What if the problem isn't Snyder, what if the problem is superman?

So who is better Snyder's Supes or CW's Supes? We need a thread about it.

Isn't it too soon for this kind of bait thread?

Whats the appeal of superman? Isn't he too perfect? I've never read him.

Snyder is mentally 14, thinks dark and edgy automatically equals good

>I've never read him.

Well maybe you fucking should then instead of assuming bullshit.

Op, Mos is my 2nd favorite movie, I love it with every fiber of my being. But even I will agree Superman is less open & friendly here then elsewhere, especially in Mos, now I personally do not see that as a bad thing, but it is genuinely a problem for those that do.
People want him to be warm & inviting like Chris Evans's Cap.

Serious maturity is absolutely better then campy silliness.
Nothing in Mos or Bvs is edgy.

These are comic books, Zack

There isn't one really, and I have read him.

He has a few good moments, but he's generally pretty boring.

>People want him to be warm & inviting like Chris Evans's Cap.
I had never heard this outside of Cred Forums, if anything people that actually dislike Cavill want Donner's version, not MCU stuff.

I don't read Superman either, but to me his appeal is that despite all of his strength and abilities, he's really just farmer boy from the south who always tries to do the right thing. And he really cares about everyone.
Superman is Clark Kent. Not the other way around.

He's a symbol of the good that all people desire to do. Hes also a really chill guy. (Depending on who's writing him ofc)

I meant only based on appearance. Who looks closer to the picture that you have about Superman?

Snyder really is a total simple bro-type who thinks he's way smarter than he is. He gives the worst goddamn interviews. Theres one where the interviewer asks why he has a bunch of axes hanging in his room and Snyder's response is "I just really, really like axes. I think they're cool."

>especially in Mos
especially in Bvs my bad.

Some people like reading about a god trying to be a man, a being who can do anything he wants, but chooses to be a good person despite the cynical world around him telling him not to be.

Donner's Superman was closer than to the MCU's tone than the DCEU's tone, so it's an easy comparison.

Irrelevant, the concepts deserve to be treated with dignity rather then parody-ish disdain.
Nostalgia fags do, but most people realize that is way way too extreme & silly/campy for the modern age. The tone of Evan's Cap is a fair middle ground.

this thread

The most recurring complaints I've heard about DCEU Superman from people outside of comics basically boil down to him being "not Superman enough". It's actually been kind of interesting to see, after years of apparent yearning for it, a dark, flawed Superman be more or less rejected en masse by mostly casual audiences. Careful what you wish for, maybe? Assuming they actually cared.

The problem really goes futher than Snyder. It's Warner Bros., or at least whoever oversees these Superman movies. That vision of Superman as a kind of weird, sad loner is something you track back to not only Superman Returns but a lot of the unmade film projects before that.

Superman's fine, people would be fine with Superman if that's what they actually got.

so you can't tell me?

Nothing is mos or bvs is edgy
>"DO YOU BLEED? YOU WILL"
>Batman Killing and using guns
>Zod's snapped neck
>"Maybe you shouldn't have saved those kids"
>STOP, INVINCIBLE SON

Which is exactly why "Superman but evil" stories are boring and unappealing.

>>"DO YOU BLEED? YOU WILL"
Not edgy, it's a valid question, Superman can split a mountain with his head, bleeding is something he probably thinks he can't do.

>>Batman Killing and using guns
A fallen antagonist Batman that isnt a hero anymore and that is saved by superman

>>Zod's snapped neck
Not edgy, proportional and justified, and a very big deal

>>"Maybe you shouldn't have saved those kids"
Never said in the movie, a parent that doesnt have all the answers, pretty good

>>STOP, INVINCIBLE SON
Not edgy, just really stupid

I hate Snyder's Superman.
I don't want Chris Evans.
I don't want Donner Superman.

I want Byrne Superman.
I want Waid Superman.
I want Dini Superman.
I want Krueger Superman.
I want Ennis Superman.
I want Johns Superman.
I want Pak Superman.
I want Morrison Superman.
Hell, I'll even take Landis Superman.

I know my words are going to fall on deaf ears but the utter lack of charm and charisma and positivity and the dour tone is only 50% of what's wrong with Snyder's Superman The other half of the problem is the complete and total lack of agency; Clark is passive and jerked around by the needs of the plot to the point that every """heroic""" thing he does it feels like he's being forced into doing rather than him having a genuine want to do it. "He needs to smile more" is just the tip of the iceberg and reducing the criticisms to just that is a great way to show how you cunts never really wanted to argue this in good faith. But I get why. Snyder focuses on 5% of Superman's character so you can only focus on 5% of the criticisms. That's how it works I guess.

>>"DO YOU BLEED? YOU WILL"
>>Batman Killing and using guns
He didn't use guns against people, and he killed out of broken desperation after 20 years of failure. That is perfectly logical world building.
>>Zod's snapped neck
"Saving 7-8 billion lives by killing 1 genocidal mass murderer is edgy" your fucking delusional.
>>"Maybe you shouldn't have saved those kids"
Wasn't a actual suggestion., he spit it out in desperation to get his point across, that the needs of the many outway the needs of the few.
>>STOP, INVINCIBLE SON
How is a father sacrificing himself for his son's life and the lives of millions of people that could be effected by his son's secret edgy?

None of this is unneeded glorified violence like Ultimatum or Nemesis, which is what "edgy" actually is, this fits perfectly in line with the tone & world they set up.
Its played 100%, edgy crap typically revels in it, its over the top & played for laughs or is made of shock value.

Superman Returns was a more mature and serious take on the Superman films. BvS was definitely pretty edgy, but there's nothing inherently wrong with that. Well, not if you do it right anyway.

>It's actually been kind of interesting to see, after years of apparent yearning for it, a dark, flawed Superman be more or less rejected en masse by mostly casual audiences.
The people yearning for this are not the same people complaining or asking for it in the first place.

The DCEU is being made by the same brain trust that thought "I don't want to seeh him fly. That costume is too faggy. He needs to fight giant spiders and be played by Nicholas Cage. How can we fix this gay character?" that's been plaguing the guy's films or the last 20 years.

No

Writing and Snyder were the demise of that movie. Batfleck was the only good thing.

I'm not a big Superman fan, but I'll admit he was one of my top three favorite characters in JL/JLU, and his show was awesome. I feel like Cavill has potential, it's just that he comes off a little bland. But then again, I'm more of a television guy than movies, so I think I might be used to having more time for a character to develop.

I've been thinking about it and one of the more innocuous lines that seems to get overlooked betrays the fundamental misunderstanding of the character:

>Stand down. If I wanted it you'd be dead already.

That's so unnecessarily aggressive and adversarial for the man of steel. It'd be more in character from him to say something like "I don't want to hurt you." than to imply a (lethal!)threat so strongly.

It was edgy dude. Thousands died in Metropolis because of a fight that featured a ton of destruction and 9/11 parallels. Superman has a angsty past filled with inner turmoil. Batman's lost his moral center and kills people who get in his way. It's edgy man. It's not a bad thing, but it's undeniably a grittier, edgier take on established heroes.

>he other half of the problem is the complete and total lack of agency
Why? Why is it bad that this Superman is reluctant for the right reasons?
Why is it bad that we get a Superman that is actually extremely concerned about the problems he could cause outwaying the good he does.
>to the point that every """heroic""" thing he does it feels like he's being forced into doing rather than him having a genuine want to do it
Doing the right thing is hard in the real fucking world when you will suffer for it, he did the right thing anyway and its not good enough for you because he isn't throwing sunshine & flowers across the land as he does it, fuck you.

Cavill has already proven he can be a great Superman with the scenes showing his first flight and his moments from Man of Steel when he returns home and shares a hug with Ma Kent.

The character is great when he's used right and smiles and gives off hope. The problem is how he's being written for these movies.

It's not Henry and it's not the character. It's the writing and direction.

Cavill is honestly one of the best portrayals of Superman ever put on the big screen. Unfortunately it mostly comes in moments where he's not speaking (Oil tanker, rescuing a girl from a burning building.)

Blame the script.

One of my bigger problems is that this Superman comes off as emotionally stunted and immature. He's reckless and impulsive. Wrecking the batmobile and dropping a vague to threat to Batman seemed like such a childish and moronic idea from someone who has the power of a God. Stop acting like a childish fascist. You're capable of words, Clark. Use them.

>Thousands died in Metropolis because of a fight that featured a ton of destruction and 9/11 parallels

If gods fight, mortal died, there's NOTHING WRONG or EDGY about the battle of metropolis, is proportional to the powers they gave to superman and zod.
Consequences are not Edgy,

>Superman has a angsty past filled with inner turmoil.

More like we get to see that part of his past, it doesnt means that was his entire past.

>Batman's lost his moral center and kills people who get in his way.

If he was a hero or put on the light in the movie? Sure, but he is pretty much a villian, he is wrong, he is doing bad shit and at the end of the movie he is redeemed by SUPERMAN.

The movie may be dark and Gritty, but there's nothing edgy about that.

>Its played 100% straight is what I meant to say.
>Thousands died in Metropolis because of a fight
No they fucking did not, get this through your thick fucking skull ONE SING,LE MOTHER FUCKING BUILDING fell during their 1 on 1 fight, everything else was a result of the world engine blast or the scout ship crashing.
A alien invasion having dire stakes & consequences IS NOT FUCKING EDGY.

They did not glorify the violence, they did not reveled in the blood & guts. They played it as a straight disaster that is appropriately horrifying & awe inspiring.
>Superman has a angsty past filled with inner turmoil
Superman does not inherently require a happy origin.
>Batman's lost his moral center
Going to extremes in desperation is not loosing your moral center, its making bigger sacrifices for the important things that actually fucking matter.
>grittier
Yes
>edgier
No

That is the fucking point for him to be shown as imperfect, and taking people's abuse for 33 years will make anyone realistically spiteful at times.
Nothing moronic about it, all evidence showed him that Batman would not be stopped by words, he was a brutal torturer he doesn't deserve negotiation.

