|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jun 26, 2017 16:26:39 GMT
That's the problem. Superman doesn't need to be edgy. He's Superman, not Batman.
this seems like a misconception. However broadly "edgy" is defined, all this is not new to the character. "Red kryptonite"or dark Supes was always there, be it in Miller's comic or even the films. The only watchable and valuable part of SM III is where he goes shady and corrupt and how he literally fights with himself to overcome it. This is solid pulp character writing, DCEU only grounds this approach.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jun 26, 2017 16:37:35 GMT
thanks TexasPete, now it's your turn. Intelligent enough?
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Jun 26, 2017 16:47:49 GMT
That's the problem. Superman doesn't need to be edgy. He's Superman, not Batman.
this seems like a misconception. However broadly "edgy" is defined, all this is not new to the character. "Red kryptonite"or dark Supes was always there, be it in Miller's comic or even the films. The only watchable and valuable part of SM III is where he goes shady and corrupt and how he literally fights with himself to overcome it. This is solid pulp character writing, DCEU only grounds this approach.
Yes. But that's when he wasn't himself. And it was a one off thing. Not a multi-movie story arc.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jun 26, 2017 16:58:57 GMT
this seems like a misconception. However broadly "edgy" is defined, all this is not new to the character. "Red kryptonite"or dark Supes was always there, be it in Miller's comic or even the films. The only watchable and valuable part of SM III is where he goes shady and corrupt and how he literally fights with himself to overcome it. This is solid pulp character writing, DCEU only grounds this approach.
Yes. But that's when he wasn't himself. And it was a one off thing. Not a multi-movie story arc. all true, but if you wish to keep an overused character alive, relevant and interesting over decades and generations, you need to make variations without losing the essence of the character. Even at the price of the god becoming more human and flawed.
The Joker went through a much broader scope of interpretations, ranging from 60s clown to edgy nihilist, to gangster boss to super pimp, why not doing something creative with Superman. For me the DCEU version is as much a legitimate represenation of the same character as the 70s, the angsty Smallville or even the Miller version were.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Jun 26, 2017 17:24:57 GMT
Making Superman edgy and angsty is losing the essence of the character.
The god was already plenty human. He was a good man. For decades, that's who he was. Being bitter and paranoid does not make him more human, nor does flawed.
The Joker works fine being reinterpreted because he's been the essence of unpredictability and crazy since the 70s.
Superman has been steadfast in being a hero. He doesn't need to learn to be a hero because he grew up as a good person that already made the right choice.
As the DCAU showed, it's possible to revamp without changing in the character away from what he's been for the better part of a century.
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Jun 26, 2017 21:19:20 GMT
I want Superman-Prime or Cyborg Superman. Both are intensely more interesting versions of Superman in my opinion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2017 6:36:15 GMT
Supergirl. We have already had 9 movies of Superman and 3 TV shows but have yet to have a real edgy and aggressive version of Supergirl on screen that is like Kara and Linda are in the majority of 'Supergirl' comic books. The closest we have got was Laura Vandervoort's version of the character in 'Smallville.'
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jul 5, 2017 1:13:19 GMT
Superman isn't a god because he doesn't see himself as one. That's stupid fanboys.
Superman is the adult in the room. When mere mortals quake in fear, Supes smiles. "Don't worry. I got this"
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Jul 5, 2017 13:06:54 GMT
Beautiful.
|
|
|
Post by chalk2 on Jul 5, 2017 13:35:00 GMT
Couldn't vote as this really needs a middle ground choice. While Chris is my fav. Superman the character is a little silly and wishy-washy. The modern version is a bit more on the realistic side character wise but a little harsh to some degree. If a middle ground between the two could be found then we might have a really good one. Oh! And bring back the red under-roos.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Jul 5, 2017 16:10:42 GMT
I think the best middle ground was actually in Superman the Animated Series. It combined a Superman that represented truth, justice, and all that along with a Clark that was a little more modern and humanized.
And yes, definitely bring back the red underroos. It's funny because people joke about Superman wearing his underwear on the outside, yet I think without the red underroos, his outfit looks even more like underwear. Like he's wearing an adult onesie.
