What are your issues with the DCEU Superman?

[The Dark Knight]

You mischaracterize my argument. As with so many things you post, I can't be sure if it's done intentionally or not.

In any case, my point in the post which you cannibalized was that Batman encounters condemnation from others because of his objectively criminal behavior. Superman encounters condemnation from performing humanitarian acts. A significant amount of the criticism to which Superman is subjected in BVS is due to his errands of mercy, rescues and so forth. My example for this condemnation was Senator Finch... who, it should be noted, did not condemn Superman for "violating international law" but for acting outside the auspices of the United States government.

I went on to imply that the condemnation Batman experiences is well justified while the condemnation Superman experiences is not justified.

In the future, if you choose to paraphrase any of my posts, please do so accurately. I resent being misquoted and I resent even more my intended meaning being so heavily mangled.

I wasn't trying to belittle you for your argument. I'm sorry if I came off that way.

I don't necessarily agree that Batman's behavior is any more criminal than Superman's, if he did violate any kind of law. I don't think his rescues are really criticized. I think there's more or less concerns about Superman being there in general. I think that acting outside the auspices of the government could be argued to be violate that law. Isn't there a law for that? I maintain not really understanding the movie's issues then, if the concern is about Superman just going to another country over them thinking he's burned people.

If offering aid to people outside your country is somehow against the law, we need to imprison just about every religious missionary, Amnesty International, Doctors Without Borders, the International Red Cross and probably zillions of other NGO's too.

In case I'm not being clear, no, it's not against the law.

Why this is a challenging idea for you, I have no idea. But it's not against the law.

To be honest, even though the lawmakers will always disagree, I side with Selina from BR when she says "the law doesn't apply to people like him or us." Batman, Superman and these types are exceptional people and exist outside the mundane existence of regular citizens. They have developed reputations of excellence during their careers. They do what others cannot and therefore should be able to utilize their skill sets accordingly. Spider-Man should be paid by the City instead of slandered by the Bugle. Superman should be able to slam down into a compound and shut down any way he sees fit. You'd have to be a miserable sack of dung to take big blue to court for property damage after saving the world from a hostile threat that humans stood no chance against. Let these assets off the leash. They're off it anyway.

[The Laughing Fish]

This clickbait website called Nerdist tweeted this tasteless image of Christopher Reeve's face superimposed over Cavill's in the mid-credit scene of JL. I assume this scene was edited with the controversial software called Deepfakes, which came under fire last year because people's faces (both celebrities or otherwise) were captured and manipulated to simulate pornographic movie scenes.



The ignorance of this tweet astounds me, given that Reeve wasn't even the first Superman on screen. It's rubbish that fuels Cavill Superman fans into believing the detractors are nostalgic Reeve fans, and honestly, I can't blame them for thinking that.

Speaking of Cavill, I believe it's only a matter of time before he and Amy Adams are next in line to leave, following Affleck and Will Smith's departures.

[thecolorsblend]

The ignorance of this tweet astounds me, given that Reeve wasn't even the first Superman on screen. It's rubbish that fuels Cavill Superman fans into believing the detractors are nostalgic Reeve fans, and honestly, I can't blame them for thinking that.

As always, I will not be lectured by somebody whose entire experience with Superman begins and ends with Reeve.

Some may call that attitude "elitist". Me, I think of it just as being honest.

Speaking of Cavill, I believe it's only a matter of time before he and Amy Adams are next in line to leave, following Affleck and Will Smith's departures.

Oh, no question about it. Odds are they're already officially out. The public is always the last to know. Either Superman on film has been put on ice or else they're already casting about for a replacement. But I'm leaning toward the former.

It's sickening, honestly, but I've already said my piece on that.

[The Dark Knight]

Affleck is towing the studio line when he says he couldn't nail a script, and thus that's why he decided to leave. I don't doubt he was jaded, but even then, the studio wanted to move on, and that also includes sidelining Cavill. He's done like a dinner, and that's a real shame. Same goes for Adams. Once they brought in Whedon I'm sure the studio's decision was made to essentially start over.

[The Laughing Fish]

As always, I will not be lectured by somebody whose entire experience with Superman begins and ends with Reeve.

Some may call that attitude "elitist". Me, I think of it just as being honest.

There's nothing elitist about it, at all. You're right to dismiss these types of naysayers. If people don't understand that Christopher Reeve isn't the be-all-end-all for everything Superman, then it's them who don't understand the character. Especially if they think he was the first screen incarnation. The only positive thing I can say about those hacks from Nerdist is they know how to spell his name correctly. A lot of loudmouths say they love Reeve, but they always spell his name wrong by putting the letter S in the end. Drives me crazy.

Oh, no question about it. Odds are they're already officially out. The public is always the last to know. Either Superman on film has been put on ice or else they're already casting about for a replacement. But I'm leaning toward the former.

It's sickening, honestly, but I've already said my piece on that.

Your guesses reminded me when you once said the so-called "fans" and Cheetoh-munching bloggers don't deserve another DC movie in their lifetime. I think you're definitely onto something.

Meanwhile, I think we can add Ezra Miller onto the list, if this rumour is correct:

It may be zero hour for Ezra Miller and The Flash.

