Batman-Online.com

Monarch Theatre => Batman in the DCEU => Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) => Topic started by: The Laughing Fish on Sun, 12 Jan 2020, 07:12

Title: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: The Laughing Fish on Sun, 12 Jan 2020, 07:12
I saw this little blog from The Film Exiles website by a disgruntled Superman fan who was irritated by people on social media giving their opinions how Superman should be presented on screen for a modern audience.

Quote
After news started circulating that Warner Bros. is lost about what to do with Superman next, Twitter was flooded with tweets from fans and would-be writers to share their ideas. It quickly became apparent that many people view this iconic and enduring character through a narrow lens. Some even bordered on what can only be described as disrespect in their demands for the characters cinematic representation yet lacked the awareness to even realise it. They don't take the character too seriously and therefore any iteration of the last son of Krypton must lean more towards 'goofy' than mature, or earnest.

It's such a shame that so many people don't want innovation or originality for a character that's spent decades being innovative himself. There's a growing demand for Superman to 'return' to his roots and people legitimately want this regression rather than see him steadily grow throughout the decades and evolve to reflect the present times. Superman as a character has so much to say but we're taking away his voice and yet expecting him to remain as relevant; it's impossible, and it puts the studio responsible for bringing him to life into an even more impossible situation.

Unfortunately, the general impression of Superman is so heavily entrenched in an antiquated adaptation which sees any attempt at creativity or ingenuity applied to the character publicly jeered and criticised. I don't think it's the movie studio that's confused about what to do with Superman, it's his so-called 'fans'. Even more frustrating, is that some vocal detractors of the more recent attempts to make Superman relevant again are on Twitter spouting their ingenious ways to "fix" the character. The problem is, the ideas they're proffering are what we've already seen in his most recent movie appearances. The ardent fans of these two DCEU films, directed by the divisive yet gifted Zack Snyder, have been left wondering whether they're being pranked. How can these people not realise the ideas and stories they're clamouring to see are already available, and yet, under scrutiny and threat of being wiped from our memory like a flash from the MiB neuralyzer.

The cause may lie in the fact that they see these characters they've defined by various buzzwords and begin making a movie in their minds. They have a checklist of what should be included and then diminish these rich fictional personalities into one-dimensional caricatures defined by preconceived assumptions of their entire disposition. They want it all wrapped up in a romanticised package; they would prefer empty speeches to the genuine actions, goofy smiles rather than a character experiencing the entire emotional spectrum. They want big action sequences without any of the real-world consequences, and straightforward morality definitions rather than anything emotionally layered or complex. They prioritise shallow entertainment over meaningful or substantial storytelling.

All of this explains why Warner Bros. should not listen to the "fans", and should not force relevancy through race swapping or other attention-seeking marketing ploys; they should find a creative team with a unique vision and trust in them to push the character in ways that even the most fervent fans don't see coming; create a distinct approach to the character that sparks conversation, inspires a new generation of enthusiastic fans, and simply trust in the strength of Superman to withstand new and creative ideas.

In short, they should step aside and just let people explore the character in ways that are fitting for the times and resonate with them, just like Zack Snyder attempted to do. This will help audiences connect with the character in unexpected ways and keep Superman relevant for decades to come.

Source: https://theexilesnetwork.wordpress.com/2020/01/10/who-is-to-blame-for-supermans-image-problem/

The bold text I've highlighted isn't something he's making up. I've had a look on Twitter, and I've seen people who tweet their "genius" ideas to make a relevant Superman movie but not realising it's already done before. For example:

(https://i.imgur.com/JDvcZ3e.jpg)

https://twitter.com/psythor/status/1201207082256613377?lang=en

The fool not only fails to realise his pitch for a Superman movie is practically BvS minus Batman and Clark Kent exposing Lex instead of Lois, he follows up it by saying "Call me Warner Bros" and "God damnit I want to watch this film now but it only exists in my mind. How can I become a Hollywood screenwriter and avoid accidentally writing fan fiction?"

