What are your issues with the DCEU Superman?

[The Dark Knight]

Anyway, I don't hate Donner.

This is me, although Man of Steel is my number one. I like the first two Superman films because in my opinion, without them I think the Superman movie franchise's track record is abysmal - I'm not a fan of III, IV or Returns. Superman and Superman II are not perfect but I think they have enough going for them. But if push comes to shove, I'm a Snyder man through and through. I prefer everything he has done over Donner. I like Superman. At the core though, I'm not heavily invested in any Superman fan base wars. The same passion just isn't there.

[thecolorsblend]

This is me, although Man of Steel is my number one. I like the first two Superman films because in my opinion, without them I think the Superman movie franchise's track record is abysmal - I'm not a fan of III, IV or Returns. Superman and Superman II are not perfect but I think they have enough going for them. But if push comes to shove, I'm a Snyder man through and through. I prefer everything he has done over Donner. I like Superman. At the core though, I'm not heavily invested in any Superman fan base wars. The same passion just isn't there.

Drama with that other forum aside, I find that Batman tend to mostly be more unified than Superman fans. It's all relative but Superman fans tend to be rather divided.

Honestly, I chalk it up the plethora of Superman reboots, new origins, restarts and retcons floating around. As of now, with comics people can prefer Pre-Crisis, Byrne's MOS, Birthright, Secret Origin, New 52 and probably more stuff coming soon.

By contrast, for a lot of years there Batman fans all had Year One as their rallying point. Even though I'm not real big on Year One, even I have to admit that some amazing stuff came from the Year One concept. There may have been continuity problems or the occasional retcon but Year One was pretty much always there to serve as the foundation for Batman comics.

Superman fans don't have that. And it long ago became a major point of contention. It's to the point now that there are "types" of Superman fans. Batman fans, in my observation, typically don't have those problems. That may have changed after Zero Year. I wouldn't know. But it looks like Batman fans have remained unified.

The major point of conflict for Batman fans appears to be movie adaptations. Burton, Nolan, Snyder, Schumacher (to a lesser degree) and others all have fans who hate everybody else's version. But when it comes to comics, they all seem to be pretty much on the same page with each other.

It would make an interesting thesis, I think.

[The Laughing Fish]

One of the biggest reasons why I will still prefer the original theatrical version of SII over the Donner cut is the ending Superman taking the American flag back to the White House and promises the President to never let him down again. Although I still don't think it makes up for Superman impulsively giving up his powers in the first place, at least this ending shows Supes taking some responsibility and acknowledging he was wrong, as opposed to the cop-out ending where he gets to rewind the clock back in time once again.

The BvS Ultimate Edition has some slight changes, i.e. Superman destroying a missile drone before coming to Lois' rescue, and Clark's watching the news coverage of the African witness speaking instead of the reporting of Batman's brutal methods. But on the whole, the overall plot remains intact with extra scenes to help fill in the blanks from the theatrical cut. SII, on the other hand, had too many cuts that don't correlate very well continuity wise, i.e. Jor-El, the vastly different opening and closing sequences, how Lois learn's Clark's secret identity etc. It does sour the experience for me.

[The Dark Knight]

Drama with that other forum aside, I find that Batman tend to mostly be more unified than Superman fans. It's all relative but Superman fans tend to be rather divided.

That's true. I think it's about being content. As a Batman fan I am content. I am happy with the character's history. We have the 66 show, Burton's flicks, BTAS, Schumacher, Nolan, the Arkham games and now Snyder. I'm not the biggest Nolan fan but his trilogy genuinely honors the character. That much we have to say. I enjoy the lighter interpretations of Batman, but honestly, when DC go dark with Batman they can't really go wrong. The Batman brand has been remarkably consistent over the years. Superman I think less so, but that's not to say he doesn't have great material.

The BvS Ultimate Edition has some slight changes, i.e. Superman destroying a missile drone before coming to Lois' rescue, and Clark's watching the news coverage of the African witness speaking instead of the reporting of Batman's brutal methods.

And they are all improvements in my eyes. At the end of Man of Steel Superman rips a surveillance drone out of the sky and says he will help the government, but on his terms. At the start of BvS UE, Superman destroys a missile drone. The guy doesn't like drones. I like that thematic continuity. By destroying the missile drone he also saves the village, so it kills two birds with one stone. Clark watching the African witness builds up the paid actress plotline which is entirely absent in the Theatrical Cut. Clark still learns about the brandings when Lex sends him the photos later on, so that aspect of the plot isn't ignored anyway. It's a win-win.

[The Laughing Fish]

I'm not the biggest Nolan fan but his trilogy genuinely honors the character.

Could've fooled me. I don't consider Nolan's rubbish writing as honoring the character at all.

[The Dark Knight]

I am not a fan of the plot trajectories Nolan took. I think his films are grossly overrated. But did Nolan honor the character? At the end of the day I think so. From a realism point of view he more or less nailed his brief, I guess. I don't like realism and Batman mixed together but that's beside the point. Nolan's stories are rooted in the comics even though he has deviations like everyone else. I think the problems with his Batman are really on full show in TDK Rises. He crams in No Man's Land, Knightfall and The Cult into one movie and its just too much to handle to be satisfying and coherent. All the bread and butter themes are there in the Nolan trilogy for me to say the character was honored but there's no doubt things became messy. That's my beef. Batman was great well before Nolan arrived on the scene. Case in point BTAS. I just prefer other interpretations of Batman other than Nolan. I'm not going to roll over and praise TDK Trilogy now, but the arrival of Affleck and Snyder really lifted my mood cinematically.

