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

[Frontier]

That is the general vagueness and reliance on a now in built iconography.

And now Clark is freakin stuck there because once anyone tries to add anything they yell about how that's not Clark. So, yeah, Jon's the one who creates the United Planets and is the Superman far more interested in social issues because Clark would be breaching on some foolish made up "prime directive" BS that they perpetuated with Clark that was more so in place to make sure the world around Clark didn't actually progress. That means Kara can better explore the "fresh off the boat" immigrant metaphor that they like to only dip Clark's toe into here and there because he has to still remain pure Americana.

Clark's problem is decades of complacency perpetuated by fans and creators alike, and now we're seeing the results of that. But hey, congratulations on Clark still being "iconic" for all the good that's done him in the last 30 years.

Personally I feel like Jon is probably as liable to just fall into the standard Superman MO and stories if they decide to really push him in outside media no matter how progressive they try to spin him. It's happened to Kara too...

[Last Son of Krypton]

WB erasing all Snyder's films... That's really petty.

[Superlad93]

Personally I feel like Jon is probably as liable to just fall into the standard Superman MO and stories if they decide to really push him in outside media no matter how progressive they try to spin him. It's happened to Kara too...

Oh it's for sure a possiblity. No doubt about that. But at the very least they'll have some more room to work and correct him if it does happen. Taylor isn't helping, but even then at the very least Taylor is underlining Jon as a proactive Superman. That's at least something he has on Clark that's already sticking.

I figure any film take on the character can then stretch their legs more with the ins and outs of his personality, and then expound on the foundation of him as proactive and thinking about more systemic issues.

And lucky for Kara not non comic fans have object permanence when it comes to her ins and outs. She's allowed to act in equal parts as a sharp contrast to Clark or a continuing of his same deal. Helps that they're visually distinguishing her from past Kara's and likely leaning more into the alien side.

They've dug a pretty deep hole with Clark, but Jon (and Kara to a degree) aren't even remotely as far in.

[kingaliencracker]

Okay so, as a Superman fan (Clark or otherwise) I'll always go up to bat for him, but-- and this will sound crazy-- the character isn't blameless.

No, Clark most certainly isn't a bad character no matter what anyone says, but he is hard to write and grows increasingly harder to write as the years go on and the times change. And I'm talking about Clark in his most basic form, but like I keep getting told whenever it's suggested they change or adjust something about Clark "well, you might as well make another character". Well, they did!

The tastes of both audiences and creators change as time goes on and culture shifts. Yes, as a bunch of people like to point out, times are getting to be a lot like the 30s and 40s when Clark was created, but that doesn't automatically mean Clark himself (again, in his most recognizable form) is just as relevant. The idea that he birthed and stood for? Of course! But Clark himself doesn't actually get a free pass in the minds of fans.

And to writers, being influenced by these times and what they're taking in, Clark in his most recognizable form may be a bit stifling at times. They're trying to hold onto what makes him him while also trying to reflect a far more complex world than he came from. One of those things has to give, and either the world bends to him or he bends. In the case of the latter we find ourselves back with the "well, you might as well make a new character". Once again, they did.

That good will that Spider-Man has? I hope you don't think it comes from his comics being good. No. Spider-Man comics are mediocre at best. They are published out of obligation and the understanding that people will buy them out of habit. The last time a long running Spider-Man comic was worth anything in the 21st century was Ultimate Spider-Man, and that has gone on to be the very backbone that all modern Spider-Man is built on one level or another. But other than that, they're just doing remixes of old 60s and 70s Spider-Man in the movies. The difference is that Spider-Man is just flat out easier to write and relate with for both writers and fans. Sure we as Superman fans don't waste anytime with our "you just don't get what's special" monologs, but if we're largely the only one that *really* get it because he's *so* complex, where does that get us? 2 liked movies ever since the 80s and ready to be replaced by characters that potentially aren't as hard to get?