(https://media.giphy.com/media/HUYPJHQ0sysqk/giphy.gif)

Deluded.

Once again, thanks to people like this, not only is the DCEU is in disarray, but Superman's cinematic future is now in limbo. The character is currently languishing on TV, on a network that has a habit of pandering to soap opera dramas and severely lacks the budget to adapt ambitious shows and crossovers. But what do you expect from so-called Superman "fans"? According to these people, Brandon Routh giving a hollow speech about hope on COIE, despite not doing anything else thus far, is apparently more heroic than anything we see from Cavill's Superman.

https://youtu.be/yhkv4nBp258

What a load of nonsense.

I'll say it again, Batman and Superman "fans" can get f***ed. All they care about is self-righteous horsesh*t to make themselves feel good. (https://www.batman-online.com/forum/Themes/default/images/post/thumbdown.gif)
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: Travesty on Sun, 12 Jan 2020, 17:42
I dunno, I honestly have no clue what Superman fans want. I think I'm done talking to Superman fans. They're all over the place. They want something closer to Reeve's Superman, and then Superman Returns comes out(which is in that universe and that Superman), and they say they don't like him. They call him a creep, and that he didn't punch anybody. Apparently, there wasn't enough action. Snyder comes in to update the character with MOS, and then they complain that he's punching too much, and there's too much action. They then say they want less action, and something closer to Reeve's Superman, which is what they JUST got before MOS and were complaining about. Now they're trying to say they want something like MCU's Captain America.

Good luck to any writer or director who tries to tackle Superman. I wouldn't touch it with a 10ft pole. The fans are out of their minds. The suit has to be the exact color of blue, or they lose their minds. Superman has to smile enough, but not too much because then he'll be creepy. They want action, but not too much action, but not too little action. They want a more classic relationship with Lois, but not centered too much around them so that he doesn't come off insecure and freakish, etc etc.

You don't see this with Batman. Sure, Batman fans like us have our opinions on him, but for the most part, we're down for whatever. Give us ultra goofy like Adam West, or ultra-serious like Burton/Frank Miller. Give us gold, silver bronze, and modern age. We'll take 'em all. But again, with Superman fans....well, I don't know what they want. They claim to know, but when they get it, they claim otherwise. I honestly don't understand Superman fans.

Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: Kamdan on Sun, 12 Jan 2020, 19:17
Quote from: Travesty on Sun, 12 Jan  2020, 17:42
I dunno, I honestly have no clue what Superman fans want. I think I'm done talking to Superman fans. They're all over the place. They want something closer to Reeve's Superman, and then Superman Returns comes out(which is in that universe and that Superman), and they say they don't like him. They call him a creep, and that he didn't punch anybody. Apparently, there wasn't enough action. Snyder comes in to update the character with MOS, and then they complain that he's punching too much, and there's too much action. They then say they want less action, and something closer to Reeve's Superman, which is what they JUST got before MOS and were complaining about. Now they're trying to say they want something like MCU's Captain America.
In other words, they want something good. That's not a tall order, is it?
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: The Laughing Fish on Sun, 12 Jan 2020, 19:54
Quote from: Kamdan on Sun, 12 Jan  2020, 19:17
In other words, they want something good. That's not a tall order, is it?

Really? If that were the case, then how come I barely see these fans voice their appreciation for Post Crisis Superman or DCAU Superman?

I've seen too many fans online that complain that Superman is "too depressed" and should always be upbeat, and have this vague idea about that he should stand for "hope". Snyder isn't perfect by any means, but I honestly see a lot of superficial backlash. Particularly if they go say MCU Cap and DCEU WW is what Supes should aspire to, which I think is laughable because those two interpretations aren't exactly squeaky clean either.
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: thecolorsblend on Mon, 13 Jan 2020, 00:43
I blame DC Comics for the lack of unity among Superman fans. By my count, there have been at least six different origin stories for Superman in the comics in the last 30'ish years. The fans all have their favorites.

