Zack Snyder's JUSTICE LEAGUE on HBOmax in 2021!

[Alan2099]

The writers and directors control the logic of a movie. It's every bit as easy to say "Superman came up with evidence and everybody believed it," as it is to say "Superman came up with evidence and nobody believed it." One is no more realistic than the other.

[Steel Inquisitor]

I'll explain how the bullets 'matter'. Yes it is obvious Superman does not use bullets and they are a dead give away but that is only if the course of events flows thus
Man killed with gun>body doused with fuel and burnt>made to look like heat vision burns

This is how most people read the film which is easily proved by forensics the bodies have bullet holes and smell of fuel so it cannot be Superman

Now follow my scenario done in reverse
Supposedly Superman uses heat vision> the 'dead' doused with fuel and burnt>shot with guns.Absolutely same result BUT in the second scenario it is presumed as a cover up.Superman apparently killed the men with heat vision,the gasoline is added instead to make it look like they were set on fire by men and the bullets are shot to make it look like they were shot.In the second scenario it appears like Superman killed them and someone came in to make it look like men killed them.That someone are his special 'handlers' that are shadowy enough that even regular CIA have no clearance to know of this except on need to know or with the clearance

Except Superman's heat vision shouldn't be the same as gasoline + fire. In the movies the sort of heat, the shape of it, the components of it wouldn't be easily copied. He's not using a flame thrower. In-universe they'd be scientists writing papers on it and testing and examining anything he hits with it to know how it works. there would be no evidence of heat vision, just people shot and burnt.

Key words here

That someone are his special 'handlers' that are shadowy enough that even regular CIA have no clearance to know of this except on need to know or with the clearance

All they need to do is find the people who know how to find them. The CIA witness is a big key to doing this. As would be any people high enough with clearance in the CIA, and the mercenaries - the latter which are easier to find.

Forensics can still prove he did not kill them for sure no doubt BUT the whole idea that a cover up was done is where the problem is.Once the witness who was told not to rescue and sees Superman fly there he himself is first to assume the second scenario as a cover up and if he suspects a cover up and leaks this narrative ,no matter what evidence is presented as proof 'Cover-up' becomes the word that gains traction and then snowballs into a conspiracy theory

They're going to need more than conspiracy theories to bring Superman down, though. That activates a portion of the world population, but that's not something which will make the government arrest him. Since the witness knows about the cover up, and this his own bosses are in on it why doesn't he try to contact Superman, the press or other authorities? This is such a strange tactic to hurt Superman.

My point is conspiracy theories no matter how outlandish or false have incredible resilience, they cannot be snuffed out with facts because everything about such conspiracy theories thrives on mistrust,lies peddled as truth and so on.Put another way is it improbable that Superman could be a government weapon?Absolutely,but is it plausible that the government would want to use him as a weapon? Solid bet

Do I make sense? Do you see the danger here?

Sure, but it's hardly unbeatable for Superman to debunk. And only works if Superman is the stereotype that he's more brawn than brains when he's both. He's supposed to be an intelligent, charismatic and well connected individual, not a brooding loner who can't figure out how the CIA works. He also has Lois, who'd either have experience interacting with the CIA or know contacts who do.

Edit: Another thing is that the conspiracy won't grasp the imagination of the western world since the west has a problematic attitude of ignoring peoples plight in other countries, especially Africa when something like that hit harder if it was in America or the UK. If they're going to hurt him they need to make it as big as possible, and Superman betraying America by murdering innocent people is going to have larger affect on the populace than looking like he's a government operative, and they can manage the latter without killing people.

[Rev9]

'They're going to need more than conspiracy theories to bring Superman down, though. That activates a portion of the world population, but that's not something which will make the government arrest him.'