>Superman does not inherently require a happy origin.
Yes he does. Unless you're actively trying to write something like Flashpoint, his happy and well adjusted origin is what sets him apart from the flock.
When you say things like this it just proves you never got the character in the first place.

The only thing to "get" about the character is that he is a good person who helps people.
Having to strive past hardship to do so does not lessen "getting" that in anyway.

If cat starts burying bones and chasing cars is that okay?

Turning a cat into a dog is great if you're a dog lover but it's not fixing the cat. It's just getting another dog. Giving Superman the angst and turmoil of his peers does not elevate him. It smooths out the edges that makes him unique.

Well adjusted and happy are not the same.

That you got to see some RELEVANT moments of his childhood that were not happy doesnt mean he wasnt happy.Clark has a loving mom, a loving mom and his parents have to struggle with what the future had for his son. tey didnt had all the answers and worried about him. There's nothing wrong with that.

Like I said I knew you'd ignore the point.
All that shit you're asking for? Clark being concernred about the effects on humanity, or struggling to make the right choice? That's less than a third of his character. You don't want Superman. You want a tiny myopic portion of his greater whole, and ONLY that, and can't even begin to grasp the complaint that the rest of that whole is missing.

This superman is everybody's superman.
You are just watching some of his darkest moments, that doesnt negates the rest of his life. It just means the rest isnt important for the story.

I am not asking for angst, I am asking for consequences and stakes.
I am asking for him to have to actually struggle & strive to accomplish good rather then him just waving his hand and the problem is solved.
I want dire situations with the character that I can actually get invested in.

I think the bigger issue with that is that it retcons his development in Man of Steel. I had to suffer that movie so that Clark could learn that humanity wasn't all bad, that he had a home there, and there was good in people worth protecting and maybe he could think better of them and trust them.

But then BvS happens and "welcome to the planet" gets retconned because it's NOT his world after all and he needs to learn that lesson again. He forgets that humanity is worth protecting and automatically starts thinking the worst of Batman and looks only at the negatives of his methods rather than focusing on the positives of his intent, can't trust anyone enough to defend himself; all his character development gets backpedaled and he's the same mopey and alienated figure searching for belonging he was last time, all in service of justifying a fight scene.

It's much like how Bruce isn't allowed to be a proper detective because then he might be too smart to get tricked by Luthor. Snyder needed his the shitty fight and everything else is a flimsy backdrop to build up to it.

Do fucking tell, what EXACTLY is the point?
>That's less than a third of his character
That was zero part of his character in the Reeves films.
I don't want campy silly Superman with no consequences is what I don't fucking want.
I want the character to be treated with dignity & respect instead of the writer walking on egg shells to make sure they don't make him flawed, have to make sacrifices for the good or god forbid actively do something wrong by mistake.

It's not enough.
Characters like Pete Ross and Lana Lang exist for a reason. Do you even know what that reason is?

I was going to ask about trees falling in the forest with no one there to hear it but honestly that doesn't apply here because the implications are quite clear that no that stuff I'm missing isn't just unimportant to the narrative, it's not happening at all in this universe. It's not happening off camera, it's just not happening period.

First of all, I don't know where you got the idea that something being edgy means it has to revel in violence or gore. Or revel in anything. Something being edgy doesn't mean it has to linger on those elements. It just has to be different in a bigger (usually darker) way, and that's exactly what it did.

>A alien invasion having dire stakes & consequences IS NOT FUCKING EDGY.
It is when it's directed the way Snyder did. He made it violent, he made it grim. He actually put an immense amount of destruction in there. I've seen numerous people on this board and just in general that there was way too much "destruction porn" for a superhero movie, let alone Superman. There was an established tone to the Superman movies and superhero movies. Snyder subverted that tone and those expectations radically by making it dark and attempting to give it some serious bite with unprecedented destruction, Superman killing, and a ton of emotional drama.

Again, being edgy isn't a bad thing.

>it's not happening at all in this universe. It's not happening off camera, it's just not happening period.

That's some serious autism

>Characters like Pete Ross and Lana Lang exist for a reason. Do you even know what that reason is?
To give him human connections, but your missing the fact that THEY INTENTIONALLY SET OUT OT MAKE HIM ALIENATED IN THIS UNIVERSE, DO YOU NOT FUCKING GET THIS YOU DENSE MOTHER FUCKER?

Oh. It's you again.
It's Reeve. No S.
And yes, angsting about his place in the world was a part of the Reeve movies. (Which I already said I don't want but you can't seem to avoid bringing up). That's why the entire arc o Superman 2 is him having to choose between what he wants (a normal human life with Lois) and what's right and what's good for the world (to continue on as Superman). That is a tough decision that you're freely ignoring because >muh serious scifi! eggshells! kid gloves! i hate donner so much!

>A alien invasion having dire stakes & consequences

>He made it violent, he made it grim. He actually put an immense amount of destruction in there.

Are you a troll?

I agree that they intentionally set out to make him something he's not. I'm sorry, you seem to be under the impression I'm implying their failure was accidental. I'm not. It was fully done with malice aforethought.

If I intentionally make a human centipede that does not mean it's not an abomination.

No its fucking not edgy from his directing, its played straight & serious, portraying it as it would actually fucking happen in real life, and giving it the gravity and impact it would have in real life is not fucking edgy.
If you don't give it the proper weight then you might as well be playing it for fucking laughs.

This argument would hold more weight if Snyder had actually done the character any justice

>That's why the entire arc o Superman 2 is him having to choose between what he wants (a normal human life with Lois)
>That is a tough decision that you're freely ignoring because
I'm ignoring it because it is insane pure retardation contrived manufactured soap opera drama from fucking hell.
There is not a reason on this fucking earth why he could not be Superman & be with Lois at the same time.

>muh realism
>muh serious
>muh weight
Get a new argument.

>you might as well be playing it for fucking laughs.
Pop quiz. Do you know what Bathos is?

Are you? This isn't the first superhero movie to have the fate of the world be at stake, and most don't look like this. It was different, darker, and more dramatic in a way that no one expected. It had a realistic and dramatic bite to it. It was edgy.

>I'm ignoring it because it is insane pure retardation contrived manufactured soap opera drama from fucking hell.
So,exactly what's begin said about BvS.

>There is not a reason on this fucking earth why he could not be Superman & be with Lois at the same time.
I can think of three off the top of my head but to be fair most of them requires me to read the comics so I can see why you would think there's no good reasons.

Was Burton not retreading Adam West done with Malice?
Was Nolan not retreading Batman & Robin done with Malice?
Doing alternative things in alternative universe is not a failure/maliceful/abominable, its do give us variety instead of repeating the same thing over and over.

There's nothing EDGY about that.

Consequences are not edgy. Weight isnt a meme.

>Consequences are not edgy. Weight isnt a meme.

They are when the current state of superhero movies has made them disposable, recycled blockbuster flicks. They're basically Saturday morning cartoons. Then comes MoS which attempted to have dire stakes and consequences with realism, fraught with intense emotional relationships. Different. Subversive. Edgy.

>be first real superhero
>be incredibly popular
>be inspiration for literally every superhero after
>maintain popularity for 80
>become known and loved all over the world, transcending languages and cultures
>have 4 live action tv series
>have my own or am a main character in 10+ animated tv series
>have my own or am a main character in 10+ animated movies
>have 6 live action movies
>have multiple on-going comics for 80 years
hmmmmmm I fucking wonder if it's Snyder?

........of fucking course the problem is that fucking hack Snyder and the idiots at WB that ok'd a 'dark and gritty real world' Superman movie and fucking then not only decided to use that shit movie to kick start their first ever live action shared universe on the big screen but also gave that hack Snyder the fucking keys.

No, that guy was an asshole

>What if the problem isn't Snyder, what if the problem is superman?
I can promise you it isn't the character.

>DCEU is realistic
Yeah no. The fact that Superman exists at all and isn't
1. In a lab being dissected
2. Abusing the fuck out of his powers
3. Always hiding due to fear of #1
already requires a suspension of not only disbelief but the context the universe provides. The world we see in Man of Steel and BvS would create, at best, Superboy Prime. Clark being some kind of selfless saint in light of the world he's surrounded by and grew up in is inorganic and far more fantastic and unbelievable than the supposed impossible camp of him visiting a children's cancer ward in his down time.

Weight isn't a meme but you're doing your best to turn it into one.
Snyder isn't serious. He's trying so hard to be badass and serious and mature that it loops back around to self parody without stopping in between. He's 100% chuuni. He's as big a joke as the 14 year old that dresses in a trenchcoat and fedora and tries to bring a katana into school.
Although in Snyder's case I guess it would be an axe.
Dude's a joke and his defenders are living examples of the guerilla warfare copypasta. It'd be brilliant if it were satirical but that would require intent.

Really? Is this how bad it's gotten? That in order to defend shitty movies you have to point the finger suspiciously to the source material?
Just when I thought that the defense force for these shitty movies couldn't get any worse, there is this.

this, though I disagree about NEEDING more in the middle. Just embrace it.

>I can't actually say anything of value so I'm gunna meme

>A person in power who isn't a psychopath? Nonsense!
Not a very optimistic sort, are ya?

>"I don't want to seeh him fly. That costume is too faggy. He needs to fight giant spiders and be played by Nicholas Cage. How can we fix this gay character?"

Was literally one person who said this who had nothing to do with the movie you colossal idiot.

Batman shouldn't come across as happier than superman. If you've done this, you've fucked everything up.

Time for some copy +pasta about why I loved BvS/MoS Superman

I really enjoy seeing Superman grow. Him growing into the ultimate hero is rarely explored, and is some of the best parts of Birthright and Secret Identity. I like that through MoS and BvS, Superman's arc has followed the heroes journey almost to a t. To the point where the metaphorical death and rebirth becomes literal. One of the key elements of the heroes journey is that at the end the hero brings back the "boon" or "elixir" making the world a better place. I believe that exactly this will happen, that the plan from the beginning, at least once they started conceptualizing or entertaining the idea of a larger shared universe, was to have Superman bring the world, one that intentionally tries to reflect our own, to a better place, one that more reflects a more classic heroic setting.