That doesn't count non-comics media origins like STM, arguably Superboy, STAS, L&C, Smallville, etc.

Just about every Superman fan has different preferences.

This isn't a problem as much for Batman. Yeah, there's Zero Year and Earth One. But fundamentally, BY1 was Batman's undisputed origin for decades. It went virtually unchallenged. Batman fans had BY1 as their foundation for unity for all those years and that affected the fandom in a big way.

Superman doesn't have that. There are differing preferences, differing agendas, etc. Unity among Superman fans is very probably impossible at this point.
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: The Dark Knight on Mon, 13 Jan 2020, 00:46
Quote from: Travesty on Sun, 12 Jan  2020, 17:42
I dunno, I honestly have no clue what Superman fans want. I think I'm done talking to Superman fans. They're all over the place. They want something closer to Reeve's Superman, and then Superman Returns comes out(which is in that universe and that Superman), and they say they don't like him. They call him a creep, and that he didn't punch anybody. Apparently, there wasn't enough action. Snyder comes in to update the character with MOS, and then they complain that he's punching too much, and there's too much action. They then say they want less action, and something closer to Reeve's Superman, which is what they JUST got before MOS and were complaining about. Now they're trying to say they want something like MCU's Captain America.

Good luck to any writer or director who tries to tackle Superman. I wouldn't touch it with a 10ft pole. The fans are out of their minds. The suit has to be the exact color of blue, or they lose their minds. Superman has to smile enough, but not too much because then he'll be creepy. They want action, but not too much action, but not too little action. They want a more classic relationship with Lois, but not centered too much around them so that he doesn't come off insecure and freakish, etc etc.

You don't see this with Batman. Sure, Batman fans like us have our opinions on him, but for the most part, we're down for whatever. Give us ultra goofy like Adam West, or ultra-serious like Burton/Frank Miller. Give us gold, silver bronze, and modern age. We'll take 'em all. But again, with Superman fans....well, I don't know what they want. They claim to know, but when they get it, they claim otherwise. I honestly don't understand Superman fans.
You have explained the situation perfectly. Who would want to make a Superman movie with that fanbase?

I feel my Superman fandom has peaked and my status quo feelings about the character have returned. I believe the Superman situation is what happens when long term stagnation mixes with nostalgia. It creates a toxic environment because any new piece of media has intense focus placed on it and gets ruthlessly compared to the 'gold standard' of Reeve and John Williams.

This mix has crippled with character, and I really do feel that the die is cast. That's why it is so important to have an active brand that tries new things, but to have a track record of doing that throughout history. If you don't reflect the times you stay in the past and become irrelevant. Imagine if Michael Keaton and Frank Miller didn't do their dark and gritty thing, and Adam West's incarnation was still the formula that had to be emulated in the hearts and minds of fans and the general public.

Superman had Reeve, then a long time in the wilderness with Singer continuing that Reeve style of film, followed by a long gap before Snyder's take. And now we're back to the beginning again with the same old John Williams theme blaring. People cannot see Reeve as simply one part of the character's history: they seem him as the character completely. Saying "this is the only way" has crippled everything. The foundations that are meant to be a strength are actually a huge weakness.

There is an ingrained retrograde mentality and I can't muster enthusiasm for the Superman franchise anymore, especially when I have so much different content to choose from with Batman. Superman has been left behind and only serves as a supporting act - if that.
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: Kamdan on Mon, 13 Jan 2020, 17:50
QuoteReally? If that were the case, then how come I barely see these fans voice their appreciation for Post Crisis Superman or DCAU Superman?

Well, in Japan, silence is the highest compliment anyone can ever give to something. So if no one is complaining about those, then they must be doing something right.
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: The Laughing Fish on Mon, 13 Jan 2020, 20:59
Quote from: Kamdan on Mon, 13 Jan  2020, 17:50
Well, in Japan, silence is the highest compliment anyone can ever give to something. So if no one is complaining about those, then they must be doing something right.

