Controversial Superman Opinions

[Frontier]

The DCAU never actually used Zod, just a Zod expy Jax-Ur. It’s rather odd how a villain who is perhaps Supes second most well known villain thanks to the movies has never really been a big deal in the comics/tv/animated mediums. Your take is an interesting one, I would keep Metropolis but having Clark work at the Daily Star could let you fulfill most of this “Embargo’s” demands. Highly agree that we need to give Lex a rest, focus on the other Rogues.

Of course I’d rather they gave Superman & The Legion another shot. Would love to see an animated adaption of Johns Legion arc in Action.

Zod was in Justice League Action, where he was voiced by the same VA who voiced Superman .

I think one of the villains in the Legion cartoon was supposed to be Zod's son. He had his symbol on his suit.

[PCN24454]

I'd love that honestly. I'm of the belief that the next Superman adaptation should be completely different from all past Superman movies and should go in a scifi/space fantasy direction

Why does there even need to be another Superman film/franchise?

I say just let the character retire.

[Robanker]

Why does there even need to be another Superman film/franchise?

I say just let the character retire.

That's certainly controversial on a forum for Superman fans.

[SuperX]

Why does there even need to be another Superman film/franchise?

I say just let the character retire.

So controversial that you are banished for life lol

[Vordan]

Why does there even need to be another Superman film/franchise?

I say just let the character retire.

Now this is the type of controversial Superman opinion this thread was made for . So much more bold than yet another argument over Zack Snyder.

With all due respect: hell no to that idea! I’ll never support that opinion. We’ve never even gotten beyond rehashing Lex and Zod! There’s so many Superman stories that would make for great movies, it’s not the characters fault WB keeps putting hacks in charge.

I need to see Superman & Brainiac go at it. I want Superman fighting his way through gladiator matches in Warworld until he takes on Mongul. I want to see him team up with the Legion of Superheroes. I want to see a Morrison t-shirt and jeans Superman face down Metallo and the United States Army. I want Manchester Black and the Elite talking **** and going after Supes. A Parasite horror movie. There’s so much stuff we’ve never seen, and the idea of letting Cavill and Snyder’s terrible take be the last one we see on the big screen makes me nauseous. What an awful ending that would be.

[Flash Gordon]

Why does there even need to be another Superman film/franchise?

I say just let the character retire.

Because people like Superman and want to see a good movie?

[SiegePerilous02]

As superhero entertainment designed to make money for big corporations, nobody technically needs to have any of this for any character. We certainly don't need any more Batman content but we keep getting it.

There's still a lot of Superman stuff that hasn't been touched on the live action movie front though. No Supergirl (at least not in the same film together), no Brainiac, no Legion. There is plenty of stuff to do beyond rehashing Lex and Zod for the billionth time.

I'd be fine with letting the character retire as long as he's with WB though. They've never actually been responsible for a good Superman movie, the only two good ones were distributed by them but created by another production company. Disney somehow getting the rights sounds more and more appealing, they aren't without their own drawbacks but I can't imagine they'd fuck it up anymore than WB*.

*though yes, there is the Star Wars sequel films, though they at least have Mandalorian.

[PCN24454]

That's certainly controversial on a forum for Superman fans.

So controversial that you are banished for life lol

Now this is the type of controversial Superman opinion this thread was made for . So much more bold than yet another argument over Zack Snyder.

With all due respect: hell no to that idea! I’ll never support that opinion. We’ve never even gotten beyond rehashing Lex and Zod! There’s so many Superman stories that would make for great movies, it’s not the characters fault WB keeps putting hacks in charge.

I need to see Superman & Brainiac go at it. I want Superman fighting his way through gladiator matches in Warworld until he takes on Mongul. I want to see him team up with the Legion of Superheroes. I want to see a Morrison t-shirt and jeans Superman face down Metallo and the United States Army. I want Manchester Black and the Elite talking **** and going after Supes. A Parasite horror movie. There’s so much stuff we’ve never seen, and the idea of letting Cavill and Snyder’s terrible take be the last one we see on the big screen makes me nauseous. What an awful ending that would be.

Because people like Superman and want to see a good movie?

Yeah, I figured. I remembered what manwhohaseverything said about how iconic characters are just IP farms, and it was hard to argue with them on that.

Superman and his lore have had so many different interpretations that you could say that they're all Superman and that none of them are. When I look at it that way, we might as well be getting new characters.

[The Kid]

Why does there even need to be another Superman film/franchise?

I say just let the character retire.

Because he's a popular character who still rakes money in merchandising and that's despite being mismanaged and not having had a good movie in 40+ years. Of all the big superheroes, he has some of the most left to tell

[PCN24454]

Now this is the type of controversial Superman opinion this thread was made for . So much more bold than yet another argument over Zack Snyder.

