What are your issues with the DCEU Superman?

[The Laughing Fish]

Man Of Steel itself attracted controversy for its darker take on the Big Blue Boy Scout – Zac Snyder creating a moody film that felt closer in spirit to Christopher Nolan than Christopher Reeve.

Source: https://www.squaremile.com/features/interview/henry-cavill-mission-impossible/

I'm coming back to my earlier post.

I just love how these worthless critics love to put Nolan on such a pedestal for supposedly creating "dark, high concept, cerebral cinema that elevated superheroes" while blatantly ignoring every f***ing fault that overrated hack does; and yet, not only do they ignore the fact he co-wrote MOS, but the moody tone they cherished so much is suddenly not suitable for a Superman movie. All the while still adopting a different standard when it comes to Snyder and do it with such shameless vitriol, for the same reasons they excuse Nolan for doing. Once again, I don't think Snyder is a genius by any means either, but I despise the pure, disgraceful hypocrisy coming from these snide, and often hateful, scumbags.

Anyway, I found this three year old blog by a fan called Alessandro Maniscalco, who took the time to address scathing criticisms of the movie shortly after it came out. Among one of the reviews he addressed was this putz called Steve, who made a negative video review on YouTube. One might wonder why would anybody waste time to write a rebuttal to some nobody on the internet, and under any normal circumstances that would be a very logical question to ask. Sadly, the video review in question was apparently very popular on YouTube.

Among a lot of things in this video, the YouTuber had appeared to have taken issue with how Lois and Clark's relationship developed on screen, which Alessandro responds.

http://reviewbvsreview.blogspot.com/2016/07/review-of-batman-v-superman-beautiful_7.html

Steve states that Superman and Lois' relationship is underdeveloped and horribly toxic.  What?  What does that even mean?!?!  He says he doesn't know what either of them wants from the other.  I can't help but laugh at the absurdity of that statement.  What does anyone want in a relationship and what does anyone want from their significant other.  He argues that Lois and Clark's relationship makes no sense as if any relationship is supposed to have more purpose than simply two people loving each other.  No, instead he insists that Lois is supposed to be Superman's world and his connection to humanity but that Martha fills that role.  In what way is the love a mother the same as the love of a mate?  And in what scenario is it healthy for a man's mother to be his world?  Furthermore, if Steve claims that Man of Steel failed at making Martha Superman's connection to humanity, why would he question Lois filling that role?

...

The fact that Steve questions why Superman would do anything to save Lois, the woman that he loves, is probably the most idiotic thing in this whole video rant.  Seriously?  Calling Superman overly infatuated?  I don't know Steve personally, but I have to wonder if he has ever been in love.  If you love someone you would raise heaven and earth for them.  He cites the fact that Superman becomes a tyrannical monster once Lois dies.  Has he never watched any show or movie in which a spouse dies leaving a completely grief stricken widow or even heard of people dying from heartache from losing a spouse?  It is completely asinine.  What does Lois love about Superman?  Well ignoring the fact that he's Superman, and the fact that he is a loving, caring, attractive person, I say what does anyone love about their significant other?

If this is what the detractor said, then yes, it is idiotic indeed. I could go in depth by recapping how Clark and Lois showing compassion for each other slowly develops into their romance ever since MOS and continues in the sequel, but that would be redundant to mention in great detail. You just need to watch the movies, and pay attention. If people like this Steven think any of that was underdeveloped, then I'd hate to imagine what would constitute a good onscreen relationship.

As for questioning Superman's love for Lois, I guess this Steve putz would take issue with Crisis on Infinite Earths because it showed Earth-Two Superman momentarily losing the will to live because he thought his wife Lois had vanished for good, along with the rest of his world. I suppose you could say Superman's grief is "horribly toxic" and "overly infatuated".



So, here we are three years later. The DCEU is in disarray, we've lost Affleck and we're very likely to lose Cavill, because of Warner deciding to cater to morons like Alessandro is calling out.

Pathetic.

[Dagenspear]

I'm coming back to my earlier post.

I just love how these worthless critics love to put Nolan on such a pedestal for supposedly creating "dark, high concept, cerebral cinema that elevated superheroes" while blatantly ignoring every f***ing fault that overrated hack does; and yet, not only do they ignore the fact he co-wrote MOS, but the moody tone they cherished so much is suddenly not suitable for a Superman movie.

How is it hypocrisy to think one tone can fit for one character and another tone can fit for another?

I think an argument can be made in the idea that tone can come from how a director interpret's what the script does in some ways. But I think Nolan wasn't a match for this material in the first place.

If this is what the detractor said, then yes, it is idiotic indeed. I could go in depth by recapping how Clark and Lois showing compassion for each other slowly develops into their romance ever since MOS and continues in the sequel, but that would be redundant to mention in great detail. You just need to watch the movies, and pay attention. If people like this Steven think any of that was underdeveloped, then I'd hate to imagine what would constitute a good onscreen relationship.

I wouldn't call it toxic, though I do think it's underdeveloped. They don't really have any real personal conversations about themselves or eachother as people. Clark really talks at her about his dad's death and that's it. I don't think they have a relationship much at all. Saying that it happens off screen I think doesn't work, for me, and maybe some others. We don't see their relationship build, I think, even to justify their kiss at the end of MOS, in consideration to the tone of the scene and in BvS justify their relationship being as important to Clark as is described.