That is a gross oversimplification, and let's face it, it totally ignores cultural differences. One can say that the lack of mention of those examples shows a lack of love, or people found them forgettable.

Still, all of that is beside the point. What I was getting at was the lack of appreciation for these other takes on Superman, is had they used them as an example how Superman "should be", I'd take them more seriously. For example, if someone were to say that Superman on film should follow how Paul Dini and Bruce Timm approached the character in STAS and the JL cartoons - by juggling between light-heartedness and darkness - they might've had a valid thing to say.

But I hardly see anyone doing that. Instead, I see comments on social media saying Superman should always be happy to evoke this childish sense of hope. These people go so far to say that Superman shouldn't attempt to intimidate anyone, which is ridiculous. These are the same sort of people who love Christopher Reeve for all the wrong reasons; they only focus on the happier side of his performance but disregard all the difficult times he faced. As Travesty already pointed out, these people have a very fickle idea how they want the character approached on film.

Nowadays, if these people watched that Justice League Unlimited episode of an angry Superman fighting Darkseid to the death as payback for brainwashing him and murdering Dan Turpin, they'd hate it too.

https://youtu.be/lhl9EotHOvo
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: thecolorsblend on Tue, 14 Jan 2020, 00:27
Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Mon, 13 Jan  2020, 20:59
Quote from: Kamdan on Mon, 13 Jan  2020, 17:50
Well, in Japan, silence is the highest compliment anyone can ever give to something. So if no one is complaining about those, then they must be doing something right.

That is a gross oversimplification, and let's face it, it totally ignores cultural differences. One can say that the lack of mention of those examples shows a lack of love, or people found them forgettable.

Still, all of that is beside the point. What I was getting at was the lack of appreciation for these other takes on Superman, is had they used them as an example how Superman "should be", I'd take them more seriously. For example, if someone were to say that Superman on film should follow how Paul Dini and Bruce Timm approached the character in STAS and the JL cartoons - by juggling between light-heartedness and darkness - they might've had a valid thing to say.

But I hardly see anyone doing that. Instead, I see comments on social media saying Superman should always be happy to evoke this childish sense of hope. These people go so far to say that Superman shouldn't attempt to intimidate anyone, which is ridiculous. These are the same sort of people who love Christopher Reeve for all the wrong reasons; they only focus on the happier side of his performance but disregard all the difficult times he faced. As Travesty already pointed out, these people have a very fickle idea how they want the character approached on film.

Nowadays, if these people watched that Justice League Unlimited episode of an angry Superman fighting Darkseid to the death as payback for brainwashing him and murdering Dan Turpin, they'd hate it too.

https://youtu.be/lhl9EotHOvo
I've always reviled that STAS storyline where Darkseid brainwashes Superman and then murders Turpin. To me, it's proof that maybe not everything that Dini and Timm touch turns to gold.

For starters, Darkseid isn't Mongul. Darkseid is a "god" and he (rightly) thinks it's beneath him in most circumstances to get into fisticuffs with commoners like Superman. Darkseid deals in conspiracies, blackmail and behind the scenes power. It's beneath his dignity to trade punches with just about anybody. He has minions for that sort of thing. Yes, Darkseid is powerful. So powerful that his mere presence was enough to bring the entire Legion Of Super-Heroes to their knees. But the fact remains that he wasn't intended to be a physical villain. Of all people, Dini and Timm should've known better than to make Darkseid into too much of a physical opponent of Superman.

For seconders, the STAS model of Dan Turpin has basically nothing to do with Turpin as he's always looked in the comics and everything to do with Jack Kirby. It's no coincidence that STAS Turpin in a dead ringer for irl Jack Kirby.

And Darkseid, a Kirby creation, murders Turpin. It's like the creation turning on its creator. It's weird, a little sick and the most incredibly bizarre meta I think I've ever seen.

