Jump to content

Lucas1138
 Share

Recommended Posts

And also, the boyscout thing can be done well, as evidenced by Captain America.

The Captain America arc is different than Superman's. Cap is a man with 1940's values thrust into a future that changed around him while he was frozen in ice. Superman, while from another planet is a man that grew up in his own time. He has down on the farm values and was raised well by his earth parents. He's good a guy. Not a goody 2 shoes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And also, the boyscout thing can be done well, as evidenced by Captain America.

The Captain America arc is different than Superman's. Cap is a man with 1940's values thrust into a future that changed around him while he was frozen in ice. Superman, while from another planet is a man that grew up in his own time. He has down on the farm values and was raised well by his earth parents. He's good a guy. Not a goody 2 shoes.

 

Both are among the (painfully) few comic heroes who had some need to help others without so much as a thought about benefiting from the act, or trying to manipulate the world around them. Even Spider-Man started out wanting to profit from his powers, and Iron Man. Well, you know the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they could've found a way to make a tradional Superman move work they would've made another one. After Superman Returns they decided they needed to go in a different direction.

They should have adapted All Star Superman. Weighty-- full of pathos, a humanized Superman, high stakes action-- and still full of hope.

 

The story BEGINS with Lex Luthor tricking Superman into the sun, which over0-charges his powers to the point that his cells are going to burn out and kill him. So Superman sets out to do everything he needs to do to the world before he leaves it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

It's not even that Superman is too much of a boy scout that is the problem. Like Brett points out, Captain American can pull it off. Also, Spiderman basically does, as well.

 

The simple fact is Superman is just way too powerful to write for, to begin with. It's hard to write a movie for a character that literally could survive if the world was blown up. It's even harder to write a credible threat to Superman, without getting ridiculous.

 

The John Byrne era (say what you will about some of the writing, a lot of concepts were actually good) tried hard to de-power Superman, but too many fanboys couldn't accept that there might be other characters more powerful than Superman, so the power levels creeped back up. After a couple semi reboots, we now have a Superman who can do this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I mean, ridiculous. And MOS Superman is basically Superman 52 for the big screen.

 

It would be nice to go to a Superman movie where he can be hurt, and even killed with more than just Kryptonite. Also going back to a Superman where Clark Kent is the real person, and Superman is the persona, not the other way around would also go a long way to humanize Superman. The fact that Superman is only super because of his powers, and not because he is a hero who lives and leads by example like this upcoming B VS S does really does a disservice to the character, IMHO. Honestly, aside the fact we knew he was Superman, and he's supposed to be the good guy, towards the end of MOS, there wasn't a whole lot that separated Superman from Zod. And of course the power levels were just off the scale. Making it clear what makes superman a hero and not just some guy with super powers and also making it iffy where Superman could actually survive a conventional explosive missile attack would make it a lot easier to write for him, and allow for the human character and exceptional qualities of Superman to be highlighted, much the same way Captain America does for the Avengers movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

Agree and disagree. I agree a moral problem would humanize him. I disagree with supes basically being at god-like power levels. Why isn't being able to fly, have bullets bounce off him, various super visions, and be super strong enough? Why does it have to be off the charts on everything? It's THAT part about Superman that should stay in the 1950s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's best when it's emphasized that no matter how much power he has, he can't do everything! One of my favorite parts of the first movie was his line about even with all his powers, there was nothing he could do for his father when he had a heart attack.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see the fanboy hate of MOS but you have to give them credit for trying something different. I like Driver's idea, but I'm not sure it would sell. Might be a good story later, though.

 

All of this comes down to DC playing catchup to Marvel. Green Lantern was supposed to be their Iron Man, the movie that launched a franchise. After it failed they felt compelled to go with an attention grabbing approach. Enter Zack Snyder. As hollow and Transformersy as his it is, I really think it's their best bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree and disagree. I agree a moral problem would humanize him. I disagree with supes basically being at god-like power levels. Why isn't being able to fly, have bullets bounce off him, various super visions, and be super strong enough? Why does it have to be off the charts on everything? It's THAT part about Superman that should stay in the 1950s.

 

DC recently tried dealing with all of this explicitly by de-powering Superman and revealing that he is Clark Kent to the public in the core Superman (non-Justice League) books. It has created some really nice storytelling opportunities for them by making fighting villains much more difficult for him (he can no longer fly and, which still durable, is not invulnerable; he has also lost many of his eye powers, too). More importantly than that, though, it has taken away much of his support network as former allies have now turned against him and he no longer has his life as just Clark to turn to. Some of the storytelling choices they've made during this time have been iffy, but I think that the books are more compelling now, having completely overturned the type of dreck that Scott Lobdell put into his run, like what you posted above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

I can see the fanboy hate of MOS but you have to give them credit for trying something different. I like Driver's idea, but I'm not sure it would sell. Might be a good story later, though.

 

All of this comes down to DC playing catchup to Marvel. Green Lantern was supposed to be their Iron Man, the movie that launched a franchise. After it failed they felt compelled to go with an attention grabbing approach. Enter Zack Snyder. As hollow and Transformersy as his it is, I really think it's their best bet.

I'm not a Superman fanboy, but my non-trolly answer is I just don't like how MOS was executed. Seriously, it did have a lot of ingredients that should have made it likable to me, but it just didn't work for me. But yeah, they do get an E for effort for trying something new, I suppose.

 

Honestly, I really don't know what it is about DC heroes that is so hard about them to make a decent movie. It seems like other than the first two Superman movies from the 1970s (which are dated for sure!), Batman is just about the only one they can get right. At least as long Joel Schumacher isn't involved, anyway.

 

If that could be answered, they would have a hit on their hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DC characters simply aren't as cool as the Marvel characters. It's s simple as that. The whole reason why Marvel even exists is because people got tired of DC crap.

 

Not that Marvel is perfect, of course. The Fantastic Four are a good example of an ancient comic that just doesn't sell anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DC characters simply aren't as cool as the Marvel characters. It's s simple as that. The whole reason why Marvel even exists is because people got tired of DC crap.

 

Not that Marvel is perfect, of course. The Fantastic Four are a good example of an ancient comic that just doesn't sell anymore.

Normally you and are think the opposite things-- but this statement is gold-plated truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The DC characters simply aren't as cool as the Marvel characters. It's s simple as that. The whole reason why Marvel even exists is because people got tired of DC crap.

 

Not that Marvel is perfect, of course. The Fantastic Four are a good example of an ancient comic that just doesn't sell anymore.

Normally you and are think the opposite things-- but this statement is gold-plated truth.

 

I bet Marvel studios would be able to make them work. They haven't disappointed yet! If only they could get the rights to them, we could get a proper Dr. Doom!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.