All of Snyder’s Films Rumored To Be Erased In The Flash; Cavill Out Also

[Frontier]

Yea but people will always have a problem with a film. As long as the majority of people like it and it establishes popularity and future great stories, who cares? Donner's Superman diverged in many ways to the point the comics copied him and what he put on film is now considered definitive. Don't worry about comic book readers (a small and dwindling group of people) and tell your own take on the character. The best superhero films all have a creator putting their own spin on a property with their own unique style. Whether it's Donner, Burton, Raimi, Nolan, Gunn, Waititi, etc.. that is the most important aspect. These are films, not comic books.

I'll wait and see who directs the Coates Superman film. Hopefully it is someone with a very unique and stylish directorial style albeit one that isn't extremely divisive like Zach Snyder

I guess at the end of the day it comes down to personal taste and what one is willing to accept being done with the characters. Like for me I'm more of a Donner/Raimi guy than a Gunn/Waititi, but I'm usually a minority in my opinions on the latter.

I'm curious about the bolded because isn't that one of the primary assignments of the filmmakers.

I had issues with Tom Holland's Spider-man but the movies themselves were good and he played a different kind of Spider-man (as someone pointed out, Holland's Spider-man was basically the MCU rehabbing Spider-man after The Amazing Spider-man series). The first part of the assignment has been achieved and after that, they could move on to other things with the character. Basically, people overlooked the issues because the movies worked for what they were.

Then again, it could be I'm just old and I'm not so particular about comic book movie fidelity anymore.

IMO, I think the new Superman movies should do something completely new and not be beholden to any previous version. It could be unconventional and it could even be jarring initially but if the movie works it could be a starting point for a new series.

For me it's like with Jason Aaron's Thor where on a technical level and divorced away from anything else stuff like Homecoming or FFH are solid, but when you think about it more some stuff doesn't hold up as well from a character and mythos perspective even when other people don't have a problem with it.

But again, I'm used to being the minority opinion .

[Username taken]

Yea but people will always have a problem with a film. As long as the majority of people like it and it establishes popularity and future great stories, who cares? Donner's Superman diverged in many ways to the point the comics copied him and what he put on film is now considered definitive. Don't worry about comic book readers (a small and dwindling group of people) and tell your own take on the character. The best superhero films all have a creator putting their own spin on a property with their own unique style. Whether it's Donner, Burton, Raimi, Nolan, Gunn, Waititi, etc.. that is the most important aspect. These are films, not comic books.

I'll wait and see who directs the Coates Superman film. Hopefully it is someone with a very unique and stylish directorial style albeit one that isn't extremely divisive like Zach Snyder

My exact thoughts again.

[Prime]

Looks like despite rumors of Cavill being in The Flash movie, that film will instead be erasing him from continuity instead.

Multiple insiders are backing up what one leaker who has a proven track record with MCU leaks and leaked the plot of NWH a long time in advance has said:


Link to Tweet

Looks like Cavill screwed himself out of a job by refusing to do the Shazam cameo.

This is beyond retarded. It just proves WB has no idea what to do with these characters.

[The Kid]

I guess at the end of the day it comes down to personal taste and what one is willing to accept being done with the characters. Like for me I'm more of a Donner/Raimi guy than a Gunn/Waititi, but I'm usually a minority in my opinions on the latter.

They all have different styles but the point is they are all auteurs that made their own takes on the character. Donner and Raimi (the former especially) made a lot of radical changes to the mythos. Hell Donner was so influential that a lot of it bled into the actual comics. But my point is they tell their own story with the character to make them relevant to a modern audience. It's why I always used to roll my eyes when people would complain about how Nolan's Batman was in his own style instead of just putting whatever comic booky thing they wanted. He had his own take on the character and his world and stayed true to it and what do you know? It's arguably the most popular version of Batman ever. That's what Superman needs right now.

[Prime]

They all have different styles but the point is they are all auteurs that made their own takes on the character. Donner and Raimi (the former especially) made a lot of radical changes to the mythos. Hell Donner was so influential that a lot of it bled into the actual comics. But my point is they tell their own story with the character to make them relevant to a modern audience. It's why I always used to roll my eyes when people would complain about how Nolan's Batman was in his own style instead of just putting whatever comic booky thing they wanted. He had his own take on the character and his world and stayed true to it and what do you know? It's arguably the most popular version of Batman ever. That's what Superman needs right now.

