Page 3 of 21 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 315
  1. #31
    The Man Who Cannot Die manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9,485

    Default

    Superman being a controversial figure makes sense. It's part of goldenage stories. It better than the silverage or comicscode induced "ally of the law" nonsense.byrne just took it and ran with it by having clark denounce he is vigilante. It's entirely boring if superman's world embrace him with open arms.

  2. #32
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    15,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    Superman being a controversial figure makes sense. It's part of goldenage stories. It better than the silverage or comicscode induced "ally of the law" nonsense.byrne just took it and ran with it by having clark denounce he is vigilante. It's entirely boring if superman's world embrace him with open arms.
    I think it's more the execution of the ideas that left people cold, at least after BvS, than the ideas themselves.

    Like the New 52 t-shirt and jeans Superman was a controversial figure in-universe who was rejected at first, and he drew heavily from the Golden Age version. And had the epiphany that his wilder antics don't change things in the long run, but still held onto his convictions and the stories embraced everything that made him popular in the first place. I'd love for a well done movie based off of that. I think it would provide the necessary shake up of perceptions for Superman by going really old, but still embrace what he stands for.

    Wonder Woman also presented some dark elements, naturally since it was set during WWI, but Jenkins' take for her was embraced more than Snyder's takes on Superman and Batman. It's all in execution.

  3. #33
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    That's...kind of what I'm saying though? General audiences don't care about faithful adaptations if the film is good because they don't read comics, and even fanboys can concede when they like a change. Superman has a bigger hurdle when it comes to changes since he's such a big name with preconceived notions, BUT I also said the film drew from source material that the general audience didn't know about and that previous adaptations had put their own spin on things. This one wasn't fully embraced because it didn't have as much mass appeal.

    It's still a darker take on Superman than people are accustomed to, not necessarily just of himself but of the world he lives in. Saying it's less dark than Homelander (duh) doesn't magically mean it's comparatively darker takes on Superman and Batman than the mainstream are used to.
    Exactly. Some people just like to manipulate that argument to add credibility to their narrative or justify their own dislike. "Everyone rejected the take because it isn't faithful to the source material!" No, that's not how it works. Also, casual interest=/=quality. Or we can also make an argument how Transformers or F&F are better than Blade Runner 2049 or Fury Road. Also, why do we care about casuals so much? We are the involved fans, and we are the only ones that should matter. Casuals bring the numbers and the money, yeah, but it's our passion and involvement that makes it stay. The quality of your, or mine points, this is what important in these discussions, not how well did gimmick and marketing worked. Avatar was the most successful movie for a decade. Does anyone care about it? Between Iron Man and Avengers, MCU had 4 movies no one gave a damn about and made by far less money than first DCEU installments. Did it stop them? Many people rejected the DCEU, sure. But it's evident many did accept it too. Now after the #releasethesnydercut movement's success, no one in their right mind would argue that Snyder's movies haven't inspired people. So why are we still onto these factually incorrect and broken narratives? These discussions need a fresh take. You (not you specifically) didn't like that take? Fine, but don't act like you have it figured what is the right thing to like and what not.
    So yeah, Snyder has a very specific kind of comics he respects and draws inspiration from. But he was hired to do exactly that. Why do people forget to mention it when they scapegoat him? And also, why is that so wrong? Why do "we" have to want these homogeneous, uninspired, formulaic superhero junk food like Shazam and MCU Spiderman? It has to be a joke that those movies are the "right" ones while Man of Steel is the opposite. And I don't think it's all that dark. It's not bright, yeah, but it isn't dark. It's somewhere in between. Kinda reflective, as it was intended.

