Zack Snyder's Superman isn't 'Dark,' He's 'Relatable'

[The Darknight Detective]

""That’s the great thing about our Superman. He is more relatable," Snyder said. "Someone said, 'It’s so dark,' and I go, 'Well, is it dark? He’s going through real problems that we go through as people every day.' To me that’s not dark, that’s life. We’re complicated people. And we’re making him in that way more relatable."

This sounds like some Ayn Rand type bs right here

Really? Sounds more like the very successful Marvel formula that was created in the '60s to me.

[Lightning Rider]

in the BVS the substance of Clark Kent and Superman has been totally destroyed .... i couldn't relate to this superman at all ! he was gloomy , depressed , and nothing like the superman iv seen in pervious tv shows or comic books . i understand that all characters go through a dark path within the comics but to make him dark within the movie and take away his persona as Clark Kent and Superman then thats just not good at all . Warner Bros really need to allow the the creative team to express there mind within the movie and produce a comic book movie ! Just look at Deadpool . could we please just have superman wearing a colourful suite ? give him some life !

Ruined the substance of Superman? And then you're comparing Superman to Deadpool?!

Please watch from 7:16 to 12:42. I recommend that to anyone who keeps insisting Snyder betrays or misunderstands the character.

Superman has almost 80 years of history. It seems like the panels you posted are all from the 1990s and later. I can't see them now at my work (it blocks photobucket), but I remember it from seeing at home. I think that is a huge problem with DC in the last few years, both in the comics and movies. Too much obsession with a nineties aesthetic and ambience.

And several of "weighty" Superman stories in your pictures, like Kingdom Come and Red Son, are the kind of self-involved tales that work as a "response" or alternative to classic Superman. I think Marvel was far more adept in mining elements from "updated" stories like Ultimates while mantaining the spirit of the classic characters.

Birthright wasn't a grim 90's comic but a 2003 origin story, Kingdom Come was about a return to classic morals, Confidential was a Darwyne Cooke/Tim Sale "coming of age" story, Peace on Earth was written by Paul Dini and Silver Age lover Alex Ross. I could also point to "For the Man Who Has Everything" from the 80's, or the golden age Superman who takes a spoiled rich boy out of his bed to look at a poor girl content with only having a broken doll. Superman's best stuff isn't exclusive to the 80's, 90's, and 2000's, but I'd say most comic book characters have their best stories written in that window. I don't understand why people just want Santa Claus with muscles. We already had Reeve and a sad Superman is nothing new.

[Lightning Rider]

The people working on The Flash and Supergirl tv series should do the movies....problem solved.

Those versions of Barry and Kara cry like every other episode over much pettier and melodramatic things. The moaning would never end.

[SiegePerilous02]

The people working on The Flash and Supergirl tv series should do the movies....problem solved.

But the objective is to make the movies good.

[Superlad93]

I don't understand why people just want Santa Claus with muscles.

Superman played as Santa Claus with muscles sounds like so much fun though

Those versions of Barry and Kara cry like every other episode over much pettier and melodramatic things. The moaning would never end.

Are you hypocritically homogenizing each episode of Flash and Supergirl together, not unlike you feel others are doing with Snyder's Superman? Aren't there comics out there where Supergirl and Flash cry? Couldn't someone make a video showing how they don't actually cry all the time in those shows, not unlike the MOS and BVS videos you've shared?

[Lightning Rider]

Superman played as Santa Claus with muscles sounds like so much fun though

Are you hypocritically homogenizing each episode of Flash and Supergirl together, not unlike you feel others are doing with Snyder's Superman? Aren't there comics out there where Supergirl and Flash cry? Couldn't someone make a video showing how they don't actually cry all the time in those shows, not unlike the MOS and BVS videos you've shared?

Fair point. Well, a show can abuse excess because of its length. If you compressed that into a movie, the crying would never stop, because the melodrama is just so constant. (Honestly though Barry and Wally cry a mere handful of times in their best works, if even that).

[Rene Narciso]

There's not really anything 1990s or emo about Superman or the other heroes the DCEU. He isn't wearing pouches all over his costume and firing off multiple, implausible looking guns, and the women aren't stick figures, silicone pumped barbies contorting themselves into back breaking positions to show off their bewbs. The nihilism inherent in the overly muscled, "kill 'em all" guns blazing heroes from that period are not present in these films. Bruce is the closest thing we got, and even he realizes he was on the wrong path by the end of the film.