I just don't understand how WB could be so blind and stupid. IT SHOULDN'T BE HARD TO DO A SUPERMAN MOVIE WB!

[Vordan]

They all have different styles but the point is they are all auteurs that made their own takes on the character. Donner and Raimi (the former especially) made a lot of radical changes to the mythos. Hell Donner was so influential that a lot of it bled into the actual comics. But my point is they tell their own story with the character to make them relevant to a modern audience. It's why I always used to roll my eyes when people would complain about how Nolan's Batman was in his own style instead of just putting whatever comic booky thing they wanted. He had his own take on the character and his world and stayed true to it and what do you know? It's arguably the most popular version of Batman ever. That's what Superman needs right now.

We did get that though. What is Snyder’s take if not something very much a product of Zack Snyder’s tastes? Every movie was Snyder doubling down harder on what he wanted to do even though it pissed off Superman fans.

[The Kid]

We did get that though. What is Snyder’s take if not something very much a product of Zack Snyder’s tastes? Every movie was Snyder doubling down harder on what he wanted to do even though it pissed off Superman fans.

Yeah I did say that hopefully it would be by a creator without a history of making divisive films but IMO even a lot of Snyder's stuff felt like a response to Donner's take. That said, I still think Man of Steel was a good movie and if it didn't go full disaster porn in the last act, it would have reviewed well. No debate over the following movie (BvS) which was just awful in every way

[manofsteel1979]

I love Superman, always will. But at the end of the day it's a character - an inanimate object/construct no different than a remote control or a rod. It's only as good, useful, or relevant as TPTB that created it and manage it.

So yes, I do think the CHARACTER is blameless. If you had told me pre-2008 that Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Aquaman, and Wonder Woman could become billion dollar film franchises, I would have told you to go fly a kite. Yet here we are, with all those film franchises making substantially more money than Hulk, Incredible Hulk, Batman Begins, Superman Returns, Man of Steel, and Justice League.

Also, how many stories have we heard over the last 30 years + in which A-list writer/artist wanted to take over Superman but was either denied or substantially restricted by editorial with their creative freedom? To his credit, Didio tried to break Superman out of his shell a bit creatively but unfortunately this is the same guy who thought Frankenstein was more important to the future of DC than Superman.

I certainly don't have all the answers and I agree Superman/Clark could be written more interesting and more in line with modern sensibilities. But I refuse to blame a character for why it's about to be sidelined when said character has endured for 80 years.

As far as Spider-Man...not necessarily disagreeing with you but if Superman could get 200 comics or so in a decade of consistently good and modern storytelling as Spider-Man had with Ultimate, I'd take that in a heartbeat. However, I would say as average or even bad as Spider-Man comics have been at times since the 90's, he's still been better written than Superman has been and his writers are given substantially more creative freedom. A story where Lex Luthor places his mind in Superman's body for nearly 2 years? How did this not happen two decades before Slott did it with Spider-Man and Doc Ock?

I wish this site had a "like" button. All of your posts in this thread actually. You and I are almost 100 percent in agreement.

I have mostly been quiet here because I don't want to be a negative Nelly and just be the old man yelling at cloud...but the Superman and Lois show and Action Comics aside , I have very little hope for what is coming for Superman overall and if....IF these rumors are correct, just illustrates that Warners and DC have basically decided the classic Superman is done and it totally reasonable to think that within the next 5 years, new material with Clark Kent/Kal-El will not be produced. They want to use the iconography (the logo and that big red and yellow "s",) but not the character himself. It may sound crazy and defeatist but, basically if DC/Warners is Done with Superman....I'm probably done with DC.

And I don't want to take away from Superlad and some of the others here that are excited about this "Post Clark" era...and maybe as you said earlier, maybe its us "older" fans who are part of the problem.

However, in my opinion, Clark Kent/Kal-El, the character created by Siegel and Shuster in 1938 IS and will always be Superman and the ONLY legit Superman. Jon Kent is not Superman. Val-Zod is not Superman. They are at best variants and spin offs and if handled well can be credits to the franchise and legend of the character, but they can and won't replace the original. They just won't.