  4. #34
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    15,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by adamTPTK View Post
    Exactly. Some people just like to manipulate that argument to add credibility to their narrative or justify their own dislike. "Everyone rejected the take because it isn't faithful to the source material!" No, that's not how it works. Also, casual interest=/=quality. Or we can also make an argument how Transformers or F&F are better than Blade Runner 2049 or Fury Road. Also, why do we care about casuals so much? We are the involved fans, and we are the only ones that should matter. Casuals bring the numbers and the money, yeah, but it's our passion and involvement that makes it stay. The quality of your, or mine points, this is what important in these discussions, not how well did gimmick and marketing worked. Avatar was the most successful movie for a decade. Does anyone care about it? Between Iron Man and Avengers, MCU had 4 movies no one gave a damn about and made by far less money than first DCEU installments. Did it stop them? Many people rejected the DCEU, sure. But it's evident many did accept it too. Now after the #releasethesnydercut movement's success, no one in their right mind would argue that Snyder's movies haven't inspired people. So why are we still onto these factually incorrect and broken narratives? These discussions need a fresh take. You (not you specifically) didn't like that take? Fine, but don't act like you have it figured what is the right thing to like and what not.
    So yeah, Snyder has a very specific kind of comics he respects and draws inspiration from. But he was hired to do exactly that. Why do people forget to mention it when they scapegoat him? And also, why is that so wrong? Why do "we" have to want these homogeneous, uninspired, formulaic superhero junk food like Shazam and MCU Spiderman? It has to be a joke that those movies are the "right" ones while Man of Steel is the opposite. And I don't think it's all that dark. It's not bright, yeah, but it isn't dark. It's somewhere in between. Kinda reflective, as it was intended.
    The thing is, we need the success among the casuals to get more media. That's what keeps the characters alive. The Wednesday Warriors are an increasingly niche group, and successful other media adaptations are probably the future. But if one fails to land, it can cause damage to the IP and prevent more from being made. Just ask Hal Jordan. Had Wonder Woman not landed, we wouldn't have gotten another movie for her for eons, if ever, and we're already not getting enough media for her as it is. I don't think the takes on Superman and Batman were a black/white in a "everybody everywhere hated it" sort of way, but I think they inspired more apathy among the general audience compared to Wonder Woman or the MCU heroes. Most of the passion about them, weather heated defenses or heated vitriol, is in fanboy circles. Otherwise, I don't think the studio would have moved forward with Pattinson and been so ambivalent with Cavill/Superman in ways they weren't with Wonder Woman and later with Aquaman. I think the GA would give Cavill's Superman another shot in another type of film, but they also wouldn't bat an eye if he was recast in a new continuity either.

    But I agree Snyder just did what he was inclined to do. It was his vision, like it or not. I'm not convinced that there can't be a place for it in a "Black Label" sort of way, but for movies. But the studio depending on that to launch a franchise that is broadly appealing, telling him to put all this stuff in the movie and then edit it down for theaters at the last minute, is a mistake on their part and a sign that they didn't really know what they were doing and then scapegoated him.

    Honestly, I don't find many CBM films have a high re-watch value, even compared to some of the better cartoons. Even the DCEU movies I liked like Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Shazam have replay value but not as much as other types of films. Superhero movies are kind of all junkfood entertainment to varying degrees at least for me, they aren't the type that end up on my personal "timeless classics" list

  5. #35
    Astonishing Member Adekis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,889

    Default

    Everything in a Zack Snyder DC movie is from somewhere in a comic, he rarely if ever just makes something up. He's clearly very passionate about these characters, and he's thought a lot about them and how they function, both in terms of "how they'd work in real life," and in mythic terms (he loves to talk about Joseph Campbell), which are together I think the greatest strengths of his movies.

    But, well... far be it from me to criticize Zack Snyder, but I do think he's a little bit "basic" in terms of what DC media he loves. I watched his BvS commentary, and he went through almost the entire commentary without mentioning any comics at all! When he finally does mention comics, what are they? Watchmen and Dark Knight Returns, or as I like to call them, "The Starter Set". Now don't get me wrong, I love Watchmen, and DKR is pretty great too, for what it is. Certainly, Watchmen is a great literary work - but it's also a starting point for "thinking about comics in a literary way," rather than an ending point. And to be fair, Zack clearly has thought a lot about these characters in a literary way, like I said. He's probably thought more about them than most fans have! But I don't necessarily feel like he's read a lot of comics about them.

    A lot of the elements of his DC films are from pretty mainstream media as well. A lot of Bruce is from Dark Knight Returns obviously, including the brutal violence. Superman is from Byrne, with a bunch of stories about him questioning himself from Must There Be a Superman on up through Superman For Tomorrow tossed into the mix. Honestly, I don't like a lot of the ingredients in Snyder's Superman, so it's kind of surprising that he's one of my favorite Supermen of all time.

    Other examples include his apparent depiction of Darkseid as a brawler who could take on an army single-handedly, which I guess we'll learn more about that next year. That's from the New 52 if it's from anything, it's definitely not from Jack Kirby.

    Don't get me wrong. I love Zack Snyder's DC work, I think he's brilliant. I just wish there was a little broader range of apparent influences to his output, at times.
    Last edited by Adekis; 06-04-2020 at 09:55 AM.
    "You know the deal, Metropolis. Treat people right or expect a visit from me."

  6. #36
    Astonishing Member Triple J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Atlantis
    Posts
    3,667

    Default

    I don't think many people have made this argument...just that lot of folks didn't like his take on the characters, which is fine.

    I mean - that's what fandom is for. We have our own personal likes/dislikes associated with these characters because we are heavily invested in them.

    Despite how it played out, I will say that respect Zack for sticking with his ambitious vision (though I do wish he hadn't crammed a lot of ideas into BvS...could have been better as a 2 parter as the initial rumors had suggested. But, whatever).