Literally no one's ever had to go "you don't get why Batman's so great" or "you don't get why Spider-Man is so great" because EVERYONE gets it since it's so easy to get regardless of what there comics are doing. It sucks to admit, but our hubris is what did Clark in.

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?

[Frontier]

Oh it's for sure a possiblity. No doubt about that. But at the very least they'll have some more room to work and correct him if it does happen. Taylor isn't helping, but even then at the very least Taylor is underlining Jon as a proactive Superman. That's at least something he has on Clark that's already sticking.

I figure any film take on the character can then stretch their legs more with the ins and outs of his personality, and then expound on the foundation of him as proactive and thinking about more systemic issues.

And lucky for Kara not non comic fans have object permanence when it comes to her ins and outs. She's allowed to act in equal parts as a sharp contrast to Clark or a continuing of his same deal. Helps that they're visually distinguishing her from past Kara's and likely leaning more into the alien side.

They've dug a pretty deep hole with Clark, but Jon (and Kara to a degree) aren't even remotely as far in.

I mean, Superman's as proactive as the stories need him to be (although not without some controversy when you get into how Snyder depicted it) and despite the stereotypes I don't think media adaptions have ever shown him as being that inactive or neutral, but it's all in the stories you tell.

I think people definitely have expectations for Kara but she definitely has different traits that can be played up or downplayed depending on the adaption or need for the story, and the last time she was placed in a leading role she was pushed pretty hard to fit into the same mold as her cousin. We don't really have much to go off for Sasha Calle's Supergirl but even she looks more like a gender-flip of Clark than even normal Kara does, but that might not extend to personality depending on how they handle her backstory.

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?

That depends. Would we expect everyone to not realize it and be as fooled as most characters were by SpOck? Like, you don't think Lois would have immediately seen through it?

They got their hero push with Luthor just with Luthor during Johns' JL and Rebirth.

[Superlad93]

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?

Because of Clark the unmoving icon that has been perpetuated by fans and creators. There's an image of Clark people have been trained to collectively hold onto, and "harming" that image is a no to fans and creators. Do you seriously think FOR EVEN A SECOND think that Clark being taken over by Lex for 2 years would've gone down well with Superman fans as you know them? No. The dude is literally in space freeing slaves and people are mad that he's not doing some general variation of Daily Planet, bad guy, and beat the bad/get the story.

Peter got to do that because even though he's for sure an icon, he's not hampered by iconography to the same degree as Clark. Remember how he just straight up hasn't been a photographer for years? Remember how his place of work hasn't been a newspaper for years? I mean, they literally just did a Spider-Man trilogy where Peter becomes Spider-Man seeming *just* because his aunt raised him right, and it was only in the last movie where he gets an "Uncle Ben" moment? That's like having Bruce *just* be Batman because whatever.

Years and years of not allowing the character to stagnate yet keeping an identifiable core have worked out like gangbusters. If Peter were in Clark's position and Bendis created Miles, Peter would likely have been gone even sooner than Clark since Miles is literally *just* and update of Peter and doesn't require Peter to function.

We're looking at decades of "comfort food" for fans and creators alike when it comes to Clark. Running back to the sugar, carbs, and artificial flavoring of our childhoods at every turn to get a cheap cheer from the masses-- who themselves ultimately don't care. So when the scale look bad and Clark has to pack it in, I'm not going to sit here and *just* blame management. This was a collaborative effort by fans, suits, and creative alike that has now left a very lasting and specific vibe on how the character is views-- thus while yes in a technical sense Clark himself couldn't do anything about it, but it's now an aspect of how he's viewed, so you have to come at it from that angle as well as the actual real people responsible.

[Superlad93]

I mean, Superman's as proactive as the stories need him to be (although not without some controversy when you get into how Snyder depicted it) and despite the stereotypes I don't think media adaptions have ever shown him as being that inactive or neutral, but it's all in the stories you tell.

In a technical sense? Sure. But in the eyes of the general public he's the upholder of the status quo. He's the man-god who rubs his brow over how he needs to be an example and not a solution. That is Clark as far as the general public goes. Doesn't really matter if it doesn't have to be. The vibe is set, and people will go to war for it.

[Korath]

Because of Clark the unmoving icon that has been perpetuated by fans and creators. There's an image of Clark people have been trained to collectively hold onto, and "harming" that image is a no to fans and creators. Do you seriously think FOR EVEN A SECOND think that Clark being taken over by Lex for 2 years would've gone down well with Superman fans as you know them? No. The dude is literally in space freeing slaves and people are mad that he's not doing some general variation of Daily Planet, bad guy, and beat the bad/get the story.

Peter got to do that because even though he's for sure an icon, he's not hampered by iconography to the same degree as Clark. Remember how he just straight up hasn't been a photographer for years? Remember how his place of work hasn't been a newspaper for years? I mean, they literally just did a Spider-Man trilogy where Peter becomes Spider-Man seeming *just* because his aunt raised him right, and it was only in the last movie where he gets an "Uncle Ben" moment? That's like having Bruce *just* be Batman because whatever.

Years and years of not allowing the character to stagnate yet keeping an identifiable core have worked out like gangbusters. If Peter were in Clark's position and Bendis created Miles, Peter would likely have been gone even sooner than Clark since Miles is literally *just* and update of Peter and doesn't require Peter to function.

We're looking at decades of "comfort food" for fans and creators alike when it comes to Clark. Running back to the sugar, carbs, and artificial flavoring of our childhoods at every turn to get a cheap cheer from the masses-- who themselves ultimately don't care. So when the scale look bad and Clark has to pack it in, I'm not going to sit here and *just* blame management. This was a collaborative effort by fans, suits, and creative alike that has now left a very lasting and specific vibe on how the character is views-- thus while yes in a technical sense Clark himself couldn't do anything about it, but it's now an aspect of how he's viewed, so you have to come at it from that angle as well as the actual real people responsible.

New 52 is a proof of that. Each time Superman deviated from that mold he was trashed as being un-Superman-y. Even good stories were trashed because he wasn't with Lois a hot second after he appeared, or some variation of that same idea ("Clark would never leave the Daily planet!" "He would never allow his identity to be revealed like that" etc.).

[The World]

I guess people are finally coming around to the idea that Clark being too passive about things. Better late than never.

Also if Clark were too far gone All Star Superman and Smashes the Klan wouldn't be what they are. He's still works, DC just has to nut up and dump the Superman they've been clinging to for the last 30 years. You can keep the romance with Lois because that's just a part of the characters story. Superman's original beliefs and attitudes work just fine, DC/WB needs to nut up and embrace them.

Spider:NWH spoilers

spoilers:

Also fun fact Peter in No Way Home lost Aunt May right around the time when Clark typically looses the Kent's in the Pre-Crisis days and no one thought the movie had too much tragedy. Funny that.

end of spoilers

[superduperman]

I can't help but think this is about the public domain issue. Action Comics 1 becomes public domain in little over a decade from now. As does Clark Kent and Lois Lane. DC needs a Superman that they actually own outright. Between this and the constant fights with the Seigel family, I can't say I blame them for wanting their own "in house" version. Snyder and Cavill wasted a decade fighting about "vision" instead of just making movies so I don't blame WB for throwing them overboard. Sorry, Henry, you're just not that important. And S&L proved that you can have a "classic" Superman that's also a father AND is still more realistic than anything Snyder came up with. They don't really need this. As for Supergirl, she is more recognized than Jon. I'm sure they're building towards the day he's the "official" Superman but Warners knows that day isn't here yet.

It's not a secret that Disney bought Marvel and Star Wars because their own IPs are coming up on the public domain era. The Frozen girls are all over everything because Disney owns them outright and will for the next century at least. This also bolsters the theory that the whole 5G thing, or whatever it's called now, was an edict handed down from on high. Owning new characters and pushing them makes a lot more sense than legal fights about who owns what century old character. As for mismanagement, I hate to say it but, yeah, there are a lot of people who just like Batman better at the helm of these things. Any character can be made good if you just put in the effort. The success of the Arrow-verse is proof of that. You can make a good Superman, S&L did it, you just have to have people at the helm who actually want to.

[Sacred Knight]

I still say the only question is how long it takes for WB to have to come crawling back to the real deal, and push him again with a renewed vigor. I don't know if there will be good ideas for him when that time comes, obviously that's been a major sticking point for a long time regardless. I just wonder if by the time that time comes, will I have been rendered too apathetic to really care that much anymore. I hope not, I'd like to think I'll get excited again after all this stuff falls flat on its collective face and they're pretty much forced to get their heads out of their ass and push the actual Superman again. I'm on record now though that there's an insurmountably higher chance of this all happening than this new cinematic universe idea succeeding to the point that they can do things like introduce Jon if that is a twinkle in their eye at the moment. Outside my major skepticism of anyone caring at all about these legacy characters in the main roles, I still don't see WB at all content to carefully build things up. If anything I can imagine the pressure even more great to try and play catch up now that the next wave of Marvel has landed with massive success yet again and DC is still a meme in that they haven't even managed to complete one.

[manwhohaseverything]

I still say the only question is how long it takes for WB to have to come crawling back to the real deal, and push him again with a renewed vigor.

You do understand that super-pastiches have had arguably bigger success than the real deal considering superman's best venture is a bunch of cw shows(regardless of how good or bad..they have certain reach and not beyond).If black adam and captain marvel family succeeds then that would give undeniable proof of concept and inherent stasis the super character is in.Super-pastiches have been able to give more room to work with than "real" deal.If you think superman is some irreplaceable and untouchable thing then you would be in for a shock.It won't be the first time captain marvel franchise has beaten superman as a franchise either.

[superduperman]

If it's any consolation, that Reeves Batman movie looks like it might be a shared universe also. I've suspected it was a backdoor reboot for a while now.

[Frontier]

You do understand that super-pastiches have had arguably bigger success than the real deal considering superman's best venture is a bunch of cw shows(regardless of how good or bad..they have certain reach and not beyond).If black adam and captain marvel family succeeds then that would give undeniable proof of concept and inherent stasis the super character is in.Super-pastiches have been able to give more room to work with than "real" deal.If you think superman is some irreplaceable and untouchable thing then you would be in for a shock.It won't be the first time captain marvel franchise has beaten superman as a franchise either.

I think Hoechlin's Supes was a better Supes than Levi's Shazam (and I love him).

In a technical sense? Sure. But in the eyes of the general public he's the upholder of the status quo. He's the man-god who rubs his brow over how he needs to be an example and not a solution. That is Clark as far as the general public goes. Doesn't really matter if it doesn't have to be. The vibe is set, and people will go to war for it.

Well, I think it matters "if it doesn't have to be" because it means the paradigm can still shift and it's not the absolute portrayal of the character. Of course I don't think Supes is the only hero really guilty of that, let alone cinematically, but he gets singled out for it.

[Sacred Knight]

You do understand that super-pastiches have had arguably bigger success than the real deal considering superman's best venture is a bunch of cw shows(regardless of how good or bad..they have certain reach and not beyond).If black adam and captain marvel family succeeds then that would give undeniable proof of concept and inherent stasis the super character is in.Super-pastiches have been able to give more room to work with than "real" deal.If you think superman is some irreplaceable and untouchable thing then you would be in for a shock.It won't be the first time captain marvel franchise has beaten superman as a franchise either.

The difference is those are their own franchises. Inspired-by, built into something of its own. These aren't Super-pastiches, they're literal replacements for Superman in lore. Its not the same thing. In that vein yes, he is irreplaceable and I highly doubt I'll be shocked by the results. Provided this rumor is true. I've seen more push back to it today than I saw yesterday, so that always implied.