This is probably the only time I will mouth off about this all. I don't want to rain on people's parades here. Again I don't want to come off as the old man who can't accept change, but....I can't help but feel this very obvious and sharp pivot away from Superman...a character I've loved for most of my life,.. reducing his presence within the comics and in other media while outright replacing him with, in my opinion, poor knock offs and spin off characters, is the just the beginning of the end. Its clear DC Comics has completely given up on Superman...and it makes me sad.

[Vordan]

Bear in mind this is happening for a couple reasons:
1. Cavill. Originally they wanted him to be the “Nick Fury” of the DCEU, Keaton was the backup choice. If he had agreed to do cameos in Shazam, The Suicide Squad, and fought The Rock in Black Adam? Right now we would probably be hearing about him in negotiations with WB for another Superman movie, or at the very least an HBO Max series. Instead he walked away because he was under the delusion WB wouldn't dare to “take the cape” out of his closet. He made a gamble and lost
2. Abrams. WB went to him to revamp Superman and Abrams decided to racebend Clark, tapping Coates for the job. My guess is WB either thinks this is going to bring in Black Panther tier money or they're just shooting for an Oscar
3. Abrams and Coates wanted MBJ for the role but he declined, likely due to bad memories with the last racebent he played in Johnny Storm. HBO Max thinks MBJ is a superstar however and they offered him a Val-Zod series. Note that the rumors have this being a limited series called The Kryptonian (so not even using the Superman name) and its unlikely to have any bearing on what the film side is doing, just like the Titans show is disconnected.
4. Superman will be going into the public domain soon. WB is making sure they have a replacement they own wholesale for when he does

All that said I'm not sure why you guys think there won’t be any more Clark content. Coming up we have more Clark content then we had back during the Snyder era where Cavill was playing Clark on the big screen. Clark will be in theaters with the animated League of Super Pets movie, Hoechlin is playing him on the small screen, he has his first animated cartoon in 30 years coming next year, there’s an animated CoIE trilogy coming in 2023 apparently so he’ll be in that, he has a ton of comics projects either out now or in the works, its not ideal but its still pretty good. Even stuff I’m not enthused about such as the upcoming SS game or the Coates project will have versions of him in them.

Plus if theres ever a Superman video game… its going to star Clark. Theyre not totally giving up on Clark, theyre giving up on Cavill. WB’s idiocy is that they seem to think only Cavill can be used for a “mainstream take” on the film side. Why not just kick Cavill out and bring in Routh? Im sure he’d be happy to do the cameos! The Rock’s production company wants to do Kingdom Come one day, and if Black Adam and League of Super Pets are successful, i think WB will let him.

[Yoda]

I really think people are blowing Superman potentially entering the public domain way way out of proportion. For one, it's based on publication - so Action Comics #1 goes public first. Some aspects of the character could be used - but not the "S" Shield or likely the branding of "Superman" because that's all WB's trademark and trademarks can be renewed. So really you'd get a character named Clark Kent, Lois Lane, and Superman (minus all the visual cues that delineate him as Superman people recognize) entering the public domain. Individual issues will enter the public domain on a rolling basis going forward, so no Silver Age concepts would enter the public domain until like 15-20 years after Action Comics. Like how the "public domain" Winne the Pooh can't have his red shirt cause that's still Disney's.

The amount of daylight between what people will be able to do with Superman when Action #1 enters public domain and with what they can do now with pastiches is pretty narrow. I really really doubt any of the decisions with Superman being made now are in any way connected to the potential for the character to enter public domain.

[Rikdad]

I'm sincerely surprised that anyone finds the Donner film boring; someone's personal experience is something one can't argue with, but it's taken me some thought to make sense of. I guess it is like this: By the standards of 1978, movies had a lot of talking and you listened to the talking. Superman The Movie had a lot more action than almost any movie that had some before it, and consequently, less talking, but there's been such a trend towards still more action (in films, but video games ramp that up dramatically) that the amount of talking in Superman The Movie seems like way too much for someone who expects as much action as in, say, Infinity War. And consequently, someone who finds Superman The Movie boring would likely find almost any movie made before it also boring – and more so.