1/2

>I can't think of a legitimate defense for this hack so I'm gonna meme

For example, Superman is put in a no win situation by Zod in MoS. Zod tells Superman he is going to have to kill him or else people die. Flat out forcing Superman to choose between humans and kryptonians. Superman killed Zod of course, mirroring a moment from Byrne's Man of Steel run, but not without it coming back to haunt him in the form of Doomsday. In BvS Superman is presented with yet another ultimatum, kill Batman or Martha dies. This time Superman chooses the third way, learning from the first time with Zod, and instead decides to be honest with Batman and ask him for help. They even illustrate this arc within Superman further by having him first just trounce Batman's Batmobile and order him to stop (since with Zod all the at worked was overpowering him). That doesn't work, so next time he sees Batman he tries to talk to him, but suffers for making the mistake of once again just using force. But he again makes the mistake of fighting back, and again pays for it. But once he finally stops trying to fight and just asks for help "to save Martha" he starts winning Batman over. And its not until Lois, Superman's loving anchor, is even more honest, revealing Martha to be his mother, does Batman finally help him. Superman, then, ultimately has to sacrifice himself because of the mistake he made in MoS. This does another thing I really adore about the movies, it takes iconic parts from the comics and synthesizes them into one narrative without making them just empty shoutouts, it instead uses these moments to add to the narrative and themes. And its not just moments like what I mentioned above from Byrne.

2/2

haha you want my defense, read
and just because you are being a fuck, I'll post the other 4 parts to it.

One of the best examples of such integration of the comics is how it uses key scenes from Dark Knight Returns (even doing a 1:1 remake of the death scene) as way to deconstruct it. I know for a lot of people deconstruction is a trigger word, so if you want you can instead say an inversion. While DKR had Batman very much in the right, BVS puts Batman on the wrong side. BvS turns Batman into the reactionary stooge that upholds the status quo, which was Superman's role in the comic. They also have the same dead Robin plot point, but this Batman never gets a new one. Batman fights Superman, but this time he goes in with the purpose of killing Superman instead of faking his own death. When Superman is nuked, it is from America instead of the commies, and he willing takes a blast to defeat a monster instead of trying to defend the earth. He also rejuvenates from the sun in space instead of sucking solar energy from Earth (as he does in the comic). And last but not least, in BvS Superman dies with a hint of him coming back instead of Batman. This kind of engagement with the past and with the stories that came before, the homages and commentaries on past comics, that is one of the aspects that makes the long 75+ years of Batman and Superman so fantastic to me, and BvS carries on in that tradition.

3/6

Batman shouldn't come across as happier than superman. If you've done this, you've fucked everything up.

I'm sure you're all sick of reading this, but now that I've typed so much I figure I'll continue with a few other bits I enjoy. To go back to Superman redeeming Batman, there is an intended meta element to it too I feel. Batman is an old character in BvS, and he is an old character in the movies. He has had many more movies than Superman has, and it all these movies (except for the Adam West one and the black and white serials) has has killed people. And we have been fine with this. In the movies, we the public and our inherent jadedness have turned Batman into a killer, much in the same way the universe Superman enters in BvS has turned Batman into a killer. Its not until he shares a screen with Superman does the public question why he kills and start asking for the no kill code back. And at the end of the movie he gets it back, after Superman sacrifices himself and proves to Batman, and the world, that he is indeed just a force of a good, or as Batman says it "men can still be good". Its illustrated when Batman corners Lex in his prison cell and does't brand him (instead opting for more classic Batman scare tactics). Even in the comics Batman started out killing, but once he became more integrated into the larger superhero universe they started telling stories where had a no kill rule. And this brings me to, you guessed it (sorry if my pattern is getting predictable) another thing I loved about these movies. They find ways to look at the big picture of a character, like Batman, see how the character has changed over its entire history, and make it part of the story.

4/6

I love you user

>I like that through MoS and BvS, Superman's arc has followed the heroes journey almost to a t
Every single time you say this and every single time someone brings up that this isn't a good thing.

You're literally just saying that Superman's character development is incredibly generic.

In fact they do the same thing with Lex Luthor. Lex always started off having a full head of hair and being a crazy mad scientist. like he was in BvS There are examples of this throughout the golden age, and a few times in the silver age. Its also re-tread by Birthright and Gene Hackman in the Reeves movies. We see the beginning of Lex's passionate hate for Superman, to the point where he lets it derail his speech at the library fund raiser. We also get to the classic Lex move of him dominating and controlling every conversation he is in. And those he can't control he gets rid of. By the end of the movie we see Lex much more stone faced and cold (sans the scene chewing bell speech, though I don't mean that in a bad way) and finally with a shaved head. A transition into the modern age Lex who keeps a more precise and calculated public persona.

I don't have much to say about this last point, other than I thought it was neat that Wonder Woman regains faith in humanity parallel to Batman, and humanity, (re)gaining faith in Superman, and by extension the superhero.

5/6

love you too superbro

I guess really I love that the movie gives me so much to chew on, and that every time I watch it I see a new little thing. Like last time I saw it, I noticed that after Batman's nightmare about dictator Superman, his worst fear about what Superman can become, its followed by Superman looking at the photos of Batman's dead victims in jail. Which is Superman's worst fear about how bad Batman can become. Or how the movie gets progressively more saturated with color as it goes on, the world literally becoming a more colorful and bright place. Or how the bat-creature in Bruce's dream is a homage/twist to a deleted scene from Val Kilmer Batman. I love all these layers it intertwines almost effortlessly.

Anyway, thanks for whoever read. I apologize if this sounds pretentious in any way.

6/6

he is the first, most archetypical superhero, its fitting he has an archetypical character arc. Also any plot structure can be done in a different an unique way, you are literally retarded if you think structure defines content.

>Was literally one person who said this who had nothing to do with the movie you colossal idiot.
>Listed as executive producer
>Nothing at all to do with the movie though
So now's the part when, caught in your ignorance (and laziness as five seconds of google would've shown you wrong), you claim that executive producers don't do anything.

I am, which is why I think that in the real world Superman would at least get a chance to say his piece. But the Snyderverse isn't the real world. It's the """"real""" world for cynical teenagers where everyone sucks but them and humanity is constantly on the brink of chimping out. And THAT world wouldn't produce someone of Superman's character. A world where everyone is self centered paranoid douche can only ever propagate itself.

>thinks an executive producer has anything to do with the movie
>had absolutely no hand in BvS
>literally got all your information on the man from that one Kevin Smith story

wew lad

>I believe that exactly this will happen,
Until it actually does all your post is is a bunch of hot air.

>because one piece is speculation the rest is invalid

jesus christ man

Thanks for being so predictable.
>>had absolutely no hand in BvS
Wasn't talking about BvS. Man of Steel is the start of the DCEU the poisonous tree from which all fruit springs forth.

so the sequel, and continuation of Superman's character growth, has nothing to do with the universe or the character in question?

Glad to know you're so close minded.

>one piece
A good half of it.
The other half is "they did this in the comics, So what if it was done in a a completely different way and derived a different meaning. There's still a precedent if you're enough of a reductionist!"

No, its 6 posts long talking about why the changes to the characters were pleasing while still being in line with whats come before

Oh it does. The sequel to "I don't want a faggy Superman I want a badass that fights giant spiders" can only be "I don't want a faggy Superman I want a badass that fights giant spiders" 2. Yes, I agree that Man of Steel and it's misguided attempt to """""fix""""" the character continued into BvS. Which is why it's probbly better to just Flashpoint the whole sumbitch.
>continuation of Superman's character growth
If by continuation you mean a complete and total retread, to the point that they had to bring Jonathan back from the dead for another "Clark if you do things bad shit will happen! speech, sure.

Good stuff, user. I quite liked BvS and you've pointed out a lot of things I missed.

A line with only occasional points of intersect at best. >Lex has red hair! That means they totally get it!
The grander scope o the characters is still either missing or "It's coming! We swear!"and the thing is, this EXACT same argument was put forth post-Man of Steel pre BvS. "It was just the origin! He'll be the guy next time!"
Now it's "He had to die first! He'll be Superman Classic next time!"
Already I can see it's gonna be be "He was stressed out because Darkseid! Man of Steel 2 though!

Lex was a great Lex.

He was nothing short of fantastic.

there is a whole post about how Lex's arc follows the entire character's history, starting him as a red haired crazed mad scientist and transitioning him into bald lex.

I never said he would be classic Superman or any of that, just that the arcs of the characters in the movies are mirroring major elements from their 75+ year history.
Stop strawmanning the thought out post

they didnt try to fix anything, they did a loving homage to the character's entire history, while also building on it to something new.

> "I don't want a faggy Superman I want a badass that fights giant spiders"

Stop saying this, its a quote from one Kevin Smith story, and has nothing to do with the actual movie. Superman became a hero because he wanted to be one, he wore a cape, and he loved flying.

Try critiquing something IN THE MOVIE instead of just something Kevin Smith said once.

it's superman

he's propaganda. he was created in what? 1938?

basically a character for people with a god complex, who think the world is some simple place where american exceptionalism isn't the problem in the first place. he has too many powers. he can do everything. the planet's biggest problems in his universe are monsters and crimes that don't happen like they're depicted any more. people don't rob banks with power armor. the u.s. is the source of problems in the world because of proxy militias false flags and regime change.

"we just need a hero to save us".

grow the fuck up. we're the problem, naive hero worship is what fuels empty platitudes like "support the troops". superman is cold war bullshit.

yes. how many shitty movies has DC pumped out? were you born yesterday? DC produces comics and entertainment for people with low standards, who don't want to think.

"capeshit" is literally the filthy casual of Cred Forums, and people are surprised when movies (which are further removed from stories with outmoded characters) end up as uninteresting flops?

