Support NeoGAF

[karasu]

Then you just don't get Superman and thus have no business bashing a Superman movie or the person playing Superman in any thread.

Oh get real. I don't see Superman as a boyscout, I see him as a man with principles. There's a difference. People call him a boyscout when they're mocking him but that stuff is totally outdated, and is only brought up when a writer with a Batman bias is trying to manufacture some kind of gulf in principals between the two of them. The idea of a super boyscout is a joke. But honor is something noble, and that's something to aspire to.

 

[Solo]

I hope you don't hate The Crow.

Its not an especially great movie. Its also a much different case. It wasnt released 20 years later, and Brandon Lee wasnt resurrected with CG. 90% of his shots were all complete before he died, and all his dialogue. They just used his stunt double for a few long shots and what not. It was a film Lee intended to be in, so thats fine.

EDIT: on a trivia note, the guy who accidently killed Lee was in 24

 

[Instigator]

The trailer was kinda meh. As far as it hints at the story, it doesn't seem all that great. I'm still not convinced about that Lois Lane, but the main characters seem ok. It's hard to judge Superman himself as he doesn't speak much.

But I doubt the action scenes will match the high CG mark set by Hulk.

 

[borghe]

I don't see him that way at all. How in gods name can he be naive with all that he's dealt with ove rthe years? That makes no sense.

he is still the BLINDED optimist to a fault. even in the comics today he is still written that way. he is the optimist to batman's cynic. I don't think it's so much naivity as it is ufettered optimism. To portray him any other way, now THAT would be doing a disservice to the mythos.

and again not saying the movie will or won't be great, just commenting here on superman as a character. he is the epitome of the "aww shucks" boyscout (kingdom come/elseworlds notwithstanding).

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Finally got around to checking out the new trailer, and it looks very blah to me. I was excited after the first trailer, which did a great job of teasing, but this one just seems to average. I'm not saying I won't go see it, but this trailer didn't inspire me to want to see it so much. I'll probably wait to see what the buzz is on it when it gets closer to release.

I did think Spacey looked good as Luthor, and Routh as Superman, but I've always thought that Lois was horribly mis-cast.

 

[Prospero]

Funny--lately I've been reading Golden Age Superman comics (from the DC Archives), and that character really has changed a lot from the late '30s-early '40s. Maybe not news to hardcore comics fans, but I was surprised by it.

--Golden Age Superman has relatively restricted powers--impenetrable skin; can leap long distances and run quickly; can lift heavy things; x-ray vision; super-hearing. That's it. He can't even fly--he just sort of jumps from place to place.

--Golden Age Superman prefers simple solutions to complex problems. If there's crime in the slums of Metropolis, his solution is to singlehandedly raze the slums so that the government will come in and rebuild the place with brand-new apartments. If the cops try to stop him on his vigilante missions, he fights the cops.

--Golden Age Superman doesn't care a whole hell of a lot about human life. He only rarely actually kills a bad guy, but he certainly wouldn't have a problem with passively watching one go to his death. Or sometimes he'll "rescue" a villain in some spectacular way, giving him a fatal heart attack in the process. Superman's response: "Oh, well--he got what he deserved."

I'd love to see that Superman in a movie, but I'll never get my wish. It's too bad the character only lasted a few years in that form.

 

[Willco]

Because who would empathize with a foriegn dick who bullies around people with superpowers? It'd never work. We'd hate him.

 

[karasu]

he is still the BLINDED optimist to a fault. even in the comics today he is still written that way. he is the optimist to batman's cynic. I don't think it's so much naivity as it is ufettered optimism. To portray him any other way, now THAT would be doing a disservice to the mythos.

and again not saying the movie will or won't be great, just commenting here on superman as a character. he is the epitome of the "aww shucks" boyscout (kingdom come/elseworlds notwithstanding).

I don't agree with that either, especially the part about that being the only way to portray the character. He didn't even start out that way, and he isn't such an optimist when the life of someone he cares about is on the line. If he thinks Lois is dead, he'll go after the kill, betray what he believes in, or go back in time to save her or whatever the feck. When I read his books I never see him as a one dimensional 'optimist', nor do I see Batman as a plain and simple 'cynic'. WTF? Especially not when he says things like "There's always a choice for people like us", or preaches to Wonder Woman about losing Faith. Batman is more optomist than cynic otherwise he wouldn't abide by such strict codes, and Superman isn't flying around Metropolis perpetually flashing his pearly whites. He has doubts and concerns, troubles, fears etc etc. And come on, is there anything about this movie that seems like it's going with the whole 'eternal optimist' angle? An angle that's been outdated since he quit and gave up his powers in Superman II! The "Aw shucks boyscout" myth needs to die.

 

[G-Fex]

I think every hero in the golden age era killed their villains by accident or heart attack or making them fall into a vat of acid.

 

[Prospero]

Because who would empathize with a foriegn dick who bullies around people with superpowers? It'd never work. We'd hate him.

Do you mean sympathy (understanding of and identification with another's motives) or empathy (vicarious experience of another's behavior)? If you mean empathy, then I don't think I've ever empathized with a comic book character (though I guess some people feel that they do); if you mean sympathy, I think audiences are more than willing to sympathize with morally complex comic book characters who engage in questionable behavior (see Batman, who is the poster boy for that kind of character).

Early Superman regularly makes what we'd consider to be astonishingly bad decisions in order to serve what he sometimes erroneously perceives as the greater good; others suffer the fallout from his actions while he gets away unscathed. The reasons that such a Superman would make for a bad movie in the present day have more to do with what the public expects from comic book movies and specifically Superman movies (a clearcut line between good and evil, etc.), not because the character's poorly written or because we have some sort of unfulfilled desire to identify with him.

 

[borghe]

I don't agree with that either, especially the part about that being the only way to portray the character. He didn't even start out that way, and he isn't such an optimist when the life of someone he cares about is on the line. If he thinks Lois is dead, he'll go after the kill, betray what he believes in, or go back in time to save her or whatever the feck. When I read his books I never see him as a one dimensional 'optimist', nor do I see Batman as a plain and simple 'cynic'. WTF? Especially not when he says things like "There's always a choice for people like us", or preaches to Wonder Woman about losing Faith. Batman is more optomist than cynic otherwise he wouldn't abide by such strict codes, and Superman isn't flying around Metropolis perpetually flashing his pearly whites. He has doubts and concerns, troubles, fears etc etc. And come on, is there anything about this movie that seems like it's going with the whole 'eternal optimist' angle? An angle that's been outdated since he quit and gave up his powers in Superman II! The "Aw shucks boyscout" myth needs to die.

ok, real life (for superman) example. In the recent OMAC Project series prelude to Inifinite Crisis, Max Lord controlled superman and used him to beat batman to near death. There was nothing Superman could do to fight it. So Wonder Woman, realizing the only way to stop Max Lord, who could control Superman at whim, was to kill him. So she snapped his neck. Superman had a HUGE problem with this. Arguably it was the only way to succeed. Had she let him live, he would have just gone back to controlling superman. Even though Superman hated what she did, there was no real alternative.

So yeah, he is definitely altruistic to a fault. There are many many many many other examples. To actually find examples of him acting otherwise, you have to venture outside of mainstream continuity.

And if Lois were dead, we all know what he would do. He would apprehend those responsible and turn them in. If he won't even condone the death of someone USING HIM TO KILL OTHERS AND ALMOST KILL HIS FRIENDS, he certainly won't condone the death of someone who killed Lois.

 

[Willco]

Do you mean sympathy (understanding of and identification with another's motives) or empathy (vicarious experience of another's behavior)? If you mean empathy, then I don't think I've ever empathized with a comic book character (though I guess some people feel that they do); if you mean sympathy, I think audiences are more than willing to sympathize with morally complex comic book characters who engage in questionable behavior (see Batman, who is the poster boy for that kind of character).

Huh?

em·pa·thy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mp-th)
n.

Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives

 

[karasu]

ok, real life (for superman) example. In the recent OMAC Project series prelude to Inifinite Crisis, Max Lord controlled superman and used him to beat batman to near death. There was nothing Superman could do to fight it. So Wonder Woman, realizing the only way to stop Max Lord, who could control Superman at whim, was to kill him. So she snapped his neck. Superman had a HUGE problem with this. Arguably it was the only way to succeed. Had she let him live, he would have just gone back to controlling superman. Even though Superman hated what she did, there was no real alternative.

