Superman Day is here! On April 18, 1938, Superman made his debut in the pages of Action Comics #1!
Happy anniversary to DC's legendary Man of Steel! He certainly looks better than most of us would at 87, so let's wish him a happy life, filled to the brim with wonderful adventures!
On May 5, 1983, Henry Cavill, the actor for Superman in the DC Extended Universe, was born!
Happy birthday to such a fine and talented actor! Thank you for all your amazing work throughout the years and may you keep doing what you do best!
On April 18, 1938, Superman made his debut in the pages of Action Comics #1!
Happy anniversary to the DC's legendary Man of Steel! He certainly looks better than most of us would at 86, so let's wish him a happy life, filled to the brim with wonderful adventures!
Hello, ladies and gentlemen. I'm LeaderVladimir1993 and with Superman: Legacy hitting theaters in 2025, I'm wondering whether that movie, or any Superman material for that matter, can be embraced by general audiences.
Now, before you rush to your keyboards and say "of course it can! How can you ask that? Superman is a cultural icon!", please hear me out. I know some of you will deliver a positive answer because, let's face it, we're fans of DC, but I felt inspired to write this post after watchiing videos discussing the difficulties of adapting Mickey Mouse and Star Trek into film. Much like Superman, Mickey and Star Trek are also considered icons of American culture and the owners of those IPs have faced difficulties in making movies based on those IPs.
I also felt inspired into writing this post by the smashing (see what I did there?) success of The Super Mario Bros Movie, recognized for adapting a character more popular than Mickey into the big screen. The Super Mario Bros Movie was successful with men, women, children and adults. It was a summer blockbuster in the style of the Marvel Cinematic Universe or Transformers, with enormous mainstream appeal.
If Mario, a character that rivals Superman in cultural relevance, enjoys mainstream success, can Superman do the same? It's true that Superman: The Movie shot the franchise into the stratosphere, but let's face it, the tastes and interests of audiences have changed since 1978. I'm legimitely wondering what kind of chance does Superman have in hitting the mainstream.
I'm not gonna pull any punches about this: Superman is not as popular as he used to be. Yes, he is still popular, but Batman and Spider-Man sell more merchandise than Superman does. If Superman is to regain his mainstream popularity, a movie is easily the best way to do it.
Don't get me wrong. I love Superman and Lois and My Adventures with Superman, but those two shows are made for very distinct audiences. The former is a family drama and the latter is an action series with elements of romantic comedy and shonen anime. Those audiences are incompatible.
We also have to look at Superman's previous cinematic outings. Despite its positive critical reception, Superman Returns did not hit $500M worldwid. Alan F. Horn was quoted saying that the movie would have made a much higher profit if it tried to appeal to the younger male crowd, i.e. pre-teen boys, and writer Michael Dougherty wanted to add more action in the sequel.
While Superman Returns delivered a humanized, downright conservative portrayal of the titular superhero, Man of Steel went for a more action-packed direction. Superman became an action hero in the style of Captain America, Optimus Prime and even Batman. Despite the mixed reception from fans and critics, Man of Steel would go on to make $668M