With all due respect: hell no to that idea! I’ll never support that opinion. We’ve never even gotten beyond rehashing Lex and Zod! There’s so many Superman stories that would make for great movies, it’s not the characters fault WB keeps putting hacks in charge.

I need to see Superman & Brainiac go at it. I want Superman fighting his way through gladiator matches in Warworld until he takes on Mongul. I want to see him team up with the Legion of Superheroes. I want to see a Morrison t-shirt and jeans Superman face down Metallo and the United States Army. I want Manchester Black and the Elite talking **** and going after Supes. A Parasite horror movie. There’s so much stuff we’ve never seen, and the idea of letting Cavill and Snyder’s terrible take be the last one we see on the big screen makes me nauseous. What an awful ending that would be.

They always rehash Lex and Zod because they're main antagonists. People don't go to the movies to watch MOTWs.

[SiegePerilous02]

They always rehash Lex and Zod because they're main antagonists. People don't go to the movies to watch MOTWs.

I wouldn't consider Zod one of the main antagonists if we're looking at the entire history. His claim to fame is really the movies and getting a meme out of it.

Brainiac isn't a MOTW, neither is Mxy (though he'd be a different kind of film- though that should be an incentive).

[Vordan]

They always rehash Lex and Zod because they're main antagonists. People don't go to the movies to watch MOTWs.

Zod is not a main antagonist at all. He’s been a complete nonentity in the comics for years. When Donner chose Zod for Superman II he was just one of multiple PZ prisoners, nowhere near as prominent a villain as Brainiac for example. The movies make the villains big deals, Bloodsport is going to be the third Superman Rogue on the big screen that’s crazy. What great stories has Zod been in that justify them picking him? And in a world where the MCU chose to use Vulture for Spider-Man and Zack Snyder chose Steppenwolf for the first JL movie let’s not pretend the directors are obsessed with “A-Listers”.

Mongul and Metallo are perfectly fine villains who have been used in a good stories and can pose a challenge to Superman. The idea that audiences will turn their noses up at a Superman movie if Lex or Zod aren’t the bad guy is silly. If anything choosing either of those two again guarantees people won’t be interested because it’s the same **** they’ve seen before. Someone else needs to be the Big Bad of the next Superman movie.

[manwhohaseverything]

Yeah, I figured. I remembered what manwhohaseverything said about how iconic characters are just IP farms, and it was hard to argue with them on that.

Superman and his lore have had so many different interpretations that you could say that they're all Superman and that none of them are. When I look at it that way, we might as well be getting new characters.

They all are.I am just being an ogre who is pissed that the kid is basically in limbo,in regards to direction and the old man seems to act like nothing from my prefered version.Clark is entirely to unenergetic and Dull for me.That's it.If i get either of them sorted out.I am gonna go back to being the prince charming.As for not having movie,i want the character to survive.But,on it's own merits.Not because,it's a money maker.If the character proivdes good stories even if money doesn't follow.Atleast,the purpose of stories are being served.And Because the character means alot to the people of the entire world.

[PCN24454]

Zod is not a main antagonist at all. He’s been a complete nonentity in the comics for years. When Donner chose Zod for Superman II he was just one of multiple PZ prisoners, nowhere near as prominent a villain as Brainiac for example. The movies make the villains big deals, Bloodsport is going to be the third Superman Rogue on the big screen that’s crazy. What great stories has Zod been in that justify them picking him? And in a world where the MCU chose to use Vulture for Spider-Man and Zack Snyder chose Steppenwolf for the first JL movie let’s not pretend the directors are obsessed with “A-Listers”.

Mongul and Metallo are perfectly fine villains who have been used in a good stories and can pose a challenge to Superman. The idea that audiences will turn their noses up at a Superman movie if Lex or Zod aren’t the bad guy is silly. If anything choosing either of those two again guarantees people won’t be interested because it’s the same **** they’ve seen before. Someone else needs to be the Big Bad of the next Superman movie.

Vulture isn't a very good argument since he's very different from his OG counterpart. Don't even get me started with what PS4 Spider-Man did with the Tinkerer.

[Steel Inquisitor]

He told the guy to stop harassing her and he did. Also, the woman was the one who told Clark to let it slide.

And yet she was happy when she suspected he was responsible for destroying the man's car. He did it badly, as I explained upthread.

He wasn't communicating with the public. He did communicate with Lois and his mother.

