Superman: The Man of Tomorrow

1303132333436»

Comments

  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,627
    Superman’ Estate Sues Warner Bros. Discovery, DC Comics To Block Release In Key Territories
    https://deadline.com/2025/01/superman-estate-sues-warner-bros-discovery-dc-comics-summer-release-1236274354/#comments
    This needs sorting ASAP
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,627
  • Posts: 371
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,985
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 634
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,843
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 634
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,843
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I like MOS, but some of the choices made are baffling. The Batman was great for me, but it isn't very memorable, honestly. Superman's cinematic state is so bad that I have written my own works for them. Knowing WB and DC, they wouldn't take it because of my no Lex rule. It's been so hard to get into the MCU lately. If most of these characters are supposed to lead the next Avengers, I'm not impressed. I hope that Superman can do well, for everyone. However, my standards are low, for now. It feels like Superman and the MCU keep getting cold feet in recent years. Superman honestly can avoid it at this point, it will take the MCU awhile to get itself back. I also think it won't be RDJ who can do it. It seems like a waste of both sides for something creative.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,627
    Great Lex Luthor, R. I. P.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,366
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I’d say the problem is that these superhero films have been too down to Earth. They should be treated like a whole separate universe rather than just “what if Superman showed up in our real world??” The thing I like about Gunn’s film is that it appears to very much be comics accurate, it IS a DC universe in every fantastical way. No attempt at grounding things the way even the MCU was guilty of. Just unabashed comics come to life complete with a superhero dog. If that’s too fantastical for some, oh well.
  • MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I’d say the problem is that these superhero films have been too down to Earth. They should be treated like a whole separate universe rather than just “what if Superman showed up in our real world??” The thing I like about Gunn’s film is that it appears to very much be comics accurate, it IS a DC universe in every fantastical way. No attempt at grounding things the way even the MCU was guilty of. Just unabashed comics come to life complete with a superhero dog. If that’s too fantastical for some, oh well.

    I’m excited for this new Superman movie too for those reasons you’ve listed. I’m done with more “realistic” superhero films; Bryan Singer and Christopher Nolan already miked “realism” in comic book films to death.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 634
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I’d say the problem is that these superhero films have been too down to Earth. They should be treated like a whole separate universe rather than just “what if Superman showed up in our real world??” The thing I like about Gunn’s film is that it appears to very much be comics accurate, it IS a DC universe in every fantastical way. No attempt at grounding things the way even the MCU was guilty of. Just unabashed comics come to life complete with a superhero dog. If that’s too fantastical for some, oh well.

    If you were saying this in 2012 after TDKR came out I might agree with you, but the last few MCU films have had crazy multi-verse plots and are difficult to follow for the average viewer who dont watch every single piece of Marvel 'content'.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,366
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I’d say the problem is that these superhero films have been too down to Earth. They should be treated like a whole separate universe rather than just “what if Superman showed up in our real world??” The thing I like about Gunn’s film is that it appears to very much be comics accurate, it IS a DC universe in every fantastical way. No attempt at grounding things the way even the MCU was guilty of. Just unabashed comics come to life complete with a superhero dog. If that’s too fantastical for some, oh well.

    If you were saying this in 2012 after TDKR came out I might agree with you, but the last few MCU films have had crazy multi-verse plots and are difficult to follow for the average viewer who dont watch every single piece of Marvel 'content'.

    The multi-verse plots are not what make them difficult to follow, it’s that Marvel started doing a slew of TV shows that many audiences opted to skip over. Marvel ran with this conceit of needing to watch every show and film in order to catch up. That was fairly easy in the 2010s when it was only two or three films a year, but now adding TV shows into the mix just made it all more convoluted.

    That’s something Gunn himself actually addressed by assuring that for the DCU they’ll largely be standalone stories with each film so to prevent audiences from feeling they missed something.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 634
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I’d say the problem is that these superhero films have been too down to Earth. They should be treated like a whole separate universe rather than just “what if Superman showed up in our real world??” The thing I like about Gunn’s film is that it appears to very much be comics accurate, it IS a DC universe in every fantastical way. No attempt at grounding things the way even the MCU was guilty of. Just unabashed comics come to life complete with a superhero dog. If that’s too fantastical for some, oh well.

    If you were saying this in 2012 after TDKR came out I might agree with you, but the last few MCU films have had crazy multi-verse plots and are difficult to follow for the average viewer who dont watch every single piece of Marvel 'content'.

    The multi-verse plots are not what make them difficult to follow, it’s that Marvel started doing a slew of TV shows that many audiences opted to skip over. Marvel ran with this conceit of needing to watch every show and film in order to catch up. That was fairly easy in the 2010s when it was only two or three films a year, but now adding TV shows into the mix just made it all more convoluted.

    That’s something Gunn himself actually addressed by assuring that for the DCU they’ll largely be standalone stories with each film so to prevent audiences from feeling they missed something.