That was ridiculous and out of character, because he was forced to do a similar thing once, and besides Batman had major problems with Wonder Woman's actions too.

So yeah, he is definitely altruistic to a fault. There are many many many many other examples. To actually find examples of him acting otherwise, you have to venture outside of mainstream continuity.

Not really. Look at pretty much anything before Infinite Crisis that took place in his regular line of books. He nearly killed Batman remember? All because he thought Batman was someone who harmed Lois.

And if Lois were dead, we all know what he would do. He would apprehend those responsible and turn them in. If he won't even condone the death of someone USING HIM TO KILL OTHERS AND ALMOST KILL HIS FRIENDS, he certainly won't condone the death of someone who killed Lois.

Totally inaccurate. Did you miss everything before Infinite Crisis? Superman has rage issues. He tried to kill Batman because he thought Batman was Brainiac and had tried to harm Lois. He once executed three kryptonians from the Phantom Zone because he felt he had no other choice. He also tried to kill Doomsday. Plus there isn't a single piece of him that has an optomistic feeling towards people like Luthor, Darkseid, etc.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Can someone give me the 101 on how Lex Luthor turned into this perpetual villian? I was hoping for something new in the film, but I've never read the comics. Does he EVER go away?

 

[ManaByte]

Not really. Look at pretty much anything before Infinite Crisis that took place in his regular line of books. He nearly killed Batman remember? All because he thought Batman was someone who harmed Lois.

Totally inaccurate. Did you miss everything before Infinite Crisis? Superman has rage issues. He tried to kill Batman because he thought Batman was Brainiac and had tried to harm Lois.

Because he was being mind-controlled by Max Lord!

 

[karasu]

Because he was being mind-controlled by Max Lord!

He wasn't being controlled, he was manipulated. He thought something happened that didn't, and thought Batman was someone that he wasn't, but he was not controlled.

 

[DaveH]

He wasn't being controlled, he was manipulated. He thought something happened that didn't, and thought Batman was someone that he wasn't, but he was not controlled.

He was, otherwise there was no way for Max to predict the outcome of his manipulations. J'onn diagnoses Superman's mental state as that of a psychotic break, even within the context of the illusions, Superman was acting out of character.

Regardless, the conclusion you're trying to draw is ridiculous. If someone mentally manipulated for years- even without the aid of psychic powers- and you did something during a psychotic episode, would that be a reflection of your character? Of course not.

 

[karasu]

He was, otherwise there was no way for Max to predict the outcome of his manipulations. J'onn diagnoses Superman's mental state as that of a psychotic break, even within the context of the illusions, Superman was acting out of character.

That was not control nor was it out of character because Superman has reacted similarly to illusions of this type before. During that entire sceneario in Adventures #829 he still reacted and analyzed the situation just like he always does. He was being led to believe something, not forced to act whether he wanted to or not. Until Darkseid killed Lois he acted just like you'd expect, and then as usual when something happens to Lois, he flipped out. Jonn says that it was not direct control or brainwashing, and really, "implanted psychotic episode" means little more than Lord showed Superman a scenario that would push him to the edge. Manchester Black tried the same thing, only that time Superman didn't really react. Too many writers I guess. He even went a little beserk when Lois was attacked in Return to Krypton.

Regardless, the conclusion you're trying to draw is ridiculous. If someone mentally manipulated for years- even without the aid of psychic powers- and you did something during a psychotic episode, would that be a reflection of your character? Of course not.

If these "psychotic episodes" happen every few years, yeah.

 

[Almighty_Chocobo]

I'm hoping that there is at least one halfway decent fight scene in this movie....
All of the teasers and news thus far has made the movie seem like a straight-up drama. There has been no news whatsoever on a REAL villain for this movie... Sure Luther is always there, but how many times can he pull a peice of kryptonite out of his pocket?

Superman = Action
Action = Big Fight Scenes

I pray that they don't turn this movie into a $200m+ chick flick... Hopefully they are just keeping the good stuff under lock and key.