From the very beginning it is clear that Lex would have preferred Superman gone (self exile) or dead. There's nothing about arrest.He cannot be arrested that's the point.My whole argument is his reputation takes a hit.I'm not saying he is disgraced to the point that he can't be a hero.If you notice I never said the evidence that is fake will not be scrutinised and the truth revealed.What I did say was it would fracture the world, some would believe him and exonerate him in their eyes,others who do not trust him already would tip over to believing the conspiracy theory. The movie didn't even go down the route I'm showing you...the whole 'cover up' witness doubting is there to see as a possible story narrative,BUT they did not focus on it.Just like they did not focus on your idea of Clark defending himself by investigating the bullet with Lois(the film story tellers saw Lois would suffice to investigate as would Kahina's story not being fake in the theatrical cut,and being fake but her being killed in ultimate cut)

In either film you see people in government first ask should he intervene in international borders unsanctioned and America gets the blame?..Later after the bombing,the media beginning to ask questions ,why didn't he stop the bomb...one reporter or new caster said something like 'is he responsible?' So you can see even with the story in film people are already aligning their thinking along specific narratives.So all this means is he himself is safe as a person but his reputation is suffering,that is what the movie shows and it's just sincere reflection of humanity.This narrative would not bring him down definitely but it would hurt his reputation, especially because in conspiracy theories, the burden is never the proof,the proof can be true and real but it is upon the doubter or believer in the theory to accept the truth and let go of the 'theory'

I agree with you in principle on the edit but to me the conspiracy narrative actually compounds the problem.In the real world we already see war crimes or wars outside America didn't really bother Americans up till 9/11,neither did interventionism.From Korea to Vietnam pretext was communism threat, post Sept 11, it was Islamic threat, so the film shows you pretty much America being America sure with Superman the image of international policing is more conspicuous and perhaps the government doesn't want the bad PR and embarrassment of dealing with international and national outcry but it is the same old dance in new clothes. What is different with my plot point is now government appears to be weaponising a hero, that is a mere step away from the knightmare dictatorship.Instead of Darkseid we have the government playing the role -for a democracy like USA that hits a real sore spot

Edit

'It is possible to retell the movie using my angle,instead of Kahina the CIA agent testifies, an investigation by Lois is launched,she follows the trail to Nairomi, tells Swanwick exactly what you surmise as she finds bullets with blood which when examined by her lab technical expert ,tells her blood from a burnt corpse on a bullet would show different traces than a body killed by the bullet.Conclusion,it's an elaborate set up the victims were shot.She asks Swanwick to come forward, with her findings, he says there has to be more proof as that is not enough.

Lex meets up with the CIA or black operations head who wants to find if a whole army of supers could be created using Kryptonian tech using Lexcorp,because Finch in government is not giving him room to allow his department to do this as a national initiative.He feels private contractors could do so without government interference especially if she is taken off the board. Lex is ok with being given access but doesn't reveal his intent to the black ops head that he wants Superman dead.

Superman is summoned to court with the CIA witness in attendance as is Keith who wants to speak as well.The bomb kills Finch,witness and Keith.

Meanwhile Batman investigates Lex ,steals the Kryptonite,Martha is kidnapped by Lex and Superman is made to fight Batman,Batman and Superman now have their argument with Batman accusing Superman of being a weapon that will kill us all,Superman rejects the notion that he is a puppet or even part of government or would do anything of the sort.The Martha scene still happens Batman relents on seeing Superman's compassion for his mother;Batman goes to rescue the mother

Superman goes to confront Lex and the CIA black ops head at the ship.Lex has been duping the chief to say he is raising a Kryptonian soldier from Zod's body , that the prototype is almost ready .Doomsday is born kills the government boss,but Superman intervenes preventing Doomsday from killing Lex too

The rest of the movie goes as initially planned, meanwhile Lois gets a call from Swanwick that he has accessed spy satellite footage and recording of Nairomi proving that Superman did not kill the men,they were killed by Lex's mercenaries running off the books black ops for CIA

Everything else happens as before with Superman dying and Lex arrested after reaching out to Darkseid

I guess the only difference is the real movie did not paint US government in a bad light,this version does.Plus it would definitely have to be a 3hr movie in cinemas

[lowfyr]

Bruce Timm does not do live action movies. Besides, Batman is in safe hands with Matt Reeves.

But what would speak against him doing live action? Seeing that he did one of the best versions of Superman for example I would really like to know.

[Amadeus Arkham]

But what would speak against him doing live action? Seeing that he did one of the best versions of Superman for example I would really like to know.

Isn’t the DCAU Superman pretty polarizing amongst fans, though? I’ve honestly lost count the amount of times I’ve seen fans accuse Timm of ‘not getting Superman’ which is kind of funny considering that’s just about the same criticism Snyder’s detractors have lobbied against him because of how he did his version of Superman, lol.

