I like Christopher Reeve's Superman a lot but Cavill's Superman is the only interpretation where I actually gave a damn...

I like Christopher Reeve's Superman a lot but Cavill's Superman is the only interpretation where I actually gave a damn about Superman as a character, at least emotionally. Most versions just portray him as a big blue boy scout.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=QUUGDRxJnFU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Really?
this is bait, isn't it?

Haven't been here in like a month and apparently came back too soon.

I would say you have shit taste, but that would be an insult to shit.

>Most versions just portray him as a big blue boy scout.
You mean like Superman.

I feel user, we gotta see the struggles of being superman, kind of like how it was highlighted in Red Son

Literally the entire ending point of Red Son is that he is a big blue boy scout.

>Wanting to relate to & have sympathy for a character on a normal human level is in shit taste...
Wat?

Hey, since I can't seem to find it and the closest I get is Flashpoint's Project:Superman, can anybody tell me which Superman is the one that gets imprisoned and dies to kryptonite poisoning, leaving behind a green corpse?

I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it, but I can't find it.

This bait isn't even good enough for me to do post an image declaring it as such

Batman: Holy Terror

I felt Cavill did his best with what he's got, but I didn't feel the character was developed enough in MOS. He barely talks and the movie didn't bother to show anything about his character other than "he wanted to save people but his dad didn't wanted for him to expose himself".

kys

>Your opinion differs to mine ergo you're a faggot

Sounds good

I give more of a damn about Clark than about most movie characters PERIOD. I'd watch BvS: DoJ: UE: Clark Edition over Bruce Edition

In MoS Clark misunderstood Jonathan Kent, mainly because he blamed himself and the world for his death.

Clark thought that people would never accept him and the world would never be ready for him, all because he let his father die to protect his secret. So he blamed himself and the world for his father death, because if it wasn't for him and his secret he'd still be alive.

In reality Jonathan only wanted for him to mature enough so that he'd be able to face the world and shoulder humanity's expectations and burden, but that didn't translate so well to Clark, since he was still very immature back then, and he died before Clark could understand him well.

So because of this Clark distrusted people and the world, as well as himself. That's something that Clark overcomes in the movie starting with arrival of Zod, when Clark first decide to trust the US army in how they should deal with him and Zod's demands. This continue later on when Jor-El says to him that he can save everyone.

youtube.com/watch?v=QUUGDRxJnFU
here is better less damaging edgy way though

But then you'd have to change the whole character arc. How would Clark blame the world for Jonathan having a heart attack, for example?

Why would he need to?

He doesn't. It's where he would realize that he can't save everyone, and that breaks his heart

Now you're getting it.

Lois and Clark is the only live action Superman I've been emotionally invested in.

>How would Clark blame the world for Jonathan having a heart attack, for example?
why?

Because that informs the whole theme of distrust/trust that permeate the movie.

That was the character arc of the first Richard Donner movie, where Superman went against Jor-El commands and warnings and reversed time to save Lois, an unnatural and selfish act.
But no of MoS.

What does Cavill portray him as?

I have yet to see a character under all the slo-mo and tinted lighting. He's just an implement to move the plot of his films from one 'like, totally rad' moment to the next.

See my post above.

This, but to be fair, you've got a lot more time to explore character in a series than a movie.

He's unsure, curious, regretful, ashamed, angry, distrustful and paradoxically hopeful. Oh, and sad.

So it would be bad to have a different theme than the shit one we got?

>Wanting to relate to & have sympathy for a character on a normal human level is in shit taste...
Did you miss the point where Jonathan Kent dies of a heart attack and Superman is utterly powerless to stop it?
How the fuck is that less relateable than "stop invincible son"?

You can have a different theme, but you can't just change scenes willy-nilly without without any regard to the overall theme.

I know you like that scene from the first Richard Donner movie, but that scene wouldn't work in the greater context of MoS.

That's what i'm trying to explain to you.

Probably because later in the movie Superman reverse time and save fucking everyone, specially Lois, showing us that he can indeed save everyone, including his Pa. He just needed to develop his powers.

The only thing the movie ask is if he should, but the movie doesn't explore that point to much.

>most versions
Why do people who don't read comics always say this shit? It's so bizarre. It's like they just made up all these nonexistent comics in their head and then base their perception of the characters based on these hypothetical stories.

>Superman always just wins without trying, he's overpowered
>"In which stories does that happen?"
>he just always instantly wins, like, always
>"Name one story"
>just, like, in every story

The problem with that theme is that it hinges on a self fulfilling prophecy. Clark thinks people won't trust him so he hides. In hiding Zod is the guy that gets to make the first impression for all Kryptonians. So of course nobody is going to trust Superman then.

And the sad thing is that its inspired by comics that have that very same theme work, just with the surrounding characterizations and plot being different.

>You can have a different theme, but you can't just change scenes willy-nilly without without any regard to the overall theme.
See, when I say this with respect to how Snyder rips a page here and a page there from the comics to make his movies I get called an autist. Why's it okay now?

Because Snyder changes the context of the pages to fit the themes of his movies.

You can probably have Pa dying of a heart attack, but you'd have to change other parts of MoS for that scene to make sense with the overall.

It's not about the scenes, per see, but the overall context.

>He's unsure
Yeah, okay. Not really a huge character trait, but okay.
>curious
About what? He wants to use his powers to stop bullies, but that's it.
>regretful
Never really shown. It's never really shown if he regrets not saving his dad or accepts it as being the right thing to do (another reason why that scene is so shit), same for killing zod, he screams about it, but that doesn't mean he doesn't accept it as the right thing to do. >ashamed
Pa Kent wanted him to be that, but we never know if he is.
>angry
About what? A spazz kidnapping his mother? What an exceptional thing that no one else would be angry about.
>distrustful
Distrustful to whom? He definitely trusts lois and martha and he barely spends time with anyone else, except people who want to kill him.
>paradoxically hopeful
KRYPTON HAD ITS CHANCE!
>Oh, and sad.
I'll give you that one, he looks like the average Tumblr user when you tell them they're not a special snowflake for the majority of both movies.

But those are terrible themes for a superman movie. They completely misunderstand the core of his character...

Who says I want to change only that one scene, I think the entirety of Man of Steel is shit.

I disagree.

That's fair.

>About what? He wants to use his powers to stop bullies, but that's it.

About his origin and purpose.

>Never really shown. It's never really shown if he regrets not saving his dad

Yes, it was shown. It's the whole reason why distrust and resent the world.

>About what?

About letting his father dying.

>Distrustful to whom?

Of people in general. Remember the church?

>KRYPTON HAD ITS CHANCE!

He's hopeful about finding his origin and purpose, and that he'll be able to help.

The Snyderman fans just won't die

Snyder's Superman is an emotionally immature faggot. Grow up Clark.

isn't there a board to talk about movies and actors?
here

>not liking Reeve's superdickery

Side tangent. At least the first image of Superman from Justice League is a lot more bright and hopeful than the first image released of him in BvS.

>everything about this image

>Because Snyder changes the context of the pages to fit the themes of his movies.
He doesn't do it well. Like, at all.
And I'm not even talking about how Pa Kent dies. I'm talking about greater structural things like ripping the "wandering the earth" montage from Birthright and then completely gimping it and making it devoid of meaning by missing the point and what it means for the character entirely.

And then trying to mix that characterization with that of Earth One Clark when the two are diametrically opposed.

The fact you can relate to this homicidal maniac is a testament to your derangement.

My gf never cared for Superman, but now he fav Supes is DCEU as well. Most people just see the boy scout and Reeve's version embraces that aspect wholly. She never got into it because it seemed boring.

I always liked Superman because of TAS, and how he was portrayed there. Still a boy scout, but one who struggles with the weight of the world. One who actually is affected by how people see him. Someone who has a human psyche that is most certainly not invulnerable. However, he still manages to do the right thing. and that is what makes him Super.

DCEU Supes is basically that same Superman, but in a different setting. A world that is much less kind to its superheroes. He's hammered relentlessly by expectations and accusations while doing a job that nobody else in the world is classified to do. There is no manual for what he's doing. He was a farmboy from Kansas with zero accountability, but decided to take on a task with the most responsibility ever, simply because he has the tool set. The beauty of it is that DCEU Superman is STILL a boy scout. He does the right thing whenever given the chance. But just because this world doesn't throw parades for him while he smiles and saves a cat out of a tree, most people can't see it.

I really don't know how people can call DCEU Supes cynical and edgy. He is a man who has seen the worst of what mankind has to offer, and has personally suffered for it, but he still gave his life for everyone. Pretty sure that makes him a bigger hero than anyone in modern capeshit.

>inb4 "but he's a HERO, it's his job to save the world! People expect him to give his life for mankind! It means nothing!"
I've heard this reasoning like 20 times, and it's kind of revolting. Because if you now assume that "saving humanity in all circumstances" is a job requirement, then you're openly admitting that the only criteria that you think makes Superman "SUPERMAN", is that he smiles and saves cats out of trees.

Was going to say exactly this. I love the fuck out of Reeves' Superman movies, but it starts building this message of "even Superman can't do everything" and "there will be consequences!" and then throws it out the fucking window at the end. The message of this movie is that "Superman can do anything and nothing bad ever happens".

...Which like... okay I guess. I love Silver-Age, rose-tinted glasses as much as the next guy, but that IS a bit boring.

>le ebin MAN OF MURDER meme XD!!!

Too bad that superman doesn't give a crap about you and his parents rewlly don't want him to help you