In an effort to stay on as star of the DC Comics-based movie, Miller has taken it upon himself to write his own script...and enlisted the help of comics author Grant Morrison.

The reason is this: Miller has his own...darker...vision for what the movie should be. But it clashes with what directors John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein have in mind.

It's a shocking move and if the studio, which is already on the path of fun and light (see Aquaman, Shazam!) but made a deal for Miller and Morrison to do their version regarldess, doesn't go for it, Miller's run as hero Barry Allen could be cut short.

https://link.hollywoodreporter.com/view/518d53f9191b2a646dbcdf4d9pbj3.1ht/0e0dcddd
https://twitter.com/Borys_Kit/status/1106709888476934144?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

I say Miller is better off leaving. f*** that worthless excuse for a movie studio.

[The Laughing Fish]

I've seen some really idiotic, over-the-top criticisms over Cavill's Superman that has drowned any legitimate conversation over the years, but this really takes the cake. I found this crazy comment on a YouTube video, unsurprisingly.

I can argue that Superman didn't save people because the audience only IMAGINED he did, after reading his comics for years. But if you knew nothing about Superman, and you watch this film, there's no evidence he would have saved the flood victims. He just stood there and I assumed he left, which would be totally in character in this film. He didn't save his dad, because Daddy gave him the "don't save me, gesture." He didn't save the people in the courthouse because . . . I'm not going to try to understand that one.

Going by this fool's logic, we didn't see Reeve's Superman actually capturing those crooks in that "Bad vibrations?" scene during the Donner movie, we only imagined that he did. 

It would be understandable if he said he was disappointed how the moment cuts off to the next and the flood survivors' rescue happened off-screen. I think that would be fair criticism, but he's not saying that. Instead, he's using that scene to dismiss every moment we see Superman saving people in the movies. It's shamelessly obtuse.

As for Jonathan Kent, say what you will about him, but he was willing to sacrifice himself to protect his son from a world who wasn't ready for him. And this is coming from somebody who still isn't a big fan of how he died. Even I can understand the reasons why despite not necessarily agreeing with it.

As for the courthouse comment, I have a hunch that even if the theatrical cut of the movie had included the scene where Lois discovered Keefe's wheelchair was covered in lead, it wouldn't have made a difference to this person. He'd likely move the goalposts and say "Superman should've been quick enough to save all of those people as soon as the bomb exploded".

[thecolorsblend]

Superman rescued the girl from the burning building, the capsule from the exploding space shuttle and the ice breaker. In the same montage of Superman completing zillions of other rescues, we're supposed to infer that he simply abandoned the people in the flood?

Is life imitating art here? In the film, Superman was shown being increasingly misunderstood by the world around him in spite of his actions. It seems the same has been happening IRL since the movie's release.

Very strange.

[The Dark Knight]

Seems to me people are misreading the meaning of the scene. Not you folks, of course. But the detractors. The point of the scene is that humanity NEEDS Superman, and that need may not be healthy. The delayed rescue (Superman hovering in the sky) allows the visual of the desperate woman reaching out to the sky. That's the symbolic money shot. Superman saves the girl in Mexico and he's treated like a deity, with everyone wanting to touch him.

[Dagenspear]

It would be understandable if he said he was disappointed how the moment cuts off to the next and the flood survivors' rescue happened off-screen. I think that would be fair criticism, but he's not saying that. Instead, he's using that scene to dismiss every moment we see Superman saving people in the movies. It's shamelessly obtuse.

I don't what scene with Reeve's Clark you're referring, but I think it may be likely that we don't pan over and just hold on Clark for a couple seconds watching from someone elses perspective as Clark just floats there. While I don't care about this personally, I don't necessarily think that complaint is based on that idea that he doesn't save people, more how the movie depicts the saving.

As for the courthouse comment, I have a hunch that even if the theatrical cut of the movie had included the scene where Lois discovered Keefe's wheelchair was covered in lead, it wouldn't have made a difference to this person. He'd likely move the goalposts and say "Superman should've been quick enough to save all of those people as soon as the bomb exploded".

I have more issue with the scene happening at all with the wheelchair blowing up. I don't care that he couldn't see it nowadays, more that, again, we just hold on him surrounded by burning bodies as he looks sad (Killing Zod elicited a stronger reaction) and more than that, the movie took away the opportunity to get inside Clark's head and have him voice his emotions specifically, in a situation that I think ultimately doesn't have much of a point (Clark gets sad and blames himself, leaves, walks somewhere in the snow, talks to his dad somehow who gives him advice that I don't think is helpful or really works and Clark comes back). Arguably for the fight to play to me, having Clark not have a bouncing back moment only for Clark to suddenly revert, and having be made to fight Batman at his hardest moment, I think would help the emotion of the scene from his end.

[The Laughing Fish]

So, this must be yet another indication Cavill is out as Superman. Take a look at this stupid cameo in Shazam.

The PR department tried to spin this by saying Cavill was unable appear because of scheduling conflicts. HA! This rubbish corporation really loves to insult the fans' intelligence, don't they? And I just love how they played the first few notes of the John Williams theme to pander to nostalgia yet again. 

At this rate, Cavill is better off leaving and having nothing to do with this joke of a corporation. Let them cannibalise their own movie franchise just for the sake of going after money-making trends. No integrity whatsoever.