DCAU Superman was like your ultra uptight stick-in-the-mud dad so I find he doesn’t have the warmth and joy of other incarnations.

[SiegePerilous02]

No Bruce Timm please.

[Amadeus Arkham]

New Zack Snyder interview with Grace Randolph.

[WebLurker]

New Zack Snyder interview with Grace Randolph.

Wish that this hadn't gotten mixed up with the Fandom Menace.

[ComicJunkie21]

He seems like such a nice guy from the video and it does suck what happened to him with WB interfering. Also, this makes me want to rewatch man of steel and BvS (ultimate edition of course) and look at the movies from the perspective in the video because it does sound like he gets Superman and comics in general.

It also sounds like WB was the one chasing a full blown cinematic universe similar to Marvel's and he was just creating a cinematic mini run, which does fit DC better because of the multiverse aspect.

With the success of Marvel so many people (execs, media, and fans) were pushing the marvel model on his films and comparing them against something that they weren't meant to be. Kind of sucks and I am sympathetic towards him for that, now that I understand his perspective a bit more. That's also may be why many of the actors, directors, and producers fought for him because they understood what happened.

[WebLurker]

He seems like such a nice guy from the video and it does suck what happened to him with WB interfering. Also, this makes me want to rewatch man of steel and BvS (ultimate edition of course) and look at the movies from the perspective in the video because it does sound like he gets Superman and comics in general.

It also sounds like WB was the one chasing a full blown cinematic universe similar to Marvel's and he was just creating a cinematic mini run, which does fit DC better because of the multiverse aspect.

With the success of Marvel so many people (execs, media, and fans) were pushing the marvel model on his films and comparing them against something that they weren't meant to be. Kind of sucks and I am sympathetic towards him for that, now that I understand his perspective a bit more. That's also may be why many of the actors, directors, and producers fought for him because they understood what happened.

While I'm skeptical of Snyder's vision, I will certainly agree that WB wanting make a cinematic universe and not taking the time to set things up and build up made things worse.

[Powerboy]

New Zack Snyder interview with Grace Randolph.

Definitely seems like a very nice guy. He can get irritated but who can't?

Some things I always thought were clear. He doesn't see his Superman as evil and he's right. He's Superman in a realistic world but trying to be the best he can be.

He doesn't say anything negative about Joss Whedon, albeit the host doesn't bring it up.

Interesting that he hasn't seen the theatrically released version of "Justice League" though I can see why he wouldn't want to since it's not his vision though he implies he has seen "Aquaman" and will see "Wonder Woman 1984".

I have no idea if I will like it or not but it will be interesting to see a version of JL that is a natural continuation of and conclusion of what MoS and B v S led up to. Although I liked JL on an emotional level, this version almost has to be a better version artistically.

[Rev9]

Definitely seems like a very nice guy. He can get irritated but who can't?

Some things I always thought were clear. He doesn't see his Superman as evil and he's right. He's Superman in a realistic world but trying to be the best he can be.

He doesn't say anything negative about Joss Whedon, albeit the host doesn't bring it up.

Interesting that he hasn't seen the theatrically released version of "Justice League" though I can see why he wouldn't want to since it's not his vision though he implies he has seen "Aquaman" and will see "Wonder Woman 1984".

I have no idea if I will like it or not but it will be interesting to see a version of JL that is a natural continuation of and conclusion of what MoS and B v S led up to. Although I liked JL on an emotional level, this version almost has to be a better version artistically.

Yeah I think he didn't see it on principle ,that it is not his true vision,but I think he knows the contours of the story as I'm almost certain he read the redacted script of what was taken out of his own script and what was left in for Whedon to edit.

[GozertheGozarian]

Superman in a realistic world is unrealistic.

[Powerboy]

Superman in a realistic world is unrealistic.

By that standard, it's pointless to do anything involving superheroes with any character or cultural realism because- super powers therefore throw every aspect of reality out.

[GozertheGozarian]

By that standard, it's pointless to do anything involving superheroes with any character or cultural realism because- super powers therefore throw every aspect of reality out.

We've seen how well it works trying to do 'grounded in reality' stories with Batman and Superman.