    End of the day, it's a good age to be a fan, because we get multiple interpretations of these characters on the big screen (along with comics..and hopefully these movies will drive more interest into comics). Though I wish companies wouldn't try to hold onto their IP so long (would be more interesting to have entities like Superman in the public domain; ah well).
    DC Extended Universe Thread (DCEU)

    That's how it starts. The fever. The rage. The feeling of powerlessness. That turns good men....Cruel - Alfred.

    This may be the only thing that I do that matters - Bruce.

    Stay down, if I wanted it, you would be dead already - Clark.

  7. #37
    Ultimate Member Gaius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Occupied Klendathu
    Posts
    12,881

    Default

    Never really heard the argument he doesn't like comics, heard arguments that he doesn't like particular characters but I think that's more people disagreeing with his takes on them than anything else.

    I liked MoS well enough even though I have problems with it and the less said about BvS the better, but I can see the sense in doing a more "darker" (for lack of a better term) or deconstructionist take on characters like Superman or Batman giving there's been a variety of interpretations of those two on film and television. Not so much when it comes to other characters who haven't been represented as much as the aforementioned two have.

  8. #38
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    779

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    That's...kind of what I'm saying though? General audiences don't care about faithful adaptations if the film is good because they don't read comics, and even fanboys can concede when they like a change. Superman has a bigger hurdle when it comes to changes since he's such a big name with preconceived notions, BUT I also said the film drew from source material that the general audience didn't know about and that previous adaptations had put their own spin on things. This one wasn't fully embraced because it didn't have as much mass appeal.

    It's still a darker take on Superman than people are accustomed to, not necessarily just of himself but of the world he lives in. Saying it's less dark than Homelander (duh) doesn't magically mean it's comparatively darker takes on Superman and Batman than the mainstream are used to.
    I don’t have an issue with changing from the source material because again some of the most iconic parts of superheroes came from the big and small screen instead of the pages and if said changes weren’t made they wouldn’t be the same characters. Simply put converting 2d panels into a motion picture will lead to things being changed. My biggest issue is when people say Snyder doesn’t respect comics but think marvel does by mocking their heroes. For example in BvS some people got upset Jimmy Olsen was killed by the African terrorists or that supposedly Dick Grayson was dead (it seems to have been done away with since there are plans for a nightwing movie) and yet Marvel can leave out insanely important parts of their ethos like having Bucky become Captain America, Peter as a regular kid and not Iron Man’s god damn hand pick successor, Ragnarok, World War Hulk, having Bruce and Hulk merge off screen and so on. I mean some people say movie Hank is BETTER than the comics. Yeah movie Hank who does nothing but whine and bitch to Lang is better than the funding avenger who came up with the name, who slowly went mad, saw his magnum opus become a killing machine and saw his life fall apart

  9. #39
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius View Post
    Never really heard the argument he doesn't like comics, heard arguments that he doesn't like particular characters but I think that's more people disagreeing with his takes on them than anything else.

    I liked MoS well enough even though I have problems with it and the less said about BvS the better, but I can see the sense in doing a more "darker" (for lack of a better term) or deconstructionist take on characters like Superman or Batman giving there's been a variety of interpretations of those two on film and television. Not so much when it comes to other characters who haven't been represented as much as the aforementioned two have.
    David Goyer writing MOS needs to be taken into account for some of the differences with the much busier and more deconstructionist take in BvS; he can be inconsistent with his adapting work, but he’s arguably a more clear-headed comic fan than Snyder, and generally more likely to hit the right track with a character when he looks at the foundational material. Where he gets more risky is when he embraces a change in interpretation - sometime he works great there, and sometimes he doesn’t. And I think Goyer being Nolan’s guy on MOS helped him have a more stabilizing influence on Snyder’s work than Terrio had in BVS.

    MOS doesn’t strike as nearly as much of a deconstruction as much as it’s someone embracing the Post-Crisis philosophy of the character with elements of the Birthright, but lacking some of the energy in both. Superman’s still the epitome of a selfless altruist, Lois is basically her Post-Crisis self without her military-brat background (which I do miss, actually), Clark wins the appreciation of the authority figures in a pretty classically Superman way, and Zod and co. actually benefit overall from the straightforward take they get, fusing the strengths of the Silver Age concept with a Post-Crisis approach.

    Only Jonathon Kent really feels like a deconstruction of the expected ideas for Superman’s world... and that’s where I think the debates about MOS come in, because there’s some aftershocks that impact the rest of the story from him. Having Superman’s father be the one element that really zigs where the rest of the story pretty reliably zags puts a different light on some of it - something like the scene where Pete’s mom turns out to actually be thankful about Clark saving the bus instead of scared (which is actually a great twist on stereotypes and arguably *positive* deconstruction of a traditional trope) gets undercut by having Jonathon then hem and haw about the worst case scenario and seem to dampen his son’s heroism. You can see what they were trying to do... but it’s the on learn of the film that I think was a genuine misfire...