    You feel the need to correct different people on multiple threads for some reason. If you're a comic book junkie I'm sure the multi-verse stuff feels pedestrian, but some people like things to be more grounded, difficult to follow or not.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited 12:39am Posts: 17,240
    Careful about accusing people about correcting others, I'm sure you wouldn't want to be accused of the same thing just because you disagreed with them. Makeshift is one of the more valued members around here and speaks a lot of sense. You can toss out abusive PMs as much as you like.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 634
    "Quiet in the peanut gallery, serious people are talking."
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,366
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I’d say the problem is that these superhero films have been too down to Earth. They should be treated like a whole separate universe rather than just “what if Superman showed up in our real world??” The thing I like about Gunn’s film is that it appears to very much be comics accurate, it IS a DC universe in every fantastical way. No attempt at grounding things the way even the MCU was guilty of. Just unabashed comics come to life complete with a superhero dog. If that’s too fantastical for some, oh well.

    If you were saying this in 2012 after TDKR came out I might agree with you, but the last few MCU films have had crazy multi-verse plots and are difficult to follow for the average viewer who dont watch every single piece of Marvel 'content'.

    The multi-verse plots are not what make them difficult to follow, it’s that Marvel started doing a slew of TV shows that many audiences opted to skip over. Marvel ran with this conceit of needing to watch every show and film in order to catch up. That was fairly easy in the 2010s when it was only two or three films a year, but now adding TV shows into the mix just made it all more convoluted.

    That’s something Gunn himself actually addressed by assuring that for the DCU they’ll largely be standalone stories with each film so to prevent audiences from feeling they missed something.

    You feel the need to correct different people on multiple threads for some reason. If you're a comic book junkie I'm sure the multi-verse stuff feels pedestrian, but some people like things to be more grounded, difficult to follow or not.

    I’m not a comic book junkie. I’ve skipped over plenty of plenty of MCU shows.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 634
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I’d say the problem is that these superhero films have been too down to Earth. They should be treated like a whole separate universe rather than just “what if Superman showed up in our real world??” The thing I like about Gunn’s film is that it appears to very much be comics accurate, it IS a DC universe in every fantastical way. No attempt at grounding things the way even the MCU was guilty of. Just unabashed comics come to life complete with a superhero dog. If that’s too fantastical for some, oh well.

    If you were saying this in 2012 after TDKR came out I might agree with you, but the last few MCU films have had crazy multi-verse plots and are difficult to follow for the average viewer who dont watch every single piece of Marvel 'content'.

    The multi-verse plots are not what make them difficult to follow, it’s that Marvel started doing a slew of TV shows that many audiences opted to skip over. Marvel ran with this conceit of needing to watch every show and film in order to catch up. That was fairly easy in the 2010s when it was only two or three films a year, but now adding TV shows into the mix just made it all more convoluted.

    That’s something Gunn himself actually addressed by assuring that for the DCU they’ll largely be standalone stories with each film so to prevent audiences from feeling they missed something.

    You feel the need to correct different people on multiple threads for some reason. If you're a comic book junkie I'm sure the multi-verse stuff feels pedestrian, but some people like things to be more grounded, difficult to follow or not.

    I’m not a comic book junkie. I’ve skipped over plenty of plenty of MCU shows.

    I never said you were.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,843
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I’d say the problem is that these superhero films have been too down to Earth. They should be treated like a whole separate universe rather than just “what if Superman showed up in our real world??” The thing I like about Gunn’s film is that it appears to very much be comics accurate, it IS a DC universe in every fantastical way. No attempt at grounding things the way even the MCU was guilty of. Just unabashed comics come to life complete with a superhero dog. If that’s too fantastical for some, oh well.

    If you were saying this in 2012 after TDKR came out I might agree with you, but the last few MCU films have had crazy multi-verse plots and are difficult to follow for the average viewer who dont watch every single piece of Marvel 'content'.

    The multi-verse plots are not what make them difficult to follow, it’s that Marvel started doing a slew of TV shows that many audiences opted to skip over. Marvel ran with this conceit of needing to watch every show and film in order to catch up. That was fairly easy in the 2010s when it was only two or three films a year, but now adding TV shows into the mix just made it all more convoluted.

    That’s something Gunn himself actually addressed by assuring that for the DCU they’ll largely be standalone stories with each film so to prevent audiences from feeling they missed something.

    You feel the need to correct different people on multiple threads for some reason. If you're a comic book junkie I'm sure the multi-verse stuff feels pedestrian, but some people like things to be more grounded, difficult to follow or not.

    I’m not a comic book junkie. I’ve skipped over plenty of plenty of MCU shows.

    I've also skipped over pretty much all the MCU shows. There's just too much MCU media out there that there's no point. If you have to watch a certain episode of a TV show to understand a movie, something is horribly wrong. That's asking too much of a general audience.

