Man of Steel

[johnnygobbs]

Very excited about this announced movie. We'll never have Chris Reeve and Michael Keaton onscreen together so this is the next best thing.

I too don't want them against each other. I imagine there will be a little of that. I think the whole "Dark Knight Returns" thing Frank Miller did with Superman caused damage to the character's popularity. I mean who would really side with the nice blue boy scout against the much cooler no rules badass Batman? Kind of one sided from the get go. But I also think it hurt Batman too. For me it made him a bit of a twat and a tad stupid even. Heroes like that should be smarter and maturer enough to understand who there allies are from their true enemies. Although their methods conflict Superman and Batman are always on the same cause. The fact that Batman wanted to beat the crap out of poor Clark Kent and not those Mutant punks (who had done a fair share of twisted things throughout the book) staggered my mind. All Superman did was follow orders.

I never cared much for 'The Dark Knight Returns' or Frank Miller's brand of base nihilism/misanthropy (although I do rather like 'Batman: Year One').  Sure, there are elements of TDKR in Burton's Batman seeing that he's a killer and he's based in a particularly dystopian vision of Gotham but I consider Burton's vision to be cynical rather than nihilistic.  Burton pokes fun at the power structures and a world that has given up all sense of measured justice and instead invested in the hands of a lone vigilante but he doesn't present worlds that are so utterly pessimistic, brutal and irredeemable world as the ones offered by Miller, nor does he revel in the thuggery and limited roles society has assigned his male and female characters.  Plus with such a fascinating roster of rogues in Batman's history why would you limit him to fighting a bunch of mutant punks?

[The Dark Knight]

Plus with such a fascinating roster of rogues in Batman's history why would you limit him to fighting a bunch of mutant punks?

Because this is the far flung future where the next generation has taken over. They're violent, rough and aimless. Joker and these sorts are older and out of the game. Batman was their excitement. The mutants are younger, know little or nothing about Batman and took over.

All Superman did was follow orders, that is true. And that was part of Batman's beef. Batman brought crime under control in Gotham upon his return. This embarrased the US Government, as crime was rampant everywhere else. They sent Superman to do their bidding. To bring Batman in. Superman did as they asked.

[thecolorsblend]

All Superman did was follow orders, that is true. And that was part of Batman's beef. Batman brought crime under control in Gotham upon his return. This embarrased the US Government, as crime was rampant everywhere else. They sent Superman to do their bidding. To bring Batman in. Superman did as they asked.

You're exactly right but you're touching on a nuance which kind of owes back to one of my main beefs with TDKR. In-story, Superman's logic makes a lot of sense. To make the peace between The Government and The Costumes, Superman agreed to work FOR the government. He was doing it to protect his fraternity.

If you ask me, that's a pretty noble goal but a generation and a half of "snarky", Cheetoh-munching, unemployed bloggers have turned this into "Superman is the government's bitch". Um, no, it isn't quite that simple. They're completely ignoring the nuance you mentioned in your post.

God I hate that word "snarky". Anytime somebody uses it, I find myself hoping they got run over by a potato-picker or have their paired reproductive organs chewed up by a shark or something.

Anyway, my fear is that because TDKR has informed a lot of peoples perceptions about both Superman and Batman, the nuances that Miller was careful to insert for each character will once again be completely ignored.

[thecolorsblend]

http://www.wordofthenerdonline.com/skeptical-sam-is-skeptical-supermanbatman

The idiot who wrote this is living proof that not all opinions are equally valid.

And again, the movie is successful. It will have made $650'ish million worldwide before all's said and done. It cost $225 to produce. Even if you believe it cost another $100 million to market, it's STILL profitable.

Y'know, everything Singerman WASN'T but people still want to argue somehow made money?

Bloggers, I swear, get a job!

[The Dark Knight]

I personally like the Batman and Superman ideologies in the context of TDK Returns, because I can see where each character is coming from. Especially considering their respective ages. Gotham is Batman's stomping ground and he came back to bring back order. He did so. He's older and pissed off but has a fire in his belly. A point to prove mentality.

Superman likes to get along and maintain positive relations, thus he did what the Government asked. He doesn't want any flare ups. As said, quite a noble thing to do, but I can definitely see what Batman thinks about it. In a way yes, Superman is the "government's bitch", but he's not really. He has his reasons for it and is not completely turning off his mind.