Virtually everything about that story arc from STAS just doesn't work for me.
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: Kamdan on Tue, 14 Jan 2020, 11:24
QuoteThat is a gross oversimplification, and let's face it, it totally ignores cultural differences. One can say that the lack of mention of those examples shows a lack of love, or people found them forgettable.
Overly simple? Yes. But hardly "gross" as you place it. Enjoyments of fandom don't always need a big shiny metal for their accomplishments. There's also material beyond the Byrne and Animated Series material. Geoff Johns and Gary Frank's Superman Secret Origin is more in line with what these fans you're referring to would like to see in their depiction of Superman on the big screen. The deal is that they steered wrongly in the Nolan Dark Knight direction and everyone rightfully called out the disorienting (and sometimes quite frightening) results. They hastily tried to bring what was desired but learned way too late.
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: The Laughing Fish on Tue, 14 Jan 2020, 11:59
Quote from: Kamdan on Tue, 14 Jan  2020, 11:24
There's also material beyond the Byrne and Animated Series material.

I was merely using those as examples, nothing more. Nor does that make them invalid.

Quote from: Kamdan on Tue, 14 Jan  2020, 11:24
Geoff Johns and Gary Frank's Superman Secret Origin is more in line with what these fans you're referring to would like to see in their depiction of Superman on the big screen.

The only Superman-related work I've read from that duo were Superman and the Legion of Super-Heroes and Doomsday Clock. Quite honestly, I wasn't the biggest fan. I wouldn't necessarily say they're "bad", the former being better than the latter (which had a strong start but faded as it progressed), but some of the things didn't impress me. One of the biggest pet peeves of mine is Frank constantly modelling Superman after Christopher Reeve. This alone invites the whole "Superman must smile" outcry.

Frankly (no pun intended), I don't think very highly of Geoff Johns as a person nowadays after reading how he played a part in sabotaging Snyder's JL movie. You might not care, but the way he and Warner had handled the matter has been rather criminal, given the tragic circumstances over why Snyder left in the first place. Even before that, but that's going into another discussion altogether.

Quote from: Kamdan on Tue, 14 Jan  2020, 11:24
The deal is that they steered wrongly in the Nolan Dark Knight direction and everyone rightfully called out the disorienting (and sometimes quite frightening) results. They hastily tried to bring what was desired but learned way too late.

Please, people knew very well what they were getting into as soon as they saw Nolan and Goyer's name in the credits for MOS; in fact, I even remember many were rejoicing their involvement. To me, it's pretty disingenuous for people to complain about the Nolan trilogy as a bad influence, when more often than not, they're the same ones who have been putting that damn trilogy up on a pedestal and still blatantly ignoring its own problems to this day. Some of which being far more egregious than Snyder ever did than they care to admit; even going so far to lie or make worthless rationalisations for those movies' shortcomings while complaining about MOS and BvS. Again, I don't see the latter two being perfect by any means, but this whole idea over "dark tone" being unsuitable for DC to inspire is quite hypocritical. Same thing goes for the quality over the writing. But then again, I guess as long as a character pays lip service to certain ideals, that's okay, because it allows them to be exonerated for any inconsistent actions. I guess Snyder should've taken a page from Nolan's book more often in that regard.
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: The Laughing Fish on Tue, 14 Jan 2020, 12:08
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 14 Jan  2020, 00:27
For seconders, the STAS model of Dan Turpin has basically nothing to do with Turpin as he's always looked in the comics and everything to do with Jack Kirby. It's no coincidence that STAS Turpin in a dead ringer for irl Jack Kirby.

And Darkseid, a Kirby creation, murders Turpin. It's like the creation turning on its creator. It's weird, a little sick and the most incredibly bizarre meta I think I've ever seen.

We'll have to disagree about Darkseid. The DCAU made its share of changes to Superman lore, the other most significant detail is Brainiac being Kryptonian AI that played a huge part in the planet's destruction - which Timm was initially against the idea but soon warmed up to it. I figured they wanted Superman to go head-to-head against his biggest galactic adversary, and when you consider what Darkseid did, he certainly was.