OP have you considered it's not just superman, it's all of them?

>a dark, flawed Superman be more or less rejected en masse by mostly casual audiences

i rest my case. it's for idiots who don't want to think about anything. they are low intelligence wastes of air that hollywood knows they can easily extract money from. they want a god but aren't smart enough to realize that with intelligence brings isolation from a stupid general population of which they are part of

DCEU threads are starting to remind me of that scene in the green mile where the guard sabotages a prisoner's execution becuase he's a sadist. The prisoner suffers more, the audience panics, the warden has to get up and go "It's all under control folks! All part of the show!". The good guards can't stop the execution because it'd be even more cruel to do so, and once the prisoner is finally dead the warden goes back and storms in and says "what the hell happened" and the guards go "It was technically a successful execution. The prisoner IS dead."

You should feel ashamed to even say that.

>Try critiquing something IN THE MOVIE i
But when I do that you disregard it and say "But it's awesome because excalibur! heroes journey!"

But to address your post, I don't believe Clark wants to be a hero. I think it comes off as inorganic to his character arc and forced by the narrative.

>they didnt try to fix anything
That's for damn sure.

>they did a loving homage to the character's entire history, while also building on it to something new.
>loving homage

A film where fledgling, borderline retarded Superman has to repel an invasion by his own people and does more harm than good is not what I would cal a "loving homage".

>Stop saying this, its a quote from one Kevin Smith story, and has nothing to do with the actual movie.

How about you actually read the original post? It's not about Jon Peters per say, it's about the prevailing thought process at Warner Bros. that you can't make a modern Superman movie without portraying him as a troubled loner.

It's the same thinking that Jon Peters and Tim Burton had, that Bryan Singer had, that Zack Snyder is also pushing. That's what user was pointing out. Hell, the WB made an entire show about Superman as a fledgling, troubled loner!

That's the real problem here. No one at Warner Bros. thinks Superman's actual personality sells, so they do everything they can to fit him into the same mold as every other brooding character on the big screen.

>stop liking what I dont like!

>liking objectively shit things

Lex was a great Lex, and a really competent villian. Anyone who doesnt like him probably likes Johns anti-hero Bullshit lex.

It' s that Snyder doesn't know how to make Superman work.
Captain American has gathered new fans with his movies. Snyders Superman hasn't.

>Captain American has gathered new fans with his movies.

That's pretty easy when he had none.

Also MCU's is a terrible steve sans First Avenger.

the idolatry of cold war and american exceptionalism is more blatant with cap. idiots crave that shit because muh mccarthyism

shut up, zack

There's idiots on Cred Forums that fail to see how Steve's war on hydra was the same as Bush's war on terror.

the cap movies are critical of that, though, and culminated in Cap disavowing America's government to form his own super team filled with foreigners and the disenfranchised

Movie Cap literally missed the entire Cold War

Because he's loyal to the dream, not the state.

That's impossible. Everyone knows there's no depth to Marvel movies. Just jokes. Cred Forums said so!

Do you think you're fucking clever, using this worn out whore of a comeback?

>I don't believe Clark wants to be a hero.
You're right Clark doesn't want to be a hero. He just wants to help people. But the cynical world doesn't let him do good deeds without punishing him for it. It took ultimate self sacrifice for the world to understand.

Landis Lex is better.
Also which Johns? Because Secret Origins Lex isn't the same as anti-hero Lex.

He's right though.

>where american exceptionalism isn't the problem in the first place
>the problem
Sounds like you're the one with the simplistic worldview , boyo.

>But the cynical world doesn't let him do good deeds without punishing him for it.
I...I dunno man. It feels more like Lex (and Snyder) than the world in general. It makes the arguments the movie puts forth seem incredibly one sided when Clark is never allowed to say his piece to people. I really wish they'd have let him get a couple words out before blowing up the senate. It would've made a world of difference and then you can still turn the public against him because at least it'd show Clark as trying.

That's what bothers me. People defending the DCEU keep saying "it wouldn't matter if Clark speaks or tries something else, there's no other options" when I don't care if he succeeds, I care if he TRIES. And then there's this assumption that trying HAS to be met with success because I just want a perfect mary sue. I'm sick of being misread so why not just shitpost?

>for the world to understand.
That remains to be seen. The fact that Snyder can't seem to turn the god stuff off even after Clark dies does not give me faith that they'll stop seeing him as some kind of unknowable god figure, or that he'll stop acting like one should it suit a particular scene.

The DCEU world is right to be cynical about him. He's a silent, brooding, distant Jesus like-figure that literally never talks to people, never smiles or never just hangs out with them. Not to mention he's responsible for the destruction of a small town and half a major city.

Why the fuck wouldn't they fear him?

do you think he's wrong?

How is Lex and Batman not part of "the world" ? Also of course its Snyder, he directed the movie, the whole point of "the world" not letting Superman do anything without it being political is all part of Snyder's movie.

Also Superman does try to speak, and when he does Senate is blown up. Should he have risked blowing up another public place? And its shown in the movie, when he speaks through The Daily Planet people dismiss it as a fluff piece.

Supergirl has more Superman in the 2 min long preview clip than all of BvS...

Its not hard to do, just have a guy act like a decent human being, have him SMILE, have him not threaten people's lives, have him not say things like "I should break you, but I will bring you back in one piece!", and for the love of god show him saving PEOPLE and caring about them. That slowmo sad introduction with him saving like two people and just staring at other people in need was pathetic.

DCEU Threads: The ouroboros of Cred Forums. We could have Affleck ass naked screaming at a dead clown for 3 hours and we'd still be debating over it.

superman stinks because not only do his powers not have any real flaws, but his personality is nonexistant as well
there's nothing to superman as a character other than "patriotic good guy"

you can't have both a perfect set of powers and a perfect personality, you have to sacrifice one or the other to make an interesting character
superman is boring, simple as that

>debate
its as much a debate as the Trump vs Clinton debate

everyone is making fun of one while the other has unanimously going to win, but for some reason a vocal minority keeps thinking that they are right

>being this casual

>t. DCdrone

>t. lex luthor

>What is escapism

He isn't even fucking CW can do Superman properly

youtube.com/watch?v=EtdK8un_VN0

at least you admit the only reason you like superman is projection

well, you are not wrong, I mean look at this.

youtube.com/watch?v=EtdK8un_VN0

It looks horrible and cheesy, has no impact or suspense, given that superman is smiling all the time while a catastrophe is happening, for superman-fags it may be a given that a superhero always smiles but it just seems like superman could solve every problem with ease because he is just that strong and even if he has to struggle, he'll just punch his way out of it showing that its all there is to the character, a smile and nearly unlimited power.

Superman-fags loving the shit out of this scene just shows that despite all the discussions, this is all there is to the character and for most people its just boring.

We are right now getting an amazing Superman book full of charm, warmth, and heart. There's nothing wrong with the character, user. Snyder and Goyer are just dreary hacks.

Nope.
>saying something is so doesn't make it so.
>once again, saying something is so because we want it to be true doesn't make it so.

You do understand that 'the Superman character' as you put created the whole genre? If we accepted your faulty argument then the either genre is 'just flawed' and no one can get any of them 'right anymore.'

Supergirl is cornball by design, you might as well complain that Lois & Clark had no real tension or drama. That's not really what the show is about.

>for superman-fags it may be a given that a superhero always smiles

Wow user you're totally right, there's never been a middle-ground between camp and depressing melodrama in all the centuries of human fiction. Thanks for showing me the light.

Plenty of people here love the STAS Superman, a character who could be both inspirational and fall victim to human jealousies and failures. He's just a guy trying to put one foot in front of the other like everyone else, trying to do right by his world and his people.

Maybe when you grow up oneday you'll understand why Superman is so great and why that clip is amazing.

Issue #7 was fucking amazing. It's not fucking fair that we can't get that kind of Supes stuff on the big screen.

Sh stop using logic and your brain. That isn't allowed here.

it's just an overreach to try to appease the bad blood in the crowd at the moment
personally, it troubles me that unless a guy is winking and playing around he's automatically an asshole

every single emotional reaction from clark in bvs is appropriate, he's carrying a different weight that's part of a different journey this guy obviously never will never have to go though, WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY FINE, but nevertheless this is exactly what cynicism is, we can't trust ourselves to actually look into things that might be uncomfortable, we can only accept comforting self righteous pats on the back

But they never made that journey compelling, Snyder internalised Chis entire arc to the point that his only human connection was Lois. It made their relationship incredibly uncomfortable and unhealthy, it really felt like he had no connection to anyone on Earth beyond his girlfriend.

Maybe if we got any sense of what Clark was like mas a person, maybe gave him scenes at the Planet that mattered on a character level or maybe even just gave us a sense that the Clark Kent persona was more then just a pair if glasses he puts on and nothing else. But that would cut away from Snyder's precious Batman screentime or Lois Lane's inane magic bullet storyline.

There's nothing to connect to here, he's plot object.

>making Superman like he should be is overreaching
DCEU Superman is an asshole because he's an unlikable, distant, dark, brooding, silent, mopey killer.

Hue at you back my friend.

>“I think it’s been said many times before: he’s potentially a very boring character because he has no faults," Miller told IGN. "So you really have to find his demons really to get an internal conflict going. You’ve really got to do that. Whether that’s by an external agency or something deep inside himself. You need that conflicted character."