The nineties were more than just Image Comics and/or Rob Liefeld. It's a more encompassing cynicism that makes people doubt old-fashioned heroes and goes at the heart of this "Superman isn't cool" debate. Librarian's post above is a perfect example, but there are shades of it in most of the posts defending MoS and BvS.

I also reject the notion that nobody on the staff understands the character, they just have a different interpretation of him.

It's not that they don't understand the character, necessarily. It's more like they don't have faith in him. Though I wouldn't be surprised if Snyder didn't understand the character either. He misunderstands a lot of of key aspects of Watchmen, for instance.

And while I want DCEU Superman to move into a lighter direction and see a different director tackle him, I hope they can aim higher in quality than the utterly generic Thor and Ant-Man films.

Somehow I had a feeling you'd feel this way about Thor and Ant-Man... Give me Ant-Man all day, everyday, over a Snyder film. I bet he'd have Hank punching Janet's teeth out in the first 30 minutes, and Scott Lang is a violent criminal that abuses Cassie or something.

[Superlad93]

Fair point. Well, a show can abuse excess because of its length. If you compressed that into a movie, the crying would never stop, because the melodrama is just so constant. (Honestly though Barry and Wally cry a mere handful of times in their best works, if even that).

But that would be assuming they'd take the same approach to writing a 15 to 20 episode show that they would to an hour and a half to 2 hour movie. That doesn't seem likely. Like you said with MOS and BVS, I'm sure they'd make him sad sometimes during the movie because a sad Superman is nothing new, but I'm also sure they wouldn't fit a whole season's worth of sadness into a movie. That just doesn't make good sense. Those TV plots are stretched and created specifically to fill the 15 to 20 episode quota and that specific sort of melodrama is crafted specifically for a basic cable procedural show. Adjustments would be made. I mean did you know that Russo brothers came to Marvel after writing and directing episodes of the basic cable comedy The Community? They now have movies like Captain America: Winter Solder and Civil War under their belts, and will go on to do two Avengers movies. Regardless of how you feel about those movies and Marvel movies as a whole, if we were judging the Russo's just off of their work on The Community we'd have imagined VERY different movies, right?

I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but what I believe He-Kal may have meant when he/she suggested the idea was a comment on the sensibilities the people working on Flash and Supergirl have. He-Kal likely meant that they way they've decided to interpret and realize the characters in general may be a better fit, in his/her opinion.

But hell, don't listen to me. I want Edgar Wright to write and direct the next Superman movie

[misslane]

Superman played as Santa Claus with muscles sounds like so much fun though.

Not quite the same thing, but close.

[Doctor Know]

I don't think Snyder's made Superman toxic, to the point where he's been ruined.

But with Superman Return's worldwide gross, you got to understand that foreign markets have greatly expanded since 2006. Back in the day it wasn't that common for movies to make over a billion worldwide. The Lord of the Rings movies, Titanic, Pirates of the Caribbean 2 & 3, etc, those were very rare cases. Since 2008, it isn't unusual for several movies to gross over a billion worldwide in the same year.

If it were released this year, it would definitely have made more worldwide. Not more than BvS or MOS, but more than 400 million worldwide.

Even with foreign markets, SR would still underperform. Of the big movies of the summer of 2006, SR came in last place.

Behind X3, The Da Vinci Code and POTC Dead Man's Chest. SR had the entire month of June to make it's money before Pirates swooped in the first week of July, and Da Vinci Code and X3 were released in May.

The film underperformed because it was boring.

[Rene Narciso]

Birthright wasn't a grim 90's comic but a 2003 origin story, Kingdom Come was about a return to classic morals, Confidential was a Darwyne Cooke/Tim Sale "coming of age" story, Peace on Earth was written by Paul Dini and Silver Age lover Alex Ross. I could also point to "For the Man Who Has Everything" from the 80's, or the golden age Superman who takes a spoiled rich boy out of his bed to look at a poor girl content with only having a broken doll. Superman's best stuff isn't exclusive to the 80's, 90's, and 2000's, but I'd say most comic book characters have their best stories written in that window. I don't understand why people just want Santa Claus with muscles. We already had Reeve and a sad Superman is nothing new.

