn't a fan of zack's movie). Morrison's superman was based on the original guy. So, they are different characters altogether.He was a badass through and through. he is a bit aggressive. But, the smile on his will make good innocent people be relieved and make the corrupt fear.

  9. #69
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Clark consulted a priest when he wasn't sure if Zod was a hostile threat or not. He didn't need convincing to save the world so much as he didn't know the world needed to be saved.
    It's been a while since I watched that scene but I think there was some "learn to trust humanity" stuff in there as well. If there was I don't even think it was that bad.
    Regardless, it didn't come from the New 52. If anything, it came from the post-Crisis version.

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    Regardless, zack's superman isn't based on golden age supes. It is based on amalgamation of postcrisis(man of steel byrne reboot) , for tomorrow , earth one, donner movie, couple of lines from allstar with alterations and maybe birthright (i say maybe because waid isn't a fan of zack's movie). Morrison's superman was based on the original guy. So, they are different characters altogether.He was a badass through and through. he is a bit aggressive. But, the smile on his will make good innocent people be relieved and make the corrupt fear.
    Yeah, a lot of stuff from MOS has some similarities to post-Crisis. The priest scene, the lack of natural births on Krypton aside from Kal-El, the presence of characters like Emil Hamilton and Kelex, the lack of the Legion of Superheroes or any costumed adventures before adulthood, Lex Corp and the killing of Zod (also taken from Reeve) were inspired by Byrne/post-Crisis. If it was based on the New 52, Superman would be more sure of himself even before learning his origins, Krypto would have shown up in the Phantom Zone and the narrative wouldn't have Superman kill anyone, before we even get into the weirder stuff like the Legion, bottle cities and land ladies from the 5th dimension. So saying it was based on the New 52 doesn't even remotely hold up to scrutiny.

    The only two properties to be based mostly on the New 52 were Aquaman and Shazam, and they were fine. Wonder Woman had Zeus involved in her origin but was otherwise based on Perez, Marston, the tv show and doing it's own thing. Batman and Superman were based on TDKR and Byrne/post-Crisis, they just didn't do it in a way that connected with the larger audience, not because there is anything inherently wrong with basing them on those two takes (though I'd gladly move as far away from them as possible).

  10. #70
    Spectacular Member Batknight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Electricmastro View Post
    Also, a Batman that has rules, but at times ignores them in favor of justice.

    You mean that scene which got almost immediately reconnected because everyone realized how out of character it was? Not the best example of that. Batman wouldn't lock someone in a room and let them starve to death.

  11. #71
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    Regardless, zack's superman isn't based on golden age supes. It is based on amalgamation of postcrisis(man of steel byrne reboot) , for tomorrow , earth one, donner movie, couple of lines from allstar with alterations and maybe birthright (i say maybe because waid isn't a fan of zack's movie). Morrison's superman was based on the original guy. So, they are different characters altogether.He was a badass through and through. he is a bit aggressive. But, the smile on his will make good innocent people be relieved and make the corrupt fear.
    Completely irrelevant to my point.

  12. #72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Completely irrelevant to my point.
    Weren't you guys discussing whether new52 morrison's superman and dceu superman were similar?

  13. #73
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    Weren't you guys discussing whether new52 morrison's superman and dceu superman were similar?
    No, that was seige and zeeguy. I just responded to a part of seige's comment I disagreed with.

  14. #74
    Ultimate Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    16,434

    Default

    The only thing the DCEU Superman and the New 52 Superman had in common were that they existed in their respective formats around the same time. Siege already did the heavy lifting but he's spot on.
    Last edited by Sacred Knight; 09-21-2019 at 12:52 PM.
    "They can be a great people Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you. My only son." - Jor-El

    "Now why don't we step up here and everybody get stepped up, and let's get some stepped up personal space up in this place." - Phillip Jacobs

  15. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    No, that was seige and zeeguy. I just responded to a part of seige's comment I disagreed with.
    My bad then. A golden age supes would be cool to see on screen. Especially, if it looks like the Fleischer cartoons. I am frankly surprised, that someone who had a passion for animation like zack snyder didn't go for the golden age take. instead opted for the post crisis take and went the dbz route for action scenes .

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •