Can Superman even recover?

Can Superman even recover?

>MoS divisive
>BvS sucked
>People though Superman was the most boring in BvS
>Will be dead for most of Justice League
>WW a critical hit
>Audiences found her more inspiring
>Some people already thinking WW should lead the DCEU, and that she should fill the Superman role
>No Man of Steel 2 in sight

How the fuck can he come back after this and win over audiences? He seems so finished.

Other urls found in this thread:

comicsbeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Bookscan-16-Top-750_sheet.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

He was good in Lego Batman

I'm a big Supes fan but at this point I honestly would prefer the character stay dead in the movie universe. He really adds nothing.

We can bring one of the best Superman writers of all time back in to reboot the character and bring him back to his core vales- oh wait that already happened and DC ignored it.

I guess he's fucked.

-Remove Snyder
-Remove Cavill because he's a stoic piece of wood
-Give Superman a personality and make him actually have a drive to save people like Wonder Woman does. That's what I like about WW. She genuinely wants to be a superhero.

Whedon will either bring him back from the dead free from his autism.
Or
Reveal that Jonathan Kent was kidnapped and replaced by Darkseid immediately after the Bus incident.

So either an asspull or a stupid asspull
So he can't recover?
Shame

>preaches despair and indifference
>confuses Clark with contradictory expectations
>stands in a full-force tornado unaffected, then simply fades away
>reappears in mountain-top "visions" to further bedevil Clark with nihilism

It all fits.

I wonder if people actually believe that's what Pa was saying.

Jesus fucking Christ Zack Snyder has really done inrecovable damage to the character. Fuck that guy so much.

The CW Superman is the best on-screen one there's been in years. Just swap him into the movies and never look back

At the end of the day, Pa Kent was someone who didn't like people, he didn't trust them, suspected the worst of them, he believed they needed someone to show them all the way.

The most revolutionary moment in human history occurs, and he buries it all under his barn, exposes all his neighbor's toddlers to a sickly alien life-form, then fills the kid's head with a bunch of confusing rhetoric. Because he thinks he's the most capable person on the planet to deal with a sickly emissary from another planet's civilization, and that he can keep everyone around him safe as the kid develops awesomely dangerous abilities.

I'm not saying he's Evil necessarily, but he's certainly not sane.

You mean the one who fought Supergirl at full power and still lost, and spends the rest of the episode talking about how much more awesome she is than him? Nah fuck that cuck.

I know one thing, I don't think I can watch a movie where Cavill and Gadot spend time exchanging this "Models Guide to Acting" puzzled expression they are both very fond of.

And Affleck has built a career on being the least interesting performance in any film.

>How can one of the top ten best selling comic characters in America win over an audience?

What did OP mean by this?

Letting shitposters forum slide over from Sup Forums was a mistake.

It sucks being a Superman fan. We haven't had a good movie with him for almost 40 years. Superman Returns sucked, MoS sucked, BvS sucked, and now Batman and Wonder Woman are being loved while Superman might as well just stay benched given his popularity in the DCEU right now.

I fucking hate Zack Snyder so goddamn much.

Step 1: stop being a moviefag
Step 2: start reading the current running comics featuring Superman
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit

>Before a good movie

Wonder Woman is trash no one likes her she has no potential she should just be forgotten she's so boring

>After a good movie

Wonder Woman is amazing she's inspiring she should lead the DCEU

Come on OP connect the dots.

Also, while Gadot's somewhat vapid acting ability was really good for "Diana, backwoods girl from the Island" in her own movie, I'm really worried about her ability to portray a hero who's easily the oldest and most experienced on the team.

Batman's victory was total and complete.

Man I'd kill myself like his daughter if he ruins the while DC Cinematic universe

Thank his senpai that he's out for the count

Oh wow you people are real, I thought it was all a meme.
Pa's situation makes perfect sense to me.
He doesn't suspect the worst in people, he's just being real. It's not a person finding out about Clark it's the world. It's proof of other life and not only that superpowerful life.
He didn't want his son to take on the weight of the world when he was a child. His rhetoric may've been confusing but he was clearly trying to instill the responsibility of what Clark meant to the world the day that he would be revealed.
He took up being the "guardian" of a sickly alien emissary because he fucking adopted him, it wasn't some fucking alien ambassador it was his son.
Yeah he fucked up a lot but he was just a dude trying to deal with an impossible situation of raising his superpowerful alien son and not letting the world destroy him because good or bad that kind of attention on a child would destroy him.
Pa was sane and a good man, just not perfect. And that's what people wanted in the end.

Because he's nice and supportive.

>Keep Superman dead
>Keep him as the "inspiration" for forming the League, LoSH-style
>Introduce Billy as the optimistic kid who loved Superman
Best possible world?

>So either an asspull or a stupid asspull
>So he can't recover?
>Shame
We have no time to NOT use an asspull. Superman already spent two films and soon to be three. There is no more time to get him to become Earth's greatest hero in any organic way. The only way he can do it now is outright retcon his past.

It's the quality of the movie that matters. That's all.

If Superman is in a movie that people love, then he'll be loved. It's not that complicated. The general public isn't going to hold a grudge against a fictional character because that's stupid.

Sure just give him to a director that can do well with uplifting themes, and just do a movie of him inspiring everyone to over come a bad guy.

Why not just write him well? The pieces are already there just use them right.
Though really there's no hope given who's directing him.

>Yeah he fucked up a lot but he was just a dude trying to deal with an impossible situation of raising his superpowerful alien son and not letting the world destroy him because good or bad that kind of attention on a child would destroy him.
And how did the film benefit from giving Clark Kent a fucked up father? The whole point was Clark was suppose to learn how to be a good person from his parents, that was the one thing that Superman is suppose to love Earth for. Crypton gave him powers but Earth gave him morality.

By making Pa Kent screw up his education, Clark loses his reason to love Earth. And suddenly he is no longer a man but just an alien.

After three and a half movies, I'm sure he'll finally be the Superman we expected in the first one.

>Why not just write him well? The pieces are already there just use them right.
Because you would need an entire film to undo the canon. and no one has time for that. Not when it would be the FOURTH film.

>Remove Cavill because he's a stoic piece of wood

Only when he's being directed by Snyder

Find someone in Hollywood who actually wants to make a Superman movie instead of a fucking deconstruction.

I think the moment in MOS, when Clark obeyed his father and let him die in the tornado was the exact moment he stopped being superman-- he was on the run in the beginning of the movie-- that should have been why-- he was sighted saving his father-- so he ran away to protect them and himself.

People don't like Superman, a character that has endured since the 1930's-- because he's not Superman. And in the DCEU-- Wonder Woman's character s portrayed the way Superman's should be.

People still want Superman to lead the Justice League-- it's just that Wonder Woman is more Superman than Superman in the DCEU.

This. Fuck Snyder.

Is there anyone in this thread who believes that they COULDN'T have written a better scripts for MoS and BvS than Goyer?
I'm even asking you rabid Snyderfaggots.

MoS and BvS is all about Superman loving the Earth and wanting to be a part of it.

>Billy Joins Diana and Bruce as part of the new DCEU Trinity
I love supes but I'd be lying if I didn't kinda want this. I love Billy too much.

>MoS and BvS is all about Superman loving the Earth and wanting to be a part of it.
If he had a decent upbringing then her would ALREADY be a part of Earth. Now he doesn't even have Clark Kent any more even after he resurrects.

No, that's the interpretation of the movie in your fat deluded skull.
It is absolutely NOT about that at all.

I'm not trying to sound like a rabid Snyder-fan, so don't take this as a hostility.
I did enjoy both Man of Steel and BvS and I can appreciate Snyder's vision of Superman. I think he has lacking storytelling elements in his films however. I know I'm beating a dead horse by saying that, but I also don't think its this incoherent mess people like to think it is. I think Snyder wants the audience to really pay attention to his films and find subtle phrasing and lines to reveal motivation and ideals. Sometimes it works well, but other times his weakness in storytelling cripples it and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
In relation to Pa Kent, I can see where you are coming from, but in my own /opinion/ (not stating it as fact), I disagree. I think he sheltered Clark from humanity, not to protect humanity, but to protect Clark himself. He was just a kid and to reveal to the world that a kid, that is just growing up and going through struggles of his own, is this all powerful being would be a mighty burden to weigh on a minor. I think Pa Kent wanted Clark to mature enough to understand his position in the world before coming out. At the tornado scene, we see that Clark still refutes his position in society by saying he isn't Pa's actual son, so that could explain why Pa refused Clark's help. Also in that tornado scene, it taught Clark ultimate sacrifice to save beings that are below him (Pa, a human, saving the dog).
Like I said, I don't say this is fact, or the way Snyder intended it to be, this is my interpretation and you're free to disagree or refute it. I enjoy this version of Superman because to me, it is realistic and grounded. I know that Snyder and co. has said that Superman will go through an arc and will end up the charming Superman we all know, and I have enjoyed the "coming-to-age/grips-of-who-he-is" arc he has gone through.
At the end of the day, these are just movies about comic book characters.

>thor
>captain america
>wonder woman
who isn't a better superman than superman

>tl;dr I creamed my pants at the First Flight scene, and it carried me through the garbage story-telling into my own fanfiction.

What's the movies about then?

I'd call Hancock a dead tie.

you're right man, it's a fatal flaw that ruins the DCEU-- he's the most important piece of the puzzle-- and Synder jammed him into the wrong place backwards-- there are no extra supermen in the box-- so the picture is forever going to be incomplete.

You guys are hopeless.

Hey now, I know it's not my own fan fiction cause Clark didn't bang every member of the Justice League and Avengers.

How is Thor more Superman than Superman?

Do you know anything about comics?
Superman doesn't even sell there, and arguably its what he's the most famous for. That's why Batman's the tentpole, and why Superman only had one comic before Flashpoint.

Before the movie, people thought he was too lame/too good/too powerful. The movie didn't change anyones perceptions of him, least of all comic book fans (who've already seen the same stories before).

it's about Superman saying he loves the earth and wants to be a part of it, because the script says so-- he then proceeds to act in a way that is not loving of the earth, it's inhabitants, or in a way deserving of his parents.

All the reasons are there but with added angst.
The messages got through. Clark just had to spend years pondering everything because he was growing up.

The movies aren't good but there's no real reason to misrepresent them.

>I enjoy this version of Superman because to me, it is realistic and grounded.
This is the first sign that you are creating a garbage Superman story.
The very IDEA of the Superman is fantastic, otherworldy and positive. You might as well try telling a "realistic and grounded" version of the Wizard of Oz or Dracula.

>Superman doesn't even sell there
Nigga he sells more than Captain America, Thor, Iron Man or Avengers.

Rebirth Superman has been selling well actually. He has two books now.

>The movie didn't change anyones perceptions of him

Because the movies have sucked, which I'm pretty sure was OP's point.

>he then proceeds to act in a way that is not loving of the earth, it's inhabitants, or in a way deserving of his parents.
Guy literally risked his life (repeatedly) to defend the earth and its inhabitants.

He rejected his father's "just keep your head down, don't do anything" because he was the only one who could do something.

>Nigga he sells more than Captain America, Thor, Iron Man or Avengers.
Now he does, because Marvel's run all those comics into the ground. But before Flashpoint? No, he was lucky if he was in the top 30.

But you really don't.
Just don't pull an Iron Man and revert him back to his old bullshit at the beginning of each movie.
Superman is now more confident he can be a truly positive influence on the world especially now that he has a guy who was entirely convinced that he could be nothing but a negative influence in his corner.
Wow it's so fucking easy.

Yeah but Superman shouldn't have to be taught to care for "lesser beings". This whole characterization of God Superman ignores that Superman, for all his impossible abilities, is a human. He went to high school, he watched tv, and he has love interests. The point of Superman, at least to this user, is that he is what happens when a regular guy with superpowers decides to make a difference. I don't know. Maybe that's just how I interpret him, but Man of Steel felt so far removed from any of that that I could not enjoy it.

I feel your pain friend. For now, the Man of Tomorrow is still just that...tomorrow. At least we still have All Star Superman.

>The point of Superman, at least to this user, is that he is what happens when a regular guy with superpowers decides to make a difference.
That's the point of Spider-man.

Superman is what happens when there's an identifiable force for good in the world and it grew up in America.

>Strange Visitor from another world
>Flies through the air, deflects bullets off his skin
>Lazor vision, can see through walls
BUT LETS KEEP IT GROUNDED AND REALISTIC FOLKS.
This isn't what audiences go to superhero movies for. Even the Nolan films are full of preposterous conventions and plot-elements.
Even Snyder and Goyer abandon their "grounded and realistic" story midway for fantastical DBZ fightan.

>All the reasons are there but with added angst.
>The messages got through. Clark just had to spend years pondering everything because he was growing up.
Your mistake is thinking it is a good idea to spend 3 films showing the pondering. Time's up. He could either get on with it immediately, or leave it to other more capable heroes.

You Forgot the real Superman.

fuck...that's really good

>Now he does, because Marvel's run all those comics into the ground. But before Flashpoint? No, he was lucky if he was in the top 30.
New 52 was rocky, too, even Grant Morrison writing him didn't take off.

Yeah I probably should have mentioned "grow up" in there. It's not an all of the sudden thing.

And Thor once went years without a book because he couldn't sell for shit. Two can play this game.

comicsbeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Bookscan-16-Top-750_sheet.htm

Superman is behind few nowadays, both in floppies or sales. If you are going to start with "do you even know comics?", at least don't give false information.

The dead of Metropolis disagree.

Actually the pondering ends when he becomes Superman straight up.

which is why MoS started on the wrong foot focusing on Krypton so much, because that's just a backstory there character isn't dependent on

"Superman Unchained" sold like water.

But the live people of Earth would agree

People, in BvS Superman is recalling a memory of his father to get through tough times on top of the mountain and the best he can come up with was "Son, one time I tried to be a hero and it all turned to shit. There's really no helping this world".
Like... Fuck.

>He rejected his father's "just keep your head down, don't do anything" because he was the only one who could do something.
Why even do this to begin with? What good is there to have Earth Robin Hood be rejected so he could agree with Space Robin Hood? Why does Pa Kent needed to make a mistake in raising a good son, when it just meant we have to waste time having Clark learning to be a good person as a 30 year old adult? How is it not a huge waste of time?

The retarded element of Snyderman is that he's 33 when Lois finally pushes him to actually start helping for real.
33 fucking years old.

>Your mistake is thinking it is a good idea to spend 3 films showing the pondering.
He already made the decision.

Faora: "For every human you save, we'll kill a million more."

The Kryptonians had to go.

BvS was what happens when he stops just being unabashedly good. Because that doesn't work in our sociopolitical climate. America (the government) doesn't trust Superman and can't have him interfering in foreign affairs. But, alternatively, they can't do anything to him but ask him to explain himself, which side he's on, etc. So he doubted himself. Because despite him doing good, people were calling him a monster and blaming him for deaths he didn't commit.

Or the message was you can't expect a perfect win. Bad things will happen even when you do the right thing but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do the right thing.

Once again explaining the concept as if we don't understand it. The fact that the Kents would try to convince Clark to NOT be a hero is so asinine it might as well just be some original character pastiche of Superman.

It's like rebooting Spider-Man and not letting him have quips and webs and also Uncle Ben never died. That is a sad sad misstep in reintroducing a character, especially one that was so keen for a revival like Superman.

Second of all, even once he DOES choose to be Superman, he smiles, like once. That smile is as important and Batman's cape and ears. And yes I know the story didn't really allow for any joy. Guess what? That was a conscious decision. Nobody held a gun to their head and forced them to write a dreadful script and to cover everything with a shit smeared lens.

WE KNOW why he did what he did. It still sucks and is a poor way of introducing the character and they continue to show a fucking suicidal Superman in BvS.

Remember in the Donner films when Superman would crack a joke every once in a while after saving people from their certain doom? Maybe the world would lighten up a bit if he showed a little more levity. Or just not grimace so much.

Well coming out.
He was helping people for real for 15 years but as a bigfoot.

>BvS was what happens when he stops just being unabashedly good. Because that doesn't work in our sociopolitical climate. America (the government) doesn't trust Superman and can't have him interfering in foreign affairs.
What the hell are you on about? Superman does good and does not need governments to tell him otherwise. He isn't a government employee and technically not an American. Clark Kent is the American. There is no reason why Superman should stop being good just because Americans suck. That is not a justification.

Is that why what he tells Lois later is "Nothing stays good in this world"?

That's not the message at all. I'm starting to suspect you guys are all retard.

He was still helping people without the costume.

In the Richard Donner's movies Superman remained isolated inside the Fortress up to his thirties as well and in that he saved no one during his younger years.

Superman stories shouldn't be about "Does Superman appeal to the Democrats and the Republicans in office?" it's about a messianic figure appealing to the People and representing the greater good and man's best nature.

Man of Carnage turned to shit because Goyer and Snyder thought they could make some sort of revealing sociopolitical statement, and neither of them are that talented. Which is why you can actually spot the moment where they just completely abandon that narrative and finish up with a dumb action picture.
With a really jarring and off-tone finale.