I more closely associate Snyder to the 1990s and early 2000s, but I do feel that Snyder borrows less from Superman stories of any time period, and more from that post-9/11 feeling of despair. The reason the Marvel Cinematic Universe worked so fine is that they offered an escape to this feeling, even though they ended up working it into their movies anyway. But they didn't work it into their movies right away. Somehow, starting a Superman franchise with massive civilian casualties in Metropolis seems to me the opposite of what Superman should be about. I don't see it as a Kingdom Come or Birthright kind of situation, because those comics took advantage of an already existing dark age of comics and tried to turn it around. Snyder is MAKING his dark age of superhero movies. If Snyder's Superman finally becomes a triumphing hero by the time of his third or fourth appearance in a movie, the appropriate reaction won't be "awesome!" it will be "duh! about time, silly!".

[Rene Narciso]

I never liked superman before...

Color me surprised...

but I like the dark relatable superman whatever you want to call it but i always like the antihero, darker, more thoughtful and more complex stories than the good vs evil where the hero's are always right and nobody thinks or expects too much.

Anti-hero and darker are not synonimous with thought and complexity. Some of the more trite and thoughtless comics of all time starred anti-heroes. You can have thoughtful and complex stories with all kinds of protagonists. I do like anti-heroes fine, when they're done well. I wanted Suicide Squad to be even DARKER and much more ponderous. The thing is, that is not the only thing I like. A variety of stories can be told with superhero characters. If you want a anti-heroic tale, then Superman might not be the best character for you. Make a Miracleman movie instead, and then we can have massive casualties, hyper-violence, and heroes making lethal decisions in the nick of time.

[SiegePerilous02]

The nineties were more than just Image Comics and/or Rob Liefeld. It's a more encompassing cynicism that makes people doubt old-fashioned heroes and goes at the heart of this "Superman isn't cool" debate. Librarian's post above is a perfect example, but there are shades of it in most of the posts defending MoS and BvS.

Except for the fact that the cynicism is going away, if Bruce's none too subtle monologue at the end of the film is any indication. The heroes coming together in the next installment to work together against a common threat, and Superman coming back to life to join them, combined with the new humor and the promise from Terrio (from before BvS's release) that BvS was always going to the be the darkest installment in a trilogy that would lighten up for the last part, all come together to paint an optimistic picture.

Other stuff like Clark dying to save the world even though he thinks most of it hates him, and also saving Lex from Doomsday without a moment's hesitation, don't paint a cynical picture of him at all. Just the opposite.

Somehow I had a feeling you'd feel this way about Thor and Ant-Man... Give me Ant-Man all day, everyday, over a Snyder film. I bet he'd have Hank punching Janet's teeth out in the first 30 minutes, and Scott Lang is a violent criminal that abuses Cassie or something.

See, it's hyperbolic stuff like this that I can't take seriously. Though these interpretations are darker than most, what about these versions of Clark and Bruce make you think they are capable of something like this, or that Snyder would do the same to Marvel's heroes? Because I didn't see a scene of Clark backhanding Lois through a wall or Bruce kicking that little girl in the beginning.

I mean, his depiction of the Wayne murders even has Joe Chill painted in a somewhat sympathetic light (look at the shocked/horrified look on his face), so I can't imagine Snyder would go full bastard with Scott Lang.

[JAK]

Here are my major problems with Snyder's take:

1: You can't both say you "didn't change the character" and then say you "made him more relatable. Pick one.

2: I'm fine with a "green" Superman who has no experience. I'm not fine with a green Superman who has no experience being used as a blanket excuse and plotpoint when it's never paid off by having him learn anything. He dodges a tanker the blows up behind him? Ok, then show him reacting and show him learning by having him react differently the second time.

3: Having a Superman who's major decisions are made only when he's forced into them is also fine.... until the end of the movie. All that powerlessness for a man with that much power needs a "pay-off" where he's in a seemingly "forced" situation and this time says "No - this ends MY way."