Which is a problem and is something Superman's supposed to be good at or learning to do, he wasn't that bad at it in Man of Steel. Except he shouldn't be relying solely on two close friend and family for that sort of support and they aren't going to cut it when this is about him being Superman to the public. This is public relations. And why? We never find out and Snyder had no interest in exploring it in B vs S.

He did not "get so quiet" after Man of Steel. In Man of Steel he preferred to stay anonymous and was only forced to become public due to the invasion. He clearly isn't comfortable with being a public figure and he did try to address concerns at the Senate hearing which was ruined by Luthor blowing the place up.

Correct, which is why I'm confused why Snyder didn't continue that. That made sense for him to stay out of the limelight, not when he's Superman in B vs S, even when he was incredibly bad at covering his tracks. Not being comfy with speaking is public is understandable but the movie never gets into this or why he isn't trying to improve - which there are many, many opportunities for him to do this if he were so inclined, instead it's not a priority. It's not even a potential idea for him to explore as a super-hero since he or the people he knows don't talk about it like it is. You can learn that for free with TED Talks on You Tube, for instance, and he'd have more opportunities to do this s a reporter and in university, which would have courses teaching how to do this because he's a reporter, a profession which relies on speaking to the public. Which would have been wonderful except Snyder had no interest in exploring the Senate hearing, which would be interested to watch but nope. Boom, Superman's back into hiding again because if there truly is anything this Superman fears the most it's public speaking. Which you'd think would make him more relatable but Snyder does nothing with it.

Clark does have a story arc in BvS. It isn't something you might like but it does exist.

Left out "to open up in B v S," which is true. My statement was not saying he had no story arc in the film, that's a straw man.

We have never been told what type of reporter Clark is.

In the movie or in general? The movie heavily implies he's a sports reporter, reporters have niches they don't switch between them, maybe Snyder just didn't know how reporting works. And in hindsight would make more sense why Perry doesn't want Clark writing any articles on Batman since he has no credibility in that field yet. It's incredibly sloppy for a film maker of Snyder's calibre. In general Clark is an investigative reporter in Lois' field, that's why he partners with her. But before he gets there he has finished his education and become a rising star in his own right in that field since she's the Daily Planet's top reporter. All this is of course blank in B vs S, and I think it's only months to a year, two tops, after Man of Steel, where Clark was a homeless vagabond with no education to speak of that is shown. If he did finish universe as a reporter in Man of Steel it was never shown or implied, and raises questions how he finished university while roaming the world. He never says he's doing university online.

The hell you do. Calling Clark a villain, saying he doesn't communicate, that he doesn't defend anyone or care about anyone, claiming he's an edgy loner etc. Every criticism about him by you is either false or an exaggeration of what actually happens. You repeatedly ignore anything about Superman in these films that doesn't make him look like a bad guy or a monster. Any tiny flaw gets blown up to ridiculous proportions with you even going as far as comparing to Ultraman.

Wrong. I'm working with the films themselves, Man of Steel is more liked than B vs S since it's more coherent in structure and I prefer that Clark over the second, and my objections are consistent. Except he's really and at communicating, you admit that yourself in this very post. He does defend people but it's not how regular Superman does it by any stretch, and he makes very controversial choices in what he does and doesn't do around dangerous people. For example, the business about ignoring the Lex goons Batman's fighting, it makes him look like a bad investigative journalist by his lack of curiosity about what's going on. He is an edgy loner alright, that's why his support network consists of his girlfriend, his mother and dead father. He's shown no intent on searching for other people like himself and the second he does so he gives them death threats like he's a leg breaker for the mob. I don't need to exaggerate anything about Snyder's Superman to find flaws in his behaviour. Superman isn't a bad guy in Man of Steel, however, he's incredibly apathetic about the destruction around him and is not impacted by death that much or reactions to it in his movies, with few exceptions. B vs S Superman is a terrible human being and a worse super-hero, making that Batman look rational takes effort in how bad his behaviour is. Which is helped by Batman having more lines, we're seeing the world through his eyes and Snyder's done Superman no favours in why people would actually react to Superman like he did - but Superman? None of that depth in B vs S. When he acts like Ultra man I'll call him out on it, as I should.

Snyder's Superman is not Ultraman or Homelander or Plutonian or Hyperion or the kid from Bright or whatever other evil Superman you want to compare him to. He isn't perfect but neither is any version of Superman.

That's whitewashing how terrible a Superman he is, the problem isn't that he's not perfect it's that he's not acting very much like Superman. He may not be Homelander but he does have scenes which remind me of Homelander, in B vs S, and no Superman should be doing that. Homelander is also smart about PR and talking to people in public, too bad this Superman sucks at that aspect, even if Homelander is lying through his teeth.

Here's Maggie Mae Fish's latest examining of Snyder's work. Enjoy.