 

[Almighty_Chocobo]

He wasn't being controlled, he was manipulated. He thought something happened that didn't, and thought Batman was someone that he wasn't, but he was not controlled.

He returned to normal after Wonder Woman snapped Max Lord's neck. He was well aware of who Diana was when the two were fighting.

controlled = manipulated

 

[DarienA]

I'm impressed with Spacey as Luthor... he'll never beat Gene Hackman in my mind, and maybe some of that is just good ole fashioned nostalgia kicking it... but Spacey... I liked what I saw.

 

[karasu]

Umm, if he wasn't being controlled why did he return to normal after Wonder Woman snapped Max Lord's neck?



He returned to normal after Wonder Woman snapped Max Lord's neck. He was well aware of who Diana was when the two were fighting.

controlled = manipulated

Because the illusion broke?! J'onn says clearly that it was not direct control. They say he was 'pushed' ie provoked. During the entire thing we're shown that he's thinking his own thoughts and coming up with his own tactics. Lord showed him images that brought out his honest reactions to what he was seeing. He thought Wonder Woman was Doomsday, so he fought her like she was Doomsday. It's not that type of telepathic mind control where Superman is a passenger in his own body. It's an illusion. Lord provides the stimuli, Superman delivers the action that he sees fit.

 

[FlameOfCallandor]

Trailer looks great.

Spoiler

Except for the fact that superman skips out on the trial of lex luther, thus letting him go. WTF???

 

[Spike Spiegel]

'Bout damn time! I was getting sick of watching that same teaser trailer over, and over, and over...

*gets to working on an arduous 2.5 hour download*

I'll let you guys know what I think... in the morning. Maybe.

 

[Cold-Steel]

That's one thing I always liked about superhero villains.

Usually, the hero tries to save them and find their redeeming qualities only to be undone by their own villainy.

Spiderman, Batman, Superman - all great examples.

Villains always get what's coming to them.

I really dig villains who don't suffer or die in a conventional way, but are driven to madness in their attempts to kill the hero only to go even further down that path.

 

[krypt0nian]

controlled/manipulated = not in control of his actions

Splitting hairs = GAF


Anyway, trailer made me happy. Routh will make a great Kal.

 

[DaveH]

That was not control nor was it out of character because Superman has reacted similarly to illusions of this type before.

That's not true. For example, when Manchester Black or Dominus put Superman in illusions, he was able to use the context of the situation to rationalize and recognize the illusion. If Superman were acting completely rationally or in-character, he would have to stop and say, "Hm, why have I suddenly been transported to another location? Why doesn't this situation make any sense?"

It's clear something of a primal script is being triggered, not a reflection of character. If I were to stab you in the thigh with a fork and you shrieked out in pain, no matter how many times I did it, calling you a "hysterical shrieker" would not be an accurate reflection of your character.

 

[karasu]

That's not true. For example, when Manchester Black or Dominus put Superman in illusions, he was able to use the context of the situation to rationalize and recognize the illusion. If Superman were acting completely rationally or in-character, he would have to stop and say, "Hm, why have I suddenly been transported to another location? Why doesn't this situation make any sense?"

He did say something to that effect, he reacted to being transported to a different location, but "Godfrey" explained it by saying they transported him with a Boomtube. Superman even thought when he was fighting Doomsday in the boxing ring that something felt odd about the situation . The entire time he was thinking and plotting. They weren't Lord's thoughts. Directly from the book:

The threats, the torture of his own people, using Lois against me... it's all suppossed to make me weak. Make me despair. But it only makes me Mad.

That was one of Superman's thoughts while he was banging up on Batman. It only illustrates that he saw something that wasnt their, but he wasn't being controlled like a slave or a robot. He analyzed the scenario that was given to him with his own mind.

It's clear something of a primal script is being triggered, not a reflection of character. If I were to stab you in the thigh with a fork and you shrieked out in pain, no matter how many times I did it, calling you a "hysterical shrieker" would not be an accurate reflection of your character.

Terrible

 

[DaveH]

Actually, it proves his thoughts are irrational. "Gee, I'm having a conversation with Max Lord whom I know to be controlling my mind and Diana... and DOOMSDAY appears, I must fight!" It just shows that only a dream-like rational is in effect.