[Rikdad]

The surest proof in my mind that a great Superman movie could be made for today's audience is Captain America (granted, now 10.5 years old). The tone of that movie is just the tone of a great Superman movie.

A point that I made when I reviewed Man of Steel is that Cavill's Superman in that movie is not a darker character than Reeve's – in fact, clearly less so. He is, however, placed into far darker circumstances. Reeve's Superman crushed Zod's hand just out of sheer, non-obligatory vendetta, and though there was an alternate ending, the theater ending implied that Superman participated in and/or watched as the three Phantom Zone villains in that movie unnecessarily died, and did so with a smirk on his face. Then he beat up a guy, also out of vengeance. (Cavill's Superman in an equivalent situation trashed a guy's truck.) That's a hell of a lot darker than killing Zod while experiencing deep anguish because it's the only way to save some innocent lives.

However, the anguish itself frames the situation – the violence was not "fun" for the audience the way Superman flinging Zod into a crevice was in Superman II.

The strategic mistake in Man of Steel, IMO, is that it contained a lot of not-fun death and destruction. Captain American did not. The latter was the way to go for a character with this history.

A tactical mistake in Man of Steel was having Superman perform some necessary errand in an uninhabited location on the other side of the world while Metropolis was being destroyed. The movie immediately becomes better if that errand is in Metropolis and he starts saving people the second before and the second after it's done.

And a plot hole that might be forgivable is why the Kryptonians were trying to destroy Earth at all. They are invulnerable to all harm and want a planet to colonize. Venus is right there; go for it.

[superduperman]

I really think people are blowing Superman potentially entering the public domain way way out of proportion. For one, it's based on publication - so Action Comics #1 goes public first. Some aspects of the character could be used - but not the "S" Shield or likely the branding of "Superman" because that's all WB's trademark and trademarks can be renewed. So really you'd get a character named Clark Kent, Lois Lane, and Superman (minus all the visual cues that delineate him as Superman people recognize) entering the public domain. Individual issues will enter the public domain on a rolling basis going forward, so no Silver Age concepts would enter the public domain until like 15-20 years after Action Comics. Like how the "public domain" Winne the Pooh can't have his red shirt cause that's still Disney's.

The amount of daylight between what people will be able to do with Superman when Action #1 enters public domain and with what they can do now with pastiches is pretty narrow. I really really doubt any of the decisions with Superman being made now are in any way connected to the potential for the character to enter public domain.

I think just the fact that Clark Kent will be available is enough to scare WB into wanting to take steps to have a back up Superman just in case. Someone more versed in copyright law could probably clear all this up. That person isn't me. But the fact that they seem determined to have a replacement on hand suggests they know something we don't. This could be because of public domain, this could be because they fear another lawsuit by the Seigels. Who knows. But it's obvious that someone up top ordered DC to create another Superman that they own outright. So clearly there is some sort of legal ass covering going on of some kind.

[DochaDocha]

I feel like there's enough time in between 2033 and now that WB won't completely abandon Clark/Kal-El. On the other hand, I feel like there's a push to make original characters that they'll control for a lifetime.

I suppose this is what it feels like to be an Oakland A's or Tampa Bay Rays fan. Superman is getting Moneyballed.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

I really think people are blowing Superman potentially entering the public domain way way out of proportion. For one, it's based on publication - so Action Comics #1 goes public first. Some aspects of the character could be used - but not the "S" Shield or likely the branding of "Superman" because that's all WB's trademark and trademarks can be renewed. So really you'd get a character named Clark Kent, Lois Lane, and Superman (minus all the visual cues that delineate him as Superman people recognize) entering the public domain. Individual issues will enter the public domain on a rolling basis going forward, so no Silver Age concepts would enter the public domain until like 15-20 years after Action Comics. Like how the "public domain" Winne the Pooh can't have his red shirt cause that's still Disney's.

The amount of daylight between what people will be able to do with Superman when Action #1 enters public domain and with what they can do now with pastiches is pretty narrow. I really really doubt any of the decisions with Superman being made now are in any way connected to the potential for the character to enter public domain.

yup, doubt public domain did much to hurt marvel's plans with Thor......granted marvel/disney isn't dc/wb when it comes to making reasonable decisions, lol,