    As for realism and fantasy in superhero movies, I'd like to see future movies to look at Michael Keaton's Batman movies for influence. Just try to be more faithful to the comics than he was, particularly with Batman Returns! As for Superman's future, using some of his unused villains could help get a fantasy feel that most superhero movies are missing.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,366
    On the multi-verse thing, if it was that supposedly confusing it didn’t stop people from enjoying DEADPOOL & WOLVERINE. Now we just got that CAPTAIN AMERICA movie which was completely free of any multi-verse shenanigans, went back to the well with that conspiracy thriller style of THE WINTER SOLDIER, and it was still considered a disappointment.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 1,164
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    So to start with I should say I have absolutely no interest in a Superman film. I would have even less if Rachel Brosnahan wasn't involved. But I saw the trailer in the cinema and I had to check if anyone else thought this.

    Is the hype the trailer is trying to create entirely based on "Oh my god it's Superman! In a movie! And he's flying!"? Because that was all I could take from it.

    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    chrisisall wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Problem is Superman has already been in a bunch of expensive movies recently, and those were quite bad.
    This one might be better...

    Let's hope.
    I was really looking forward to Man of Steel 2 back when it seemed like a possibility, but this Superman just hasn't excited me so far. James Gunn is a bit of a hack who made two good Guardians films then parlayed it to this job apparently.

    I have mixed opinions about this version of Superman. One thing that is getting bad in a lot of superhero movies recently is other superheroes getting sidelined in their own movie. Also, it feels like WB and DC can only just have the main characters be Superman, Lois and Lex. Or Zod, of course. I feel that the one Superman character that Zack Snyder should have gotten right is Doomsday. What a waste. Other villains that should be explored are Parasite, Toyman, Silver Banshee and Mongul. I'm actually happy that James Gunn is using Krypto as a character. As I feel it helps explore the true Superman mythological comics.

    I agree with that sentiment. The last superhero film I went to see was Avengers Infinity war. It just got too fantastical. Marvel and DC need to find a way to bring things back down to Earth. And I'm not a big Zack Snyder groupie, but 300 and Man of Steel are excellent.

    I’d say the problem is that these superhero films have been too down to Earth. They should be treated like a whole separate universe rather than just “what if Superman showed up in our real world??” The thing I like about Gunn’s film is that it appears to very much be comics accurate, it IS a DC universe in every fantastical way. No attempt at grounding things the way even the MCU was guilty of. Just unabashed comics come to life complete with a superhero dog. If that’s too fantastical for some, oh well.

    If you were saying this in 2012 after TDKR came out I might agree with you, but the last few MCU films have had crazy multi-verse plots and are difficult to follow for the average viewer who dont watch every single piece of Marvel 'content'.

    The multi-verse plots are not what make them difficult to follow, it’s that Marvel started doing a slew of TV shows that many audiences opted to skip over. Marvel ran with this conceit of needing to watch every show and film in order to catch up. That was fairly easy in the 2010s when it was only two or three films a year, but now adding TV shows into the mix just made it all more convoluted.

    That’s something Gunn himself actually addressed by assuring that for the DCU they’ll largely be standalone stories with each film so to prevent audiences from feeling they missed something.

    You feel the need to correct different people on multiple threads for some reason. If you're a comic book junkie I'm sure the multi-verse stuff feels pedestrian, but some people like things to be more grounded, difficult to follow or not.

    I’m not a comic book junkie. I’ve skipped over plenty of plenty of MCU shows.

    I've also skipped over pretty much all the MCU shows. There's just too much MCU media out there that there's no point. If you have to watch a certain episode of a TV show to understand a movie, something is horribly wrong. That's asking too much of a general audience.

    As for realism and fantasy in superhero movies, I'd like to see future movies to look at Michael Keaton's Batman movies for influence. Just try to be more faithful to the comics than he was, particularly with Batman Returns! As for Superman's future, using some of his unused villains could help get a fantasy feel that most superhero movies are missing.

    Agreed on that last statement. There has to be a way to find the middle ground between those two concepts, Sam Raimi's Spider-Man comes to mind.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,843
    I agree with you about Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy, and blending the realism and fantasy. Iron Man 1 & 2 do this well as well. I think Iron Man 3 is one of the worst MCU movies. It proved that they really don't care about villains. As much as I love Spider-Man 2, it does owe A LOT to Superman 2. Plus, Mary-Jane in the trilogy is how NOT to write a love interest. She didn't have many redeeming qualities. Lois Lane generally has a uniqueness in love in all her movies appearances, that works in one way or another.

    It's actually kind of amazing that Toyman (Winslow Schott) has not been used in much Superman media. He would have fit perfectly in both the George Reeves' 50's show or Christopher Reeve's 70's movies. He did more or less appear on Wonder Woman, played The Riddler himself, Frank Gorshin. At this point, I could see him being in a Batman movie, before a Superman movie.
Sign In or Register to comment.