[The Laughing Fish]

From a realism point of view he nailed his brief.

See, I even call bullsh*t on that. For all the attempts to make Batman 'real', it didn't work because it focused too much superficial crap like how the costume is made, or being inconsistent with what Batman can and can't do, and contradict his moral principles every single time without reason or logic, and not even affect him once.

No matter what people say about Snyder's take on Superman and Batman, at least we can see how their presence is having an affect on society, and how both overcome all obstacles and shortcomings to redeem themselves in the end. Ironically, BvS shows more realism than anything we see in Nolan's stuff. But BvS is deemed a complete failure, while Nolan's morally warped TDK series is not only accepted, but hailed as a masterpiece? Get the f*** out of here. The fact that people still complain about Batman killing on film to this day, but are happy to overlook Nolan's hypocrisy, is a pathetic travesty by itself. And to add further insult to injury, idiots actually have the nerve to accuse Snyder of dumbing down his audience, unlike Nolan! HA!!!

For me, I'd compare my distaste for Nolan's take to Superman fans' dislike for Bryan Singer's movie: to me, taking the fall for a psychopath is not any better than giving a hero an illegitimate son (as fans would say). But unlike Singer's movie, people have been brainwashed into thinking Nolan's movies define Batman. That is something I will never accept.

[Silver Nemesis]

I'm not the biggest Nolan fan but his trilogy genuinely honors the character.

Absolutely. I've made no bones about the fact I prefer Burton's overall approach to Nolan's, but as a lifelong comic fan I can't deny the thrill I got from seeing Bruce Wayne represented so accurately on screen in Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. It's not a perfect depiction by any means – no live action version is – but it came satisfyingly close and ticked most of the important boxes. It was especially rewarding for die hard comic fans to see Nolan address characteristics that were flat out ignored by Burton and Schumacher (Bruce training his body to peak condition, Batman interrogating criminals and visiting crime scenes to gather evidence, meeting with Gordon on the roof of the GCPD HQ, suddenly disappearing in the middle of conversations, etc). To quote Denny O'Neil, one of the greatest Batman writers of all time and the greatest Batman editor:

"I can answer that in two words: Christopher Nolan. I created one of the characters in the first and third, so you would expect me to be pretty picky about it. And about halfway through that script I thought: 'My God, he's doing it better than I did. He really gets this character... why the hell didn't I think of this?' He is a man who has great respect for the source material – that's not always been true – and a master of his own craft."
http://screenrant.com/best-batman-movie-version-comic-book-writers/

On the subject of comics and Nolan's Batman films, I'd just like to mention that we haven't forgotten about The Dark Knight comic analysis feature. Hopefully we'll have it posted in time for the 10th anniversary next year, but it's going to be a mammoth undertaking. That movie is full of material taken from the comics.

[GoNerdYourself]

On the subject of SII, I slightly prefer Donner's Cut (which technically is just an approximation of what a Donner Cut might have been, but not really), but I think both those cuts are very flawed. Mostly, I like the opening better and I love how Lois tricked him later in the film. I also love Brando's scenes. There's some weird placement in terms of editing in the Donner Cut. The Theatrical Cut feels more triumphant when Superman tricks Zod at the end and the theme begins to play. And, of course, it had the flag scene. And both cuts have my least favorite scenes, with the over the top hillbillies.

The only Superman film in that series that I truly love is the original. I would love to have seen what SII would have been like had Donner returned to finish it.

[thecolorsblend]

On the subject of comics and Nolan's Batman films, I'd just like to mention that we haven't forgotten about The Dark Knight comic analysis feature. Hopefully we'll have it posted in time for the 10th anniversary next year, but it's going to be a mammoth undertaking. That movie is full of material taken from the comics.

If you want, I can dig around and see if I can throw in some tidbits.

Still, you have my sympathies. That's one hell of a big job you've got. So much of it can be summarized as "Go read The Long Halloween" but there's a ton of other stuff in there too.

I slightly prefer Donner's Cut (which technically is just an approximation of what a Donner Cut might have been, but not really

This statement points to the major problem I have with the Donner Cut.

I've seen tons of people say the Donner Cut is better than the Lester Cut. So I take issue with that, of course. I mean, in some ways it's picking gnat $#!+ out of pepper to argue which one is better. My view is Superman II sucks on the conceptual level so there's no margin in debating which version is better.

But that aside, I guess I believe the Lester cut is better than Donner's and, in response to someone who says they prefer the Donner Cut, I typically list off the multitude of things done better in Lester's Cut.

Invariably the rejoinder to that is the other guy says the Donner Cut is imperfect, unfinished and not really comparable to Lester's.

But isn't it? Because many of the Donner Cut lovers are fond of saying the Donner Cut is better than Lester's. So obviously they're comparable to each other at least on some levels.

But as the discussion about Donner vs. Lester continues, the feeling sinks in that Donner fan in the discussion is fine with comparing the two cuts when it benefits Donner. But when it benefits Lester, hey, Donner's cut is unfinished, flawed, incomplete, yadda yadda yadda.

I'm not bashing on you, you understand. You didn't say those exact words. But it's something I've seen a lot and wanted to get this off my chest.