    ...Aaaaand unfortunately I think ti was the one part that Snyder himself was deeply interested in.
    Like action, adventure, rogues, and outlaws? Like anti-heroes, femme fatales, mysteries and thrillers?

    I wrote a book with them. Outlaw’s Shadow: A Sherwood Noir. Robin Hood’s evil counterpart, Guy of Gisbourne, is the main character. Feel free to give it a look: https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asi...E2PKBNJFH76GQP

  10. #40
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    779

    Default

    what i just don’t understand is why people will criticize dc and fox marvel but often praise the mcu for making changes. There was literally a CBR article that rated “MJ” from the MCU as one of the best MJ and Raimi MJ as one of the worst. Now don’t get me wrong Durst never really did MJ for me and I still feel we haven’t gotten a really great MJ yet but i swear if Snyder introduced a kid named “Lewis Smith” and Batman adopted him and renamed him Damian Wayne people would flip. Or another example is CBR made an article and video about mcu heroes who look totally different (ignoring 1610 i guess) and they always say how the comics version looks silly but does that stop them from bitching the X Men aren’t in comic accurate costumes? I swear the mcu could outright say superheroes are stupid and people would still say they respect them more than Snyder

  11. #41
    Astonishing Member Adekis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,889

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dboi2001 View Post
    There was literally a CBR article that rated “MJ” from the MCU as one of the best MJ and Raimi MJ as one of the worst.
    Yeah, Michelle "MJ" Jones doesn't really do it for me, either. Where's that party girl covering the trauma of an abusive childhood by dancing all night? Who's this sarcastic nerd?

    I actually like Michelle a lot though, she's just not Mary Jane Watson. And arguably, based on my description of MJ above, neither is Kirsten Dunst. So maybe it's just more honesty than we usually see, haha!

    But overall, I don't think it's just a double standard where Marvel can change anything and DC can't get away with nuthin'. That seems like an oversimplification. For one thing, neither Bane as a white guy on painkillers instead of a roided-up luchador, and Robin being a 30 year old cop, didn't seem to raise too much trouble. There were people who had problems with that, but not enough to be loud - similar to Michelle Jones.
    "You know the deal, Metropolis. Treat people right or expect a visit from me."

  12. #42
    Extraordinary Member Badou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,313

    Default

    He doesn't respect the more corny or fantastical elements of comics. He doesn't see value in outlandish or ridiculous elements and only likes the dark, grim, grounded, and serious pieces of the lore. His DC and Watchmen movies are proof of that. Him killing Jimmy Olsen unceremoniously at the start of BvS because he didn't see the point of the character and thought it would be cool just to kill him forms the kind of tastes he has for the properties. So he respects certain stories, but his love or passion for them is limited to a certain type of story rather than encompassing the whole thing.

  13. #43
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    779

    Default

    It’s kinda apples and oranges. The Nolan movies were trying to be more realistic from the comics. While the MCU has made significant changes they have nailed the main super heroes so it’s disappointing to see how different spider-man is. I do think there is some double standards. For example people constantly say for example Scarlet Witch’s comic costume is silly but then complain the X Men aren’t in their accurate suit and when Pyslocke gets her accurate suit they say it looked silly. I just don’t get how Zack Snyder can be accused of not respecting comics when MCU mocks Ant Man or Star Lord directly

  14. #44
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    15,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dboi2001 View Post
    It’s kinda apples and oranges. The Nolan movies were trying to be more realistic from the comics. While the MCU has made significant changes they have nailed the main super heroes so it’s disappointing to see how different spider-man is. I do think there is some double standards. For example people constantly say for example Scarlet Witch’s comic costume is silly but then complain the X Men aren’t in their accurate suit and when Pyslocke gets her accurate suit they say it looked silly. I just don’t get how Zack Snyder can be accused of not respecting comics when MCU mocks Ant Man or Star Lord directly
    I don't know that there is a double standard with everyone though.

    Those who criticize the DCEU, or at least the Snyder portions of it, aren't necessarily fans of everything the MCU does either.

  15. #45
    The Man Who Cannot Die manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9,485

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Badou View Post
    He doesn't respect the more corny or fantastical elements of comics. He doesn't see value in outlandish or ridiculous elements and only likes the dark, grim, grounded, and serious pieces of the lore. His DC and Watchmen movies are proof of that. Him killing Jimmy Olsen unceremoniously at the start of BvS because he didn't see the point of the character and thought it would be cool just to kill him forms the kind of tastes he has for the properties. So he respects certain stories, but his love or passion for them is limited to a certain type of story rather than encompassing the whole thing.
    Everyone is like that, we all have tastes and make choices based on our tastes. He didn't see the need for jimmy, when he already had gender bended version of him in daily planet.

Posting Permissions

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