Once again, if under the influence of something robbing you of your rational thought, any actions you perform under such a state are not a reflection of your character. If you are unwittingly doped, your declaration of love for everyone in the room is not you. If stabbed in the leg, your girlish cries are not you.

Again, we've seen examples of RATIONAL Superman under illusion - Black, Dominus, The Queen of Fables, etc. This was not a case of pure illusion. If it were, then why do illusions not appear with Max pushes WW or BB? The illusions are purely for our benefit so that the book isn't boring.

 

[karasu]

Actually, it proves his thoughts are irrational. "Gee, I'm having a conversation with Max Lord whom I know to be controlling my mind and Diana... and DOOMSDAY appears, I must fight!" It just shows that only a dream-like rational is in effect.

This wasn't the fight with Diana, this was the one with Batman. The fight with Diana was weird as Rucka semed to lose the plot. One minute Max gives Superman a direct order, the next he goes on about showing Superman what he wants him to see. In that issue,Superman did look like a zombie. I suggest you reread the arc, there was nothing dreamlike about his rationale. When Darkseid called him Clark, he backed up and wondered wtf was up just like he should have.

Once again, if under the influence of something robbing you of your rational thought, any actions you perform under such a state are not a reflection of your character. If you are unwittingly doped, your declaration of love for everyone in the room is not you. If stabbed in the leg, your girlish cries are not you.

Oh? Well, who do the girlish cries belong to? Just because you're tricked, it doesn't mean that the thoughts and reactions to the stimuli are a part of the trick. It means your natural emotions and reactions were evoked under false pretenses, but those emotions and reactions are very much yours. It's not the boogeyman for crying out loud, that's how conmen work. They play to your nature. Seriously this aspect of Superman's character is even something the movies played with in 78. Why did Superman go against Jor-el and turn the world backwards? To save ONE PERSON. Lois. He is not perfect, he can be selfish, and he can be a control freak because he feels that with his powers he should be able to protect those he loves , without fail. If he fails, he does tend to flip out. We saw it in Superman 78, in various stories through his history, in Superman/Batman with Kara, various Elseworlds, in Sacrifice, in OWAW etc etc. This aspect of him is consistent.

Superman was mind controlled in Hush, when Poison Ivy forced him to fight Batman. He was not controlled in the direct sense, when he did the same thing to Batman in Sacrifice. He was lead, only in that he saw Batman as one of his foes(Brainiac, Darkseid, etc).

Again, we've seen examples of RATIONAL Superman under illusion - Black, Dominus, The Queen of Fables, etc. This was not a case of pure illusion. If it were, then why do illusions not appear with Max pushes WW or BB? The illusions are purely for our benefit so that the book isn't boring.

Wha? If they weren't illusions he wouldn't think that Batman was Darkseid or that Wonder Woman was Doomsday. He was showing Superman IMAGES of Lois being hurt. Images of civilians being in Danger during his fight with what he thought was Darkseid. I'll quote Superman again from #642

My head... I keep seeing these images. Lois Dying, and I think I see Brainiac.. but it's not. It's Doomsday, It's Darkseid...It's Ruin...It all seems so real

Then a few pages later after being shown his actions:

It was Ruin. I thought I was fighting Ruin.

Illusions man, meant to elicit a response. He was definitely manipulated, in that he saw things that weren't real, but he thought he was delivering the necessary amount of force to a valid threat. His reasoning was his own. So it's more than reasonable to assume that he would respond similarly if the events WERE real. He wouldn't kick the shit out of Batman of course, but Doomsday? Sure. Darkseid? You bet.

 

[DaveH]

It think you're damning your own case, citing something like:

My head... I keep seeing these images. Lois Dying, and I think I see Brainiac.. but it's not. It's Doomsday, It's Darkseid...It's Ruin...It all seems so real

Proves the dream-like rationale. No one experiencing "reality" like that is considered to be in their right mind. You cite Batman, but the Diana fight is achieved under the same mechanism, like I said, the illusion was purely for our benefit- or the writers, to decompress the event. The end result is exactly the same, Superman can irrationally be controlled to jump on anyone in any context like an attack dog, precisely because he's acting out of character.