[The Laughing Fish]

I personally like the Batman and Superman ideologies in the context of TDK Returns, because I can see where each character is coming from. Especially considering their respective ages. Gotham is Batman's stomping ground and he came back to bring back order. He did so. He's older and pissed off but has a fire in his belly. A point to prove mentality.

Superman likes to get along and maintain positive relations, thus he did what the Government asked. He doesn't want any flare ups. As said, quite a noble thing to do, but I can definitely see what Batman thinks about it. In a way yes, Superman is the "government's bitch", but he's not really. He has his reasons for it and is not completely turning off his mind.

It's unlikely that we'll get that for this movie though, since Superman keeps telling the military that he won't be manipulated.

I think people have been reading too much into the Dark Knight Returns inspiration; if anything they'll come up with something that is vaguely similar to that storyline.

http://www.wordofthenerdonline.com/skeptical-sam-is-skeptical-supermanbatman

The idiot who wrote this is living proof that not all opinions are equally valid.

And again, the movie is successful. It will have made $650'ish million worldwide before all's said and done. It cost $225 to produce. Even if you believe it cost another $100 million to market, it's STILL profitable.

Y'know, everything Singerman WASN'T but people still want to argue somehow made money?

Bloggers, I swear, get a job!

If there's one thing I hate more about bloggers who always complain and overanalyse, it's those who have nothing interesting to say at all, like whoever wrote that article.

[The Dark Knight]

It's unlikely that we'll get that for this movie though, since Superman keeps telling the military that he won't be manipulated.

Yep. These are just general TDKR comments here. I don't call it 'being manipulated' per se if Superman more or less agrees with the idea. If he helps out and maintains a lower superhero profile, he can still save people. Batman did reduce crime. But as a result his behaviour, no matter how 'silent' he operates, became loud due to the effectiveness. Batman clashed with his agreement. He became a focal point, and the Government didn't want these kinds of people making a scene.

[The Laughing Fish]

It's unlikely that we'll get that for this movie though, since Superman keeps telling the military that he won't be manipulated.

Yep. These are just general TDKR comments here. I don't call it 'being manipulated' per se if Superman more or less agrees with the idea. If he helps out and maintains a lower superhero profile, he can still save people. Batman did reduce crime. But as a result his behaviour, no matter how 'silent' he operates, became loud due to the effectiveness. Batman clashed with his agreement. He became a focal point, and the Government didn't want these kinds of people making a scene.

That's true, Superman did believe he was keeping the peace. Although I'm sure that I remember him having some doubts about his place in the world in that comic.

[thecolorsblend]

It's unlikely that we'll get that for this movie though, since Superman keeps telling the military that he won't be manipulated.

I think I'm the one who first introduced this aspect of the discussion. So forgive me. But I think I also predicated my introduction of it that Superman appears to be in league with the government. The actual truth is as you say but someone observing the situation may think Superman's a lot cozier with the military than he actually is.

The premise could therefore revolve around that.

If there's one thing I hate more about bloggers who always complain and overanalyse, it's those who have nothing interesting to say at all, like whoever wrote that article.

It's the dark side of the Internet. Yeah, it gives everybody a VOICE... but at the same time it gives EVERYBODY a voice. It doesn't matter how many times something gets completely debunked, some idiot's misunderstanding of the situation is still out there ten years later as fresh and "relevant" as when it was first posted.

This is going to sound elitist but there's no way around it; there are a lot of people out there who just shouldn't have a bullhorn. But then, I also happen to think not everybody should have the right to vote either so what do I know?

[zDBZ]

http://www.wordofthenerdonline.com/skeptical-sam-is-skeptical-supermanbatman

The idiot who wrote this is living proof that not all opinions are equally valid.

And again, the movie is successful. It will have made $650'ish million worldwide before all's said and done. It cost $225 to produce. Even if you believe it cost another $100 million to market, it's STILL profitable.

Y'know, everything Singerman WASN'T but people still want to argue somehow made money?

Bloggers, I swear, get a job!

To be fair, while his description of Man of Steel's box office performance is off, I have read buzz is that Warners is disappointed with the film - not because it was a flop, but because it wasn't as big a hit (or critical success) as they expected. If that's true, then they're the idiots.