>“That’s what made the Greek gods so great. I mean they were jealous, vengeful, hubristic. They had all these things going for them. I think that’s why Batman’s such an interesting character because he’s human, so he’s just like us. He’s relatable, rather than someone who’s just perfect.”

ign.com/articles/2015/10/07/what-george-miller-would-do-with-superman

And this is the director people on this board want to direct a superman movie.

i was going to start of by saying that i think it is compelling, but then you went off on bunch of irrelevant shit
aside from his mom and lois, the only relationship that was shown was the relationship to perry at the paper, but only really in the extended cut, which gives off a natural sort of work life for him to have
for you to be right about not having a sense of what he's like, there'd literally have to be no scenes to see the character in, there are plenty

jesus user, even the theatrical cut made a point of showing that clark is trying to use the paper towards the same goal he strives for as superman, truth justice and the american way. the movie makes a great point of showing he he himself felt powerless as clark and eventually intervened with batman as superman, the extended cut makes this clearer through his time at gotham

no, he's none of those things user. i get you feel a certain way about this, but that in no way is an accurate assessment of what's on screen

don't remember the exact quote but snyder said something to the effect of "you don't break the super you break the man" because of him paradoxically being "more human than any of us"

whichhhhhh is his arc in bvs, which cavill even talked about in interviews when he'd say that the character is going through the growing pains of trying to get past his own ego so he can be whatever humanity wants him to be which funnily enough plays right into some of other aspects of the movie

>everyone is making fun of one while the other has unanimously going to win, but for some reason a vocal minority keeps thinking that they are right

the vocal minority being hillary fans?

>We could have Affleck ass naked screaming at a dead clown for 3 hours and we'd still be debating over it.

>Implying this wouldn't be more worthy of debate than the DCEU and the MCU

>youtube.com/watch?v=EtdK8un_VN0

All I can see this achieving is having people mad they don't have a Superman series

they had one for 11 years it was called Smallville, this is fine

Superman sucks. Always has, always will.

Nah. Superman's great.

Shouldn't you be off in Cred Forums practicing your "liberal media" excuses for when the Annoying Orange's poll numbers start dropping tomorrow?

...

Captain America says hi.

he wasn't orange today

Superman is a character that doesn't fit our times, trying to reinvent him for the times is a flawed approach

There's no point to not embracing him as the fantasy character he is

brah fucking donald was fucking embarrassing tonight

fucking anyone else from both parties (except for cruz and rubio and black sleepy surgeon) would have been better but this is the shit we're stuck with
the fuck

>Superman is a character that doesn't fit our times,

Then our times suck

Jeb would have been slaughtered

They do, they do.

>Also Superman does try to speak, and when he does Senate is blown up.
Like I said. You're not getting it. He had
Y
E
A
R
S
YEARS! Before the senate scene to talk. To try and connect with people and say "Hey I'm just here to help, don't be afraid."
He's a reporter! He's dating another, WORLD FAMOUS reporter; no one would question it if Lois put out an exclusive interview given that the two of them were seen making out. When he's in the middle of Mexico, he could easily use some high school freshman level Spanish and go "No soy un dios!" But nope, better just frown and fuck off.

Snyder slaps the mic out of Clark's hand at every turn and then you pigfuckers throw a tantrum why people go "Clark isn't getting enough time to say shit"/

If you want to show pundits misinterpreting him, that's FINE. If you want LexMedia to run a negative smear campaign I'm right there with you! But WE, THE AUDIENCE never even get to see him try to be heard. His side of the argument is almost FULLY ABSENT. It doesn't get argued or shut down, it NEVER GETS MADE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

Steve isn't as good as superman in the comics and Steve in the mcu isn't a boy scout since the first movie.

This is what happens when you let batfags run wild.

none of this is a problem, and the point of the anxiety isn't that he's a total stranger, the movie explicitly shows that people do interact with him when he's around

look at it this way, if you know people are anxious about something, is your move to go out of your way to make them feel that anxiety, just so YOU can feel better about yourself?
the conversation that was going to happen at the hearing wasn't going to be some fucking hang out, it was going to be him getting grilled about how he can be checked, how he be trusted, basically how to handle the situation that breaks apart the previous paradigm

none of what you're saying is any way an actual problem

I've only ever seen the whole "boy scout" thing used derisively, be it in or out of comics. I'd be willing to wager that most legitimate Superman fans don't call him that.

Because flaws and failurse aren't the dealbreakers like so many DCEU defenders insist that people are saying. It's so many other things on top of that. There's this whole big range between total camp flawless victory and what Shyder's self admitted inversions, and those would be a fine compromise for all parties if they were being honest.

But no, it's gotta be this extreme 90s shit or nothing at all, for some reason. But don't you dare chose nothing, because then you're not smart enough!

the standards aren't even that high for Cap, he can use weapons and kill as much as he sees fit, he causes colateral damage without blinking an eye for the greater good, he doesn't compromise when it comes to his principles to the point where he rather risks a civil war and he disragards the complexity of worldwide issues and political issues.

>the movie explicitly shows that people do interact with him
I find it interesting that you worded that as "people interact with him" rather than "he interacts with people". Why did you do that?

>look at it this way, if you know people are anxious about something, is your move to go out of your way to make them feel that anxiety, just so YOU can feel better about yourself?

There's a third option you're not listing: Do what you can to put them at ease and remove their anxiety, That, to me, is the Superman option. Deescalation is an important tool in his arsenal. Even New52 got that right. Pic related.

>the conversation that was going to happen at the hearing wasn't going to be some fucking hang out, it was going to be him getting grilled about how he can be checked, how he be trusted, basically how to handle the situation that breaks apart the previous paradigm
And having Superman be an active participant in that conversation is bad why?

>none of what you're saying is any way an actual problem
It is a problem. Just not for you. And that's fine. I hope you enjoy your SINO.

My favorite part of Man of Steel was where Superman was flirting with that army girl and then told the general-looking dude that he was from Kansas, and that he's as American as they come.

It was a good scene, and I liked the tone of it a lot better than all the Jesus allegory shit we had to deal with in the rest of the movie. The rest of the movie also felt rushed as hell.

I think Superman would be much better if it focused on a lighter tone, dropped the holier-than-thou garbage, and just focused on a more contained plot

The biggest difference between Superman and Steve Rogers is that Steve is just a man.

A man above men sure, principled and selfless, but still a man. He's not a godlike being, isn't an unshakable paragon of goodness.

>A man above men sure, principled and selfless, but still a man. He's not a godlike being, isn't an unshakable paragon of goodness.
And the beauty of Superman is that he too, is just a man.

There are many stories, quite a few of them beloved, that have Clark losing his powers but ultimately still being the same guy.

Look, all the people that are saying the DCEU isn't a good reflection of Superman? If you really look, most of their complaints have nothing to do with the powers and everything to do with the man. Clark just isn't the same person. He's too tortured, too untrusting, too closed off, too unsure of himself. If anything it's the constant framing as a god that's grating. Why do you think there's so much bitching about the jesus metaphors?

Personally, rather than go the unbeatable and untouchable and unknowable deity route, I'd rather they have just started Clark off here with a lower power level. You can escalate a power nerf. What they did? Changing the core of his personality? There's no good ways to repair that. And what's sadder, there seems to be no real call to.

It will never cease to amaze me that so many of the scenes cut from BvS were the ones where Clark got to act like fucking Clark

Honestly I don't know.
Audiences don't like Snyder conflicted Superman, but I don't think they'd like Godlike paragon of justice Superman either.
>Lol he's so perfect you know?! Perfect is boring!
and the like dumb people spout.
But maybe there's a good balance between the two, like the conversation between him and Lois Lane in the cemetery. He was human, playful, but also mysterious and not brooding and angry like usual.
So maybe work on that.

But he's been adapted dozens of times in the past, with precious few of the complains and concerns that Snyder's vision brings up.

Not the bow, it's the indian that's the problem here.

>>Lol he's so perfect you know?! Perfect is boring!
>and the like dumb people spout.
That's because they're dumb and dumb people think in extremes. They've never actually gotten exposed to a post Crisis Clark where he's got fallibility but is also not depressed. Whenever people ARE exposed to that Superman you see them like it, like with the DCAU.

The idea that a humanist that tries to think the best of people is a "naive boyscout" is just idiot /r9k/ posters projecting their insecurities onto Superman.

?you're putting way too much effort to spin that statement bro?
simply moments where there's interaction, that's what i'm saying, moments where you can *infer* other things

nice pipe dream in that picture there.
i've been in same situation sans firearm and even my offer of silence didn't stop what happened next
fucking anway

gee i fucking wonder why he showed up to a hearing no one could have force him to go to.... when prior and even after the explosion the movie makes it clear that the air is thick whenever he's around

the movie plays the situation very straight, which is why it plays out the way it does

i never said superman being an active participant is bad

it is absolutely not a problem, not for this story or any story, the movie sets the general premise of the narrative, the characters establish their place in the narrative, and the movie sticks to these

"this character didn't do what i wanted" is not a fucking valid criticism

and i hope they don't start doing the "superman makes everything better wherever he goes automatically" angle, because that as shown in the pic is straight up the same fucking god territory of commentary that is so complained about

what the fuck is a sino

>People still don't know how easy it is to rig polls on the internet

supposedly our homeboy was having too much fun with the white powder and that fed into the cuts

but it is strange, as all those cut scenes are straight up what the end of man of steel promised as thematic continuation

and bro fucking relax, the movie is not "too muh bad connotation emotions" there are only TWO scenes of strife for the character, the bombing and the last conversation with lois before exile.

and lol the framing isn't superman=god. even within the narrative of the movie we get the idea of projection from everyone, that the movie then hints the audience is also in on.

i'm only saying this because i'm a slight nerd for this shit, but i wonder if the movie is actually making an atheist message where the divine is something everyone has collectively, which i wouldn't put past terrio especially considering his background with hegel and again, certain shit that i picked up on

> moments where you can *infer* other things
Yet you think it's putting too much effort when I infer things here.

>nice pipe dream in that picture there.
It's a Superman comic book. You know, the thing these movies are supposedly based on? It's fiction. You don't always have to have the worst possible things happen.
...Unless you're Snyder.

Showing up is not enough.

And once again you prove you're the kind of douche that thinks "Wanting Superman to try" is the same as "makes everything better automatically".

>it is absolutely not a problem, not for this story or any story, the movie sets the general premise of the narrative, the characters establish their place in the narrative, and the movie sticks to these

Yeah, and that's the problem. They DON'T establish Clark's character. He's too busy being sad (okay, and later angry) for them to let him ever express his viewpoint.