But yes, I can understand your pain point over Darkseid killing Dan Turpin, as a somewhat a crude tribute to Jack Kirby. As a matter of fact, I was curious to find out what was the thought process behind the idea and I found these excerpts from the book Modern Masters Volume 3: Bruce Timm.

(https://i.imgur.com/Fgor7ql.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/gITyUnK.jpg)

I got to say, I find Timm's comments about Kirby's wife to be rather inconsiderate. I was under the impression he would've asked the family for their permission to model Dan Turpin after Jack Kirby, never mind killing the character off.
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: thecolorsblend on Tue, 14 Jan 2020, 15:00
Quote from: Kamdan on Tue, 14 Jan  2020, 11:24Geoff Johns and Gary Frank's Superman Secret Origin is more in line with what these fans you're referring to would like to see in their depiction of Superman on the big screen.
This is quite true. When Secret Origin came out, the Donner crowd raved about it. It seems like nearly every major iteration of Superman media was referenced in that miniseries: STM, Smallville, STAS, even a bit of the Reeves show if you know where to look. All those influences were incorporated into an overall more Pre-Crisis context of Clark and Lex having a relationship of sorts as kids, the existence of Superboy, having adventures with the Legion, etc.

The contingent of Superman fandom that's still obsessed with Donner mostly loved that miniseries. But I'd grown up Post-Crisis so my cherished MOS was out the window and I was something other than happy about that.

That occasion did offer me a chance to rediscover everything I loved about the Post-Crisis Superman. But I resent the never-ending reboots/revamps/restarts/retcons/whatever. It has reached a level now where Superman cannot maintain a stable history anymore. DC rejected a Superman reboot proposal from Frank freaking Miller IN HIS PRIME back in the 80s but these days every lazy hackjob writer thinks he has some unalienable right to wholesale reinvent the character even though he's not fit to lick the dirt off Miller's boots.

Sad state of affairs.

DC wanted to reboot Superman back in the 80s for the purpose of giving him a defined starting point and a new brand identity in the marketplace. As you know, it was a special privilege that Byrne was given but it wasn't meant to be a generational thing or something that a talented creator earned. It was supposed to be a one-time deal and John Byrne's origin was going to be definitive as Action Comics #1 had been definitive (or something close to it) in its time.

But obviously we're way past that now.
Title: Re: Blog: "Who is to blame for Superman's image problem?"
Post by: The Laughing Fish on Tue, 26 Jan 2021, 08:08
This is Christopher Nolan's introduction in the official MOS artbook and his endorsement of Zack Snyder.

(https://i.imgur.com/KHF3lDi.jpg)

I still have a lot of criticism of Nolan. I think his messy, inconsistent handling of Batman's rule in his trilogy really did significant damage to any rational and honest discourse surrounding that character, and the mere thought that he was initially opposed to Snyder's idea of having Superman kill Zod is even more hypocritical.

But I have to give him this much credit: he fulfilled his role as a producer and protected Snyder from any intervention by the studio. Geoff Johns reportedly tried to interfere with the production but was blocked, thanks to Nolan. Plus, as the co-writer of the film, Nolan had a greater vested interest in the film's success and could've easily banned any ideas that Snyder had brought to the table. But he didn't, and he respected the wishes of the director he had hired. Like it or not, the DCEU would never have existed if Nolan never envisioned this version of Superman. Furthermore, if Snyder was never hired to be at the helm of Superman and the wider DC Universe, we would never have gotten the likes of Affleck, Gadot and Momoa to play Batman, Wonder Woman and Aquaman respectively, and the Justice League film that so many people wanted would likely never have gotten made in the first place either.

Here are a couple of good videos analysing Superman's complicated film history from the past to the present day, and how nostalgia is holding the character back. Case in point, Matthew Vaughn saying he would've modeled his Superman movie after Donner. Like we never saw that before!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woksRkItPDo

https://youtu.be/p5G_GyQ_VGg

If Superman is going to have a future on film, ZSJL must be a success. At this point in time, it's perhaps the only chance Superman has. And no, I don't have any hope in the Superman and Lois TV show.