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Jul 5, 2017 18:15:15 GMT
Traditional...
But with Henry Cavill playing him.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jul 5, 2017 19:04:04 GMT
Superman isn't a god because he doesn't see himself as one. That's stupid fanboys. Superman is the adult in the room. When mere mortals quake in fear, Supes smiles. "Don't worry. I got this" all that is most florid Merth but not logically conclusive. A few misconceptions: Nobody claimed him to be an actual god, thus a straw man argument on your side. What however is frequently brought against this character is that he is oft written as a "God-Mode Garry Stu" (it's a writing trope), solving all problems with deus ex machina abilities (eg, turning back time to save Lois) and being perfect (-ly boring) in character. Also false cause misconception: Usually the mortal worshipper defines who is considered a god, not the god (who mostly is just a figment of imagination). Prove is that you yourself speak of "mortals quake in fear".... That again is your human projection of Supes being a higher being who sets up rules & justice vis-a-vis "mortals", thus him acting just like a parent/adult. But Superman often irresponsibly acted against authority (just see him rebelling against his fathers rules, or him wishing to become a normal mortal), or became an immoral pawn of authority (TDK Returns). Again, Supes as a fictional character (figment of imagination) is defined by the mortals making him up, foremost the current IP holder, who is entitled to write him as he wishes. To paraphrase: That's stupid, fangirl. It's been a pleasure, as always, Merth.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jul 6, 2017 0:22:58 GMT
Superman isn't a god because he doesn't see himself as one. That's stupid fanboys. Superman is the adult in the room. When mere mortals quake in fear, Supes smiles. "Don't worry. I got this" all that is most florid Merth but not logically conclusive. A few misconceptions: Merh. No t Mary Ellen Maiden name Married name. No t . So all that False God crap in BvS was my imagination? Not really. Cops are expected to keep their heads. Firemen. Do we worship them? Sad reality is too many "adults" want someone else to be the responsible party. Why do we elect a president? We could do the whole process of voting o everything which would be lengthy & exhausting so we appoint one person to be in charge. So when Lex sends a monster to attack the city, we could send the cops, or we can send superman, a proven champion. I talk to parents who want my government entity to order their adult child to act like an adult. I know human nature. He's the champion, coming out on top of the battle each time like Ali or whoever. He tends to behave better than many others, hence the boy scout image. Yeah, I'm a fan girl of Cap & Thor since I was a little girl-around 1965. I read Supergirl & Super boy back then as well. I said that is stupid fanboys meaning modern fanboys thought. I do not recall any of this "Superman is a god" junk one sees tossed around. Thor WAS a god, but it was never a problem. He was a god in the Norse pantheon & fought against & with Hercules of the Roman pantheon. No one acted like he needed to be worshipped & no one thought to worship Supes. As Chris Reeve said his replacement playing Supes should bear in mind-Supes is a friend. Supes wants to help. He loves this planet as his home. He does not think of himself as a Kryptonian, but as an Earthling.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Jul 6, 2017 14:21:50 GMT
There was nothing friendly about Cavil's Superman.
That was a huge problem. There was no warmth to his character.
Even his scenes with Lois. They came across more lusty than romantic.
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Jul 6, 2017 20:53:43 GMT
There was nothing friendly about Cavil's Superman. That was a huge problem. There was no warmth to his character. Even his scenes with Lois. They came across more lusty than romantic. That was the direction and probably editing, not the performance. Henry Cavill is nothing but charming and personable in every single other performance.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Jul 6, 2017 21:09:24 GMT
Believe, I don't blame Cavil. I actually like him and thought he had a good look for Superman.
Unfortunately, the writing and direction isn't there.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jul 9, 2017 1:08:12 GMT
There was nothing friendly about Cavil's Superman. That was a huge problem. There was no warmth to his character. Even his scenes with Lois. They came across more lusty than romantic. Cavill has the charm. I like the scenes with Lois It would be so easy to make him the true friendly Supes we know
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jul 9, 2017 10:18:49 GMT
Wish we could have some kind of medium. Traditional is an unrelatable boyscout, new is a dreary douchebag. Between the two, I'll take traditional.
|
|