Let him give the speech, then the senate blows up. How does that hurt the movie? It helps by making Clark actually get a word in edgewise over the surrounding angst and it grows his character.

SINO is what you're defending.

Cred Forums does. They rigged almost all of them except for fucking CNN which they should have hit the hardest.

Rigging is morally wrong of course but if they give off the illusion that others saw that Trump won the debate some people will second guess themselves even if they watched the debate.

>and bro fucking relax, the movie is not "too muh bad connotation emotions" there are only TWO scenes of strife for the character, the bombing and the last conversation with lois before exile.
I said the DCEU. BOTH movies, not just one. If you're going to try and argue don't get it twisted and pick and choose. The aggregate is what matters.

>nice pipe dream in that picture there.
Oh right I forgot. Snyderverse is realistic.
You're right. In the the real world no one has ever successfully negotiated with hostage takers.

he wasn't brooding and angry in bvs

in bvs the first scene in which he has a troubled look on his face is after the montage where he's watching finch's interview on the news

from then on, he never displays an intense emotion until the bombing, after that, we see him with lois, looking broken, until he comes back normal

to say he's brooding and angry in this movie is factually incorrect
bvs on such an overt and explicit way challenged him on this level through luthor

the fact that he still saved luthor
>I don't lose
>You'll learn
and straight let's him (and us) now that he'll abide by certain rules is the exact same superman that people say wasn't in the movie

even in that scene there's a difference made between superman and batman
>break the bad news
>i'd rather do the breaking in person

which characterizes batman but also sets him apart from superman who had earlier said
>i'll take you in without breaking you, which is more than you deserve

Superman is not smiling because a catastrophe is happening.

Superman is smiling he's about to prevent a catastrophe.

no you asshole, it's the same godhood shit that is supposedly so bad in bvs, but as long as in the comics its never addressed its okay
WHY does superman have the power to affects someone like that?
WHERE does that power come from?
the theological aspect is unavoidable
>it's a comic book
yeah, and?
bvs is a superman movie. you know, an adaptation of comics past and present.

what happens in fiction doesn't matter, i personally am never thinking about "better" or "worse" things in movies

WHAT I'M SAYING is that none of what you're saying makes the movie bad

THEY DO establish clark's character.
and he's not sad until after the explosion.

how does lex being lex and literally blowing up clark's moment hurt the movie? (it doesn't)
as far as i'm aware there isn't any superman speech quota, which even still feeds back into the whole godhood thing

what i'm saying is that this doesn't matter, this is a complete nonissue that doesn't affect the quality of the filmmaking in anyway

>If you're going to try and argue don't get it twisted and pick and choose
that's what i'm telling YOU user

count his scenes in the movies, count the emotions throughout both movies

people keep saying clark is "mopey and depressed" which simply isn't true. does he have his moment after the bombing? sure? is it appropriate? yes. does it last long? no

>people keep saying clark is "mopey and depressed" which simply isn't true
He is for the overwhelming majority of Man of Steel. Across the two movies there are three exceptions, off the top of my head. The first flight, bathtub with lois, and welcome to the planet. Other than that? He's a pretty dour dude. They're exceptions, not the rule.

But no, you're right. Everyone else is clearly wrong.

>WHY does superman have the power to affects someone like that?
The same way any psychologist or hostage negotiator or regular joe does. Charisma. It's not just a dump stat. You need points in it to get the good dialogue choices.
WHERE does that power come from?
A healthy social upbringing. Your confusion as to this is excused however, given where we are.

>no one can really get him right anymore
This is mostly right. A majority of writers haven't got him right since COIE and they write him as an emo or put him in cheap soap operas. But there are writers who do get him right, so it's just Snyder.

There is no problem. False premise.

He smiles when he goes back home to his mom and then again when he's talking to her about what hes going to do for a job. There's a few other times as well. Honestly the filter in MoS did not help

There are about three different bad Supermen:

- the good guy Superman who acts like a fireman and doesn't do anything regular people couldn't do but it's different because he's so nice and inspiring
- the establishment Superman who arrests the 'crazy people' who cause large scale property damage or threaten political order
- the serious Superman who doesn't do anything, he just looks very serious and contemplative because the world is such a complex place and there is no 'right' thing to do

Then there's the one good iteration of Superman that's rarely if ever seen: the radical Superman, who to most comic readers would appear like a villain, because he doesn't serve any government or corporation, he isn't a slave to people's selfish demands and isn't afraid to act because he is able to make concrete ethical choices. I would totally read a comic about this Superman.

>or put him in cheap soap operas
Maybe you just don't like capes because they've always been analogous to soap operas. That's neither a good nor bad thing. There are good soap operas and bad ones, just like there are good and bad cape writers.

I will say this much. I really, really don't like the DCEU as a whole but I do like the scenes in Man of Steel where Clark is with his mom. Those are the best bits of the movie. So we can find common ground there if nothing else. Martha, in Man of Steel? Best character. Fucking MVP.

It's just really hard to celebrate those moments when the sequel exploits them in the way it does.

>Then there's the one good iteration of Superman that's rarely if ever seen: the radical Superman, who to most comic readers would appear like a villain, because he doesn't serve any government or corporation, he isn't a slave to people's selfish demands and isn't afraid to act because he is able to make concrete ethical choices. I would totally read a comic about this Superman.

Man, I've been on Cred Forums since the debates and this is somehow the most fascist thing I've heard all day

Martha was confirmed MVP when she told Zod to go to hell. The sequel really should have had a lighter Superman. The God imagery was awful.

You're either bad person or a cynic, there's no other reason why you'd fear Superman.

>He is for the overwhelming majority of Man of Steel
not true at all, at fucking all

the movie starts with him at the boat, where he working then set out to save people.
he's not smiling, but i don't get what kind of person has a fucking smile counter anyway
his seriousness matches the seriousness of the situation. perfectly valid
after that, he's pensive until the bar scene, where he's chill until his face changes a bit until his coworker intervenes and we get the lol funny bit that isn't worth arguing over
next time we see him he's at the ship, with a cute ass expression when he learns his birth name, after which we get the moment with lois where he gives of an assertive but gentle vibe.
then it's him chilling out with him mom, zod coming, him going to the church then turning himself in and doing all of that.
basically, the first time we actually see him angry is when zod fucks with his mom and he shows up

point fucking being he's not mopey or depressed for the overwhelming majority of any of these movies. and its so blatantly wrong to say so

if anything, the vast majority of time in both movies is clark just hanging out with people as in man of steel and his adventures that brought him home and in bvs with his scenes at the planet and his scenes in gotham

yes, i really am right. fucking get a counter for all his expressions and compile them and compare them to their contexts if you have to this shit is blatantly wrong

Very little of capes is actually straight up soap opera. Morrison wrote a fantastic Superman in ASS and action comics without substituting other things in the plot for cheap melodrama. Compare that to Tomasi's run.

Constant smiling is an american thing. There's something wrong with them.

BROOOOOOOO
thank god you brought up hostage negotiators because that shit is so totally far removed from anything i've seen in a superman comic

and thank you for bringing up healthy social upbringing. as i've rarely met people have something to say for any situation.

you can't just say shit and just think "as long as i have the right vibe, it'll be okay" well, unless you're flirting, sometimes at least, but it's hilarious to me that you're seriously passing that off as a serious rule to judge a movie on in regards to not even the character's choices in the scenes he's in but the contrivances of the fiction.

Right, so all you fags saying "Superman is interesting! I swear!" recommend me some Superman stories. I've yet to read one where I actualy care for him.

>If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear

Oh this keeps getting better

It's not Snyder.

The main theme of Snyder's "Batman v Superman" on spiritual dematerialism is not eschatological, but a phenomenological ontology. Thus he implies that we have to choose between predialectic construction and deconstructivist neodialectic theory, essentially Heideggerian as seen in the concept of Dasein. The subject is interpolated then into a cinematic dematerialism that includes spirituality as a whole. But if the Kierkegaardian worldview holds, we have to choose between the cultural paradigm of expression and atomism. In Snyder's own "Man of Steel" he has a character say that "the world's too big”. Inherent in this is how the function of Lebenswelt (cinematically translated by Snyder as "world of life") operates in all his films, chiefly in "Sucker Punch" and "300". We see a phenomenological approach to the world showing a cinematic logic that presupposes a structural constraint in rootedness, another intentionality central to his filmography and philosophy. Because "metaphysical comfort" is not an object of temporality per se, but rather an aspect of automatic condition, as suggested by Cavell. Hermeneutic interpretations are also apparent in his post-"Watchmen" movies; in fact the interchangeable subjectivities are but another representation of Husserl's and Wittgenstein's "form of life". As his academic hero Heidegger succintly noted, "freedom is the ‘abyss’ of Dasein, its groundless or absent ground". This is essentially the thesis operating in Snyder's films.

probably ASS is the one that is just soooo good for being nostaliga+morrison shenanigans
and superman for all seasons, birthright

basically everything after the man of steel i think

be warned, as you seem aware, this whole superman!!! conversation is contradictory and fucked at every angle. despite how much he represents, irl he functions just the same as religion does, albeit in a corner of society with a demographic a time in history where violence means saying mean things and getting mad

tl;dr you won't care for him, go read the picture of dorian gray or someshit breh

"Do you bleed?" was very edgy, you fucking moron. A better defense would have been "Of course Batman is edgy".

where'd this pasta originate from again? a generator right?

We're talking about Superman, not Batman. Please keep up.

Superman is incapable of being transferred to the big screen, he's too archetypal; he's larger than life.

Children's stories get good adaptations. Harry Potter and Disney stories. They're easy to digest, simple, with a generic story structure. That's why Marvel movies are rated so highly, they are stories for children.

But DC heroes are for grown-ups. It's like Watchmen; everyone said that it was impossible to adapt and to some degree, it is. Superman is The Weapon Shops of Isher. He is Dune and Thus Spoke Zarathustra and The Odyssey. I love BvS and what Snyder tried to accomplish with it but the masses just can't resonate with a real life person trying to impersonate someone who embodies pure goodness. It's like someone trying to understand God, you just can't do it.