As for questioning Superman's love for Lois, I guess this Steve putz would take issue with Crisis on Infinite Earths because it showed Earth-Two Superman momentarily losing the will to live because he thought his wife Lois had vanished for good, along with the rest of his world. I suppose you could say Superman's grief is "horribly toxic" and "overly infatuated".



So, here we are three years later. The DCEU is in disarray, we've lost Affleck and we're very likely to lose Cavill, because of Warner deciding to cater to morons like Alessandro is calling out.

Pathetic.

The rest of his world is a component there I think. But if he momentarily did that, I think that's something that can happen if the relationship has been developed more. Giving up entirely, I'd think be a bit much.

I don't think WB thinks their in disaray, with what their doing, and with Matt Reeves Batman seeming to come together now.

[The Dark Knight]

I don't think WB thinks their in disaray, with what their doing, and with Matt Reeves Batman seeming to come together now.

Agreed. Regardless of what one thinks of what transpired with Suicide Squad and Justice League, and the tone going forward, Aquaman and Shazam were both received favorably and fared respectably at the box office, especially Aquaman. Joker with Joaquin Phoenix has generated a fair share of interest. Wonder Woman 2 is bound to be popular, and I also think Birds of Prey with Margot Robbie will have appeal. Patman's reveal seems to have been relatively smooth in comparison to the Affleck and Keaton announcements. Any fan backlash suggested by the media is mostly exaggerated for clickbait.

[The Laughing Fish]

Any fan backlash suggested by the media is mostly exaggerated for clickbait.

Um...in case you haven't paid any attention in the last couple of years, Warner Butchers buckled to any type of backlash exaggerated for clickbait. Hell, they've been COMPLICIT in the clickbait themselves with their constant lying and dillydallying.

Besides, take another read what I said: I'm talking about the actual DCEU being in disarray. That Joker-in-name-only movie is irrelevant to the discussion.

Let's get real, the whole DCEU now is just a basketcase, despite latest reviews and box office to the last couple of movies. The continuity is now a mess, Affleck is gone, Cavill doesn't look like he's returning, the future over Miller and Fisher's roles as Cyborg and Flash respectively are up in the air, and there is no JL sequel on the horizon, and likely won't ever be. What are they going to do now, just use Gadot and Momoa going forward? While completely ignoring the other characters, or worse, use body doubles to make awkward cameo appearances like in Shazam? That's just stupid. What happens if the next crop of movies don't do well? If this is what they're going to do, just stop making these movies.

Besides, if Warner has demonstrated anything in the last year or so following the PR debacle surrounding JL and refusing to acknowledge the demand over the Snyder cut, they haven't learned a god damn thing. Mark my words, if Reeves's movie fails to satisfy mass audiences and earn the money Warner wants, they'll sabotage that franchise too.

[The Laughing Fish]

I found this tweet from some idiot who calls himself "SJW Superman".



As I said before, there is some criticism to be had when talking about Cavill's Superman. But there's nothing I hate more when some dickhead makes a cheap point by quoting a line from BvS out of context to dismiss the entire movie. If this fool had more than a single brain cell inside his pitiful little head, he'd understand Superman said that a line in a moment of fear and doubt. According to his/her logic (oh sorry, am I assuming its gender?  ), all the good Superman does, whether it's saving a village from a missile drone, rescuing people from disasters and sacrificing his life to protect humanity, is all for nothing. Because he said something in the spur of the moment and doesn't have a scene talking somebody out of suicide, that apparently makes Cavill's Superman completely worthless. How stupid.

Even if the movies had a scene like that example from All-Star Superman, it would need to actually have some relevance to the story. That scene might serve its purpose well for a dying Superman wanting to make the most of his limited time alive in All-Star. But a movie adapting such a scene without a particular reason would come across as a cheap attempt at a feel good moment. Then again, looking at how mass audiences react to superhero movies, I get the impression they care about how something feels in the moment, rather than really thinking about the plot.

I shouldn't have wasted my time poking fun at somebody who goes by such a ridiculous screen name, and has a picture of Brandon Routh as the Kingdom Come Superman that Alex Ross drew. But I'm pissed off because dickheads like this are the reason why Warner Butchers sabotaged the DCEU, and why we'll unlikely see another Superman movie in the near future. At this rate, I'll be surprised if we'll ever see another Superman movie in our lifetime.

[The Laughing Fish]

A fan who tweeted "Henry Cavill is Superman" got a reply from John Glover, aka the Riddler, Lionel Luthor and Dr. Woodrue:

Just never had one good film to showcase it sadly

https://twitter.com/RealJohnGlover/status/1477383566103236608

Pretty poor form to talk down on somebody else's work so publicly. He's not the only high profile DCAU actor do so, I remember Susan Eisenberg, who played Wonder Woman, had tweeted some unsavoury comments when ZSJL was announced, and called the $70 million budget that was used to finish the cut as "a waste of money". Really poor form from her too.

John Glover is in no position to make unflattering comments about other actors' movies, considering he appeared in Batman & Robin. I say this as somebody who doesn't even have strongest dislike for B&R, but I don't need to remind everyone about the fallout surrounding it, do I?

[The Laughing Fish]

For some reason, Alex Ross uploaded a side-by-side comparison of comic panels he drew and Superman in BvS, and tagged it to Gunn. This was the second time he uploaded this montage on Twitter, but he deleted the post he tagged on Gunn's name.



Don't know if it's worth reading into. But you can tell Ross appreciates the similarities between his work and the shots in BvS.