>Bad things will happen even when you do the right thing but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do the right thing.
Which directly contradicts Johnathan's stance in MoS

>Why even do this to begin with? What good is there to have Earth Robin Hood be rejected so he could agree with Space Robin Hood? Why does Pa Kent needed to make a mistake in raising a good son, when it just meant we have to waste time having Clark learning to be a good person as a 30 year old adult? How is it not a huge waste of time?
Because it shows the more realistic world depicted recently in DC movies (like the Nolan Bat flicks). Pa Kent knows the government would come down on him and his family, that if they COULD find a weakness (and keep in mind he doesn't know how strong Superman is) they would use it. And they do! It comes up in BvS and Suicide Squad.

Superman is there to help people. And just like Jesus (which the movie pushed hard to make an obvious parallel) the government at the time was not ready or willing to have someone do that.

Pa Kent knew it. Everyone knows it. No sensible person now would look at their super strong child and tell them to go and show off. They'd be locked in a lab and vivisected by the end of the week.

Superman was always a good person. It's like for you it only matters when he has a costume. All the previous good-deeds are of no importance.

Yeah because he was being forced to do evil by Lex.

It's the way he's portrayed. In the BvS montage, Superman is seen over the house of some flood victims who reach out to him, hovering above, unmoving, with his head darkened. When he saves the Mexican girl from the fire everyone reaches out to him and he looks to the fire, despondent.
He should be looking at the victims, reaching out to them as well, and maybe reassure them a bit that things are bad but will be alright. "It's okay, folks, I'm Superman. I'm here now".

That was before and in a moment of middle self-doubt. He's allowed one of those.

>Superman is there to help people. And just like Jesus (which the movie pushed hard to make an obvious parallel) the government at the time was not ready or willing to have someone do that.
The film directly contradicts you. After the aliens show up in a UFO , absolutely nothing changed. No panic, no mass suicides, the stock market barely moved. Pa Kent was wrong.

Not at all.
The right thing was waiting until he was ready to be Superman.

It doesn't.

>Once again explaining the concept as if we don't understand it. The fact that the Kents would try to convince Clark to NOT be a hero is so asinine it might as well just be some original character pastiche of Superman.

That's your headcanon.

Snyder should have had a co-writer who actually had a positive bone in their body. Who at least cared about people or could fake it.

It was self loathing pseudo intellectual poppycock. For gods sake all he needed was to dump the measured use of power and need to look cool and in control crap and just decide to go full on positive with it.
Have him save some people in a burning building but then stop to save a kitten stuck in a tree. That kind of shit.

The entire show stank with a complete disregard for and general dislike of people. That his power and want to protect people was this terrible burden and not something that is an intrinsic part of who he is and something he genuinely enjoyed.
Like he stood as an allmight godking upon a throne and looked down upon everyone beneath his feet.

He's a seemingly less callous Justice Lords Superman except he lacks the ability to be entertaining.

Superman should have been put into the hands of someone who could do a good happy movie with all of the bells and whistles. Everyone was excellently cast...except Lois. Goddamn. Faora should have been Lois goddamnit.
Or Jennifer Connelley.
Snyder should have been given the Justice League movie and a better writer. He could have done it justice.

>The fact that the Kents would try to convince Clark to NOT be a hero is so asinine it might as well just be some original character pastiche of Superman.
This.

This is like Uncle Ben lecturing Peter on egoism right before dying.

Donner Superman spent those years being educated and prepared by Jor-El, not busing tables and wrecking semi trucks.
He was literally being trained by Space Dad to utilize his powers effectively and intelligently.

Sure Synderman would save the life of someone in imminent danger of dying in his immediate presence, but ANYONE would do this if there was no risk to themselves.

The only way to save the DCEU Superman at this point is to let another writer handle him, and maybe frame his death as the "aha!" moment that really made him grasp what being a hero to Earth's people means to him. Make it clear that his choice to die protecting humanity means that he's no longer struggling with the question of if he's doing the right thing, there's no more doubt or uncertainty.

The next Superman outing needs to take a page from Wonder Woman's book, in other words- part of the reason WW worked was that Diana, as a character, was a true believer in the cause of justice. It's not an angle we see much anymore in superhero media, it's been very in-vogue the last ten or fifteen years to be dark and cynical.

The worm's turning, though. The world's ready for the optimistic, idealist Superman that the DCEU needs him to be. WW just proved that point.