Nice bait m8.

DC heroes were originally marketed to children though and they already adapted Superman damn well in the first two Reeves films.

>he's too archetypal; he's larger than life.
That's exactly the kind of shit movies are for you dunce.

I honestly could've give two shits if the problem was Superman or Snyder or anything. I don't even know why I'm responding to this. We've been going over the same fucking bullshit for years now. We say something, then a bunch of autists left and right make the discussion unbearable. I would love to discuss it because I actually liked Man of Steel, it certainly wasn't perfect but alright, and I thought BvS was shit (yes, fucking shoot me, go ahead).

We've been at this for too fucking long.

We can't we all just give it a fucking rest?

>A fallen antagonist Batman that isnt a hero anymore and that is saved by superman

>Batman lives long enough to see himself become the villain
>Superman dies a hero
>they both come back
Exploit? Harvey Dent rekt?

Superman is great in BvS, the dude plays Clark perfectly too.
The problem is the whiny cocksluts who find reasons to hate a movie before it comes out.

>liking things for being cool is bad now

Alright there buddy. I'm sure the only reason you like things is because they're "sophisticated" right? Good luck with your no fun allowed lifestyle. Snyder is living the dream.

The fuck is wrong with liking axes, are you a fucking spearfag or something?

>the biggest complain is that he doesnt have enough screentime.

iirc, someone counted all his lines from the theatrical cut and he had something like 50

They should probably also count the minutes he was on screen too because he had a lot of scenes where he didn't say much or anything. Seems like an anti-DCEU meme like the Suicide Squad math.

Nah. Snyder tried to make Superman dark and brooding. It doesn't work.

ily
pls b in LONDON j/k im gay,and pretty sure you're a guy, so this can never work out

So he has an axe collection, what's the deal? Do you not display shit in your room?

I have a fucking bow mounted on my wall and a sword mounted above my door.

>How is a father sacrificing himself for his son's life and the lives of millions of people that could be effected by his son's secret edgy?
I don't think anyone would have fucking sperged out over it. What does it matter, anyways, considering Superman went all vagabond afterwards anyway?

>But even I will agree Superman is less open & friendly here then elsewhere,
i think thats because in MoS he isn't exactly superman yet, and he really only interacts with the military and people in smallville (who know his identity)

for BvS Superman is seen through the lense of litterally everyone else, and the narrative focused on people who hate him anyway; so of course he appears less friendly.

This isn't the 90's anymore.

This board is so fucking stuck in the past they can't understand that the ideas of Superman is dated.

A more modern Superman would be more violent and more opposed to the authority.
He would not hesitate to stop a white man from trying to flirt with a woman. This scene would take like a page.

Imagine a Superman with today's values. Being progressive, PC or whatever...
It can't work, Superman is imo a very conservative character.

Fuck people would jizz over a comic with a social commentary on how Superman is an space refugee and how Trump is evil

Found it.
bloomberg.com/features/2016-zack-snyder-profile/
>Six axes lean against the nearby wall. “I just like axes,” he says innocently. “They are cool. I have axes at home that I cut wood with, but these are my special ones.”

>“Not to be drinking my own Kool-Aid, but I think Ben is a pretty good Batman,” he says. “I never liked a small Batman. Ben’s all of 6-foot-4, and in the boots, he’s like 6-foot-6.”

I need more Snyder interviews. I love everything he says.

>Implying right wing ideals isn't seeing a comeback lately

Marvel is the super lefty company. Hell, I can't even think of a right wing marvel hero.

In narrative if it isn't shown or mentioned it doesn't exist, otherwise shifty directors and writers would justify all their plot holes with "it happens off camera"

You have to at least imply it, wich doesn't happen in the movie, where just implying based on comic books and cartoons

Have you seen V? Non violent alien invasion is possible

Doctor Who? Non/violent alien invasion ever season without resorting to violence porn

Should I go on?

...

>modern iron man
>right wing

Whenever he acts right wing he's portrayed as the villain.

Cap probably swings right but that doesn't come up much.

With Clarks past and family is a miracle he's not

Super lefty company?

With an entire Norse god Kingdom?

>Implying superman isn't the dictionary definition of 'superhero'

Literally american exceptionalism you dumbass.

Well, he said Anti-Hero Lex. But i agree, both versions are quite different.

Snyder is the problem. He doesn't know how to do superman. He just tries to make him manly by doing stupid shit like giving him a beard and a dead father.

Donner supes was so much better, it's a shame that Superman returns didn't do better, at least in that movie Superman is actually a hero instead of King Arthur in a Superman suit.

No version of superman would get a different reaction.

Comic version, cartoon version, they all get the same reacions, the difference is that most of the time that's not the focus of the story, in this movie it is.

I will say supes is hard as hell to write for. And one of the least popular heroes there is, which is funny because people who arent into comics think hes the most popular.

Id like to see how hes written 20 or 30 years from now, comics always reflect their time

Only problem with this logic is the lack of a moral compass/the elder for the hero for the moment he doubts his own morale. Originally sups moral compass is Pa Kent since he symbolizes ye old American way and would make him remember the good path but in DCEU he was turned more into an alienating factor, making him negate part of himself instead of accepting it. By killing him off in MoS he losses any chance of becoming a moral compass.

Without an external factor, try and error doesn't change your morale, it just shows you wich way not to achieve what you try.

This could have been easily avoided by Doomsday being the main villain, batman the secondary and him becoming a Sups morale compass, not the other way around. But Snyder doesn't know shit

user you know that directors and writers are the producers bitches right?

the destruction that was reached was understandable story wise atleast. No one ever talks about that

This better be bait

If you expect 80 years of comic books on a cinematic universe when not even the comic universe could handle it (shit's been retconned like 4 times already) you're way more delusional than WB execs

>not muh
Lex was great you pleb.

Snyder is an objectivist. Superman's typically an altruist. There's an inherent problem with those conflicting ideologies imo

>Marcel is for kids DC is for adults
Oh boy here we go again, everyone aboard the shit train Choo Choo

I'm surprised people here are defending Snyder like "he dindu nuffin, he needs mo money fo dem movies and shieet"

>There's an inherent problem with those conflicting ideologies imo

No, there's not. Anthony Hopkins doesnt eat people, yet he can act as a cannibal. Same for Snyder, he doesnt need to put his political world views on the movie, and he doesnt do that with superman.

DC isnt for adults, but marvel is for kids.

Well, you're two thirds right. That's more than most. Hopkins DOESN'T eat people and Snyder DOESN'T need to force his views on the movie.

He does it anyway. His cynical view of humanity (what snyderfags claim is "realism") is evidence of that and runs counter to the altrustic humanism at the core of Superman. You agreeing with the viewpoint Snyder espouses doesn't actually mean it's not a significant shift.

>His cynical view of humanity
It's not cynical, at all in the movies.

I can't even tell if these posts are bait anymore

my god, how childishly edgy can you faggots be

>That is the fucking point for him to be shown as imperfect, and taking people's abuse for 33 years will make anyone realistically spiteful at times.
Yes and that's the problem. It's a Batman vs Superman movie for fuck's sake, it was a perfect opportunity to contrast the two heroes by showing how their ideologies both parallel and oppose each other. But because they decided to give us an emotionally stunted autistic Superman that constantly growls at people and acts like an edgy 14 year old, we never got to see that. That's exactly why they had to pull all that contrived Martha bullshit to get Batman and Superman to fight, and eventually work together; because these interactions would have never arose naturally with a Batman opposed to a slightly less edgy Batman who has powers.

>not liking CW crap means someone is edgy

For me, he's Mr Rogers with a cape. You know he's a bit corny, but he honestly cares and inspires people to try just that little bit harder, and they don't want to let him down because he's Superman.

DC has things for all ages. Marvel has things for none.

I'm surprised people here are defending Snyder like "he dindu nuffin, he needs mo money fo dem movies and shieet"

>Not to mention he's responsible for the destruction of half a major city.
It was more a 6th of Metropolis was destroyed.
Only 1 building fell in Metropolis while he was fight Zod hand to hand and he did ZERO structural damage to it. So no he is in no fucking way responsible for it.
> He led Zod to earth
If a serial killer sees me buy a new car and follows me home & murders my neighbors, is it my fault?

>A more modern superman would be more violent and more opposed to the authority
>sups is a very conservative character

Go to sleep Snyder

Don't you have a thread complaining on the removal of the red trunks to create ?

>Only 1 building fell in Metropolis while he was fight Zod hand to hand and he did ZERO structural damage to it. So no he is in no fucking way responsible for it.
I can remember at least two buildings just off the top of my head without checking anything: The Wayne building and the building in the scene where he jumps over the fuel truck.

Was that destroyed or just damaged?

After you create a proper Superman, Zack "the hack"

I think it's realistic. There will always be two sides of perception to any opinion. That's what BvS is all about. How should we interpret these vigilantes and superpowered beings?

It was a parking lot.

do you guys don't pay attention?

I really don't get how the world reacting in several different ways is considered "pessimistic".

I have only seen mos and bvs and have never seen the inside of a comic the thread

BvS was an objectively bad movie.

I am 100% sure the only reason people thought Batman was well done was because he got one good fight scene and because Affleck was the sole actor to actually attempt acting in this movie.

Its sad as fuck that you Snyderfags are now saying the problem isn't Snyder, its the source material. This is next level denial now.

Parking lots are still buildings though and would count, even if no one was in it.

>implying it's an "snyderfag"
>implying "snyderfags" don't love Cavill's superman

Also, that escene is great.

The front side of the parking garage collapsed from a combination of Superman going into a tumble while trying to slow down after propelling himself out of the collapsing Wyane Tower and crashing into it & the oil truck going off.

>BvS was an objectively bad movie.
The theatrical cut is.

How was Jesse not "acting" in the film?