4: Has Superman killed before? Yes. Has it generally been a good idea? Not so much. Does it impact the character beyond the story? Not in MoS it seems, since he considers killing Batman in BvS. Thus negating the point of putting him in a situation like that in the first place.. wasn't him killing Zod supposed to be him "learning not to kill"? And for those that said "it's ok because Zod's a big threat," then what about his momentary thought that he might have to kill Batman in BvS? Looks like he just has a semi-reluctant taste for it now..

5: You shouldn't spend one movie not fully fleshing out a character and then the next one focusing mainly on other characters to the point of making the first one feel "distant". Doesn't work if you haven't fleshed them out properly. It certainly doesn't make them relatable. I've said this before in other places, but it's like sitting in the corner facing the wall at your senior prom and wondering why nobody's talking to you.

6: Self doubt is fine. It's healthy. But "Superman isn't real. He's just the dream of a farmer from Kansas" and "No one stays good in this world" isn't self-doubt; it's pessimism. Can a pessimisticly-themed Superman movie be done? Sure, it has been for two movies now. But it's about as appealing as Fox's original idea for a PG-13-rated Deadpool.

7: and holy crapsticks, WB.. burn the blue filter. And that weird brown one from BvS, while you're at it. It was fine for the first Twilight film...but not for Superman. Which is pretty funny, given that Henry was Meyer's first choice for Edward, but he's not playing Edward here. At least not in name, I guess, lol...

Are there saving graces to these films? Absolutely. The cast, by and large, is pretty amazing - and Cavill has the chops to be as remembered in the role as Reeve was. Snyder is (generally) good as a visual director. And Terrio is quite good with dialogue. That's not a bad start. And some of the ideas were good, but the execution was terrible, imo. Correcting things wouldn't be that hard. But the main reason a lot of people I know went was because it was the "first time Superman and Batman were in a movie together." So if they don't fix things soon, there will be no more firsts.. and that'll be that.

[misslane]

1: You can't both say you "didn't change the character" and then say you "made him more relatable. Pick one.

Those two things aren't mutually exclusive. Making a character more relatable is not a fundamental change.

3: Having a Superman who's major decisions are made only when he's forced into them is also fine.... until the end of the movie. All that powerlessness for a man with that much power needs a "pay-off" where he's in a seemingly "forced" situation and this time says "No - this ends MY way."

Zod's whole raison d'etre at that point in the film was gone. As an individual programmed from birth to be a soldier for Krypton, he had lost his purpose. He wasn't going to stop until he was stopped. Now, would it have been great to see Superman find a way to stop Zod without killing him? Sure, but what makes you think that he didn't have a choice to stop Zod the way he did. Superman didn't have to kill Zod; he could have tried something else. Would an alternative solution be guaranteed to work? No. Superman made a choice to kill Zod, and maybe it wasn't the best choice, but it was still a choice. In that moment, Superman believed he was doing his best to protect people.

4: Has Superman killed before? Yes. Has it generally been a good idea? Not so much. Does it impact the character beyond the story? Not in MoS it seems, since he considers killing Batman in BvS. Thus negating the point of putting him in a situation like that in the first place.. wasn't him killing Zod supposed to be him "learning not to kill"? And for those that said "it's ok because Zod's a big threat," then what about his momentary thought that he might have to kill Batman in BvS? Looks like he just has a semi-reluctant taste for it now..

I didn't read that line the way you did. When Clark tells Lois, "I have to go to Gotham to convince him to help me. Or he has to die. No one stays good in this world," it seemed he was only laying out the ultimatum he was given. When he finds Batman, he does try to convince him to help save Martha, but is met with resistance. Superman's response is not to kill him. He straight up says that if he wanted to kill Batman, then he would be dead.

6: Self doubt is fine. It's healthy. But "Superman isn't real. He's just the dream of a farmer from Kansas" and "No one stays good in this world" isn't self-doubt; it's pessimism. Can a pessimisticly-themed Superman movie be done? Sure, it has been for two movies now. But it's about as appealing as Fox's original idea for a PG-13-rated Deadpool.

The film wasn't pessimistic. Superman expressed some pessimism before ultimately rediscovering hope and optimism. You make it sound like those statements were the final word from Superman in the film. They were not.