If Lex isnt sexy its not muh lex for that kind of retard

>BvS was an objectively bad movie.
>The theatrical cut is.

No theatrical cut was also a masterpiece. The UC was just better.

>No theatrical cut was also a masterpiece

No it's not. It has serious pace problems that go beyond the inusual Pace Snyder wanted. Is a good movie with serous flaws, the UC on the other hand is great

>What if the problem isn't Snyder, what if the problem is superman?
Leave Snyder. Not even people who like Man of Steel or BvS likes you

>only people with healthy social upbringings can be good people
>implying Superman wasnt raised well by the Kents who wanted to protect him, always told him he was THEIR son, encouraged him to be a good person, but never told him he was under any obligation to do anything, and just generally loved him

>all the Jesus allegory shit we had to deal with in the rest of the movie.

there is literally ONE scene in MoS that has any jesus imagery, and its when he is in the church.

>dropped the holier-than-thou garbage

The whole point is Superman is just a guy with powers that wants to do good. But its the PEOPLE that view him as a god, thus they hold him responsible for every consequence and re-action that results from any heroic action he takes.

Superman never, at any point, implies he is holier than anyone.

But user, we didnt see him playing baseball, that means he wasnt rised right.

Stop with this nonesense, Pa kent was never an alienating factor. He said maybe ONCE in a moment of panic, after citizens were coming to his doorstep to tell him that his son was a gift from god.

Every other time he talks he loves superman and encourages him to be the good person he knows he is at heart. He just wants to make sure Superman does good because he wants to, not because he feels obliged.

Pa Kent very well fits that role, and in BvS even does the whole Atonement with the Father step of the monomyth (you know the whole mountain top scene). Superman tells him he is trying to be a good person, but is losing faith, and Pa Kent tells him about how ultimately love will help you keep that faith.

You can literally see how that changes his moral system with how he interacts with Batman later. First he just tries to scare him away, using might over first first, then he tries to talk to Batman but its too late. Superman has already made him his enemy. And its not until Superman speaks out of love again, asking him to save martha, and when Lois comes and is even MORE honest (revealing Martha is his mom) does Batman turn into an ally of Superman.

And finally Superman's embrace of love is highlighted with the "This is my world... you are my world" line.

maybe the main producer, like Nolan (though even he said he had little to no impact on the plot except for the end of MoS). But Snyder has the majority of control over these movies son.

Executive Producers dont do anything.

They seem to be handling it pretty well. They transition Batman from his "gun and killing" golden age esque phase to his more Silver Age Justice League phase, and have moved Lex through his mad scientist golden/silver age phase into his more modern interpretation.

shoulda forced him to eat some apple pies

And Pa Kent was right, the person he will grew up to be will change the world, and the world will be shaken by him. Pa was a good well rounded character.

Thank you, I definitely agree. I like that he wasnt just a one dimensional, plot-relevant advice spitter.

>Superman that constantly growls at people
not true at all. more bullshit about the content in the movie

the first time he scowls is at batman when he stops the chase, which is after he's been finding out more about batman and minutes after he cuts the pictures of the guy who got stabbed in prison, of course he's disgusted with this guy

after that, the closest he gets to that is in being stern with lex, which he's fucking allowed to be, and then stern again when he tells batman to stay down.

the fucking "edginess" is a complete fucking meme, as not a single characters acts outside of what is acceptable for the character in their scenes

If you were rich you would buy a bunch of cool shit that you like too. I would have so many arcade games and every fucking Kenner Alien action figure in existence, one mint and one opened each.

Pandering to the tumblr crowd causes sales to drop, proven fact.

Got any charts?

i think there's something to say about love, grace, and righteousness in the movie

as you said, it's only when superman *completely) acts out of love that he commits to the idea of "i will be whatever humanity needs me to be" that we a full act of grace, him acting out of compassion for everyone in a completely unconditional way, which then pays off even more in batman witnessing this

i hope jl has more of of these virtues, justice as love and grace as the act that happens out of love

the logo already has the the same play on meaning that the bvs logo had; in how it first reveals superman's insignia then light reveals the batman signal around it, the justice league logo is the JL in a shield with a star in the middle, which is of course the continuation of the idea presented in the painting in lex's office, humanity as light fighting off the darkness and so on

Damn, no one even mentioned Civil War at this point.

Fuckin DC defense force preemptive strike.

BvS sucked

imdb.com/name/nm0811583/
Do you see Civil War under this list?
Do you even know what thread you are in?
It's not a DC "Defense Force", you're literally in a fucking DC thread. Fucking marvel plebs get stupider by the day, I swear.

You are a fucking idiot, he was talking about the CW channel and the idiots that pretend Supergirl and Flash are good shows

reminder that Lex Luthor is always right

>Pa Kent very well fits that role, and in BvS even does the whole Atonement with the Father step of the monomyth (you know the whole mountain top scene).
Oh my God, you're right, that is a monomyth moment.

Wow, I didn't think it was possible to have even less respect for this movie than I already do.

Confirmed for not reading comics.

>Hell, I can't even think of a right wing marvel hero.
Cap

Yeah, instilling the idea that the sheer knowledge of Clark's existence will instigate worldwide panic and change (because chance isn't scary at all nope) isn't going to make anyone feel alienating. Especially not a twelve year old.

The movie does though. It's possible to have people *in the movie* see him as a god without also drawing those comparisons for the *audience*. That's where the disconnect is. It's fine to say "the people in Mexico worship him as a god". But when he's T posing it up in Man of Steel or the power lines over his grave just happen to be angled in such a way to orm crucifixes, stuff like that isn't Snyder going "people in this universe are treating him as a god". That's a more direct "You in the third row, sixth seat. YOU look at him as a god. See? This makes you think of god!" Then you leave the theater and next sunday you're in Church and they're literally reading a WB drafted sermon about how Jesus and Superman are totally the same guy and the sequel which includes the Death of Superman comes out on Good Friday -- International Death of Jesus Day.

The fact that they didn't know when to turn that stuff off is why there's an argument with regard to intent. It's too all over the place to be just the people within the fictional narrative drawing the comparisons. We're not allowed the freedom NOT to as much as you claim; there's some definite steering towards "look upon him as a deity" going on.

>Being this fucking insecure in your shitty ass movie that you have to shit on the other company.

>There will always be two sides of perception to any opinion
If they showcased both sides effectively we would not be having this conversation.

More like by all indications his first friend is Lois and isn't met until he's 33 years old.
If you think that's normal then well, at least you're in the right place.

>by all indications

What are you talking about? We see his friends in his funeral

Taking away the strongman shorts was stupid.
Superman is supposed to be colorful.
Making everything gray and bland doesn't translate well. Even Captain America has his little helmet-wings every other MCU movie.

>Even Captain America has his little helmet-wings every other MCU movie.

And no scales por pirate boots.

>That's a more direct "You in the third row, sixth seat. YOU look at him as a god.
no, it's not

it's straight up flipping the script on 'divinity' while reaffirming superman's place in the world in the most absolute way possible

it's not that snyder is saying he's a god, it's that superman already literally is a god, just look at how people talk about him

the point of that scene and the movie in general isn't that he's a god that watches over us in a larger than life way (what do you think the statue represents) but that he's one of us, even more specifically, he represents a certain impulse that's within all of us that's a divine quality

which goes into the whole above/below sky/earth shit that is punctuated with the dirt rising
and in regards to christianity, the reading of christianity used in bvs is not mainstream to christianity in the slightest, considering terrio's background with hegel, the hegelian elements of bvs and the freurbach ideas of projection touched in bvs as well, i wouldn't put it past him to work with some atheistic reading of christianity

>Cavill is honestly one of the best portrayals of Superman ever put on the big screen.
Looks the best too
>chaosandpain.blogspot.com/2013/06/dude-so-and-so-got-so-fucking-jacked.html

Dude yeah. He's got figurines of Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman, as well a Sucker Punch Angel according to that article. That man is a success, even if some people don't like his movies. It's a good trade off.

Or Superman is a shit character and people have this idealized, romanticized view of him that they feel directors/writers/etc. must adhere to; and god forbid anybody tries to do something different and new with the character then they're shit.

far apart what the actual problem is

I live in real life, who the fuck goes to a superman movie to see superman doing his fucking taxes and batman putting his money in an off shore.

Why wouldn't the government try to scientifcally research a literal god

>"man i'm about to save people from certain death, this is fucking bogus"
This is what gritfags actually believe

>it's not that snyder is saying he's a god, it's that superman already literally is a god, just look at how people talk about him
Are you looking? Because most of the "perfect being that never does anything wrong" is a strawman argument from defenders of Snyder's interpretation. Clark being just an average joe that uses what he ha to make good isn't the problem people are having when they talk about him.

Plenty of people bitched about that Superman, user.

Let me tell you a secret. People will always bitch about Superman. He's one of those things that has transcended its status as a fictional character. Superman exists to the entire world as an idea or symbol, that every normie will wear on a t shirt or stick in the window of their car. Millions proclaim a love for him without actually knowing much about him. He can never live up to expectations because everyone has their own fractured idea of what Superman should be, and very little of it is based on any substantial version of the character. The best route is to just turn him back into the boring cliche character he was for most of his existence. He will be utterly uncompelling, and a relic, but everyone who endlessly spouts about "muh Superman" will take comfort in his bland, inoffensive existence.

superman is a jesus analogy , and we are sick and tired of jesus hiding among us bringing yahwh here to find him and destroy us in the proses . this story is old .

that's not what i'm talking about at all. the character/idea is literally a sort of deity right now, i wonder if like the movie suggests he's just the modern incarnation of a common human impulse

in the same way that feuerbach says god is a projected imagination that plays a function for humanity, so to does superman have that same function, which the movie straight up addressed in the montage, and later brought up a few times in general then specifically with the exploration of how different characters relate to him.

what's more, the religious aspects in bvs go even further than just reference, as the movie clearly suggests that we can do better in the here and now, something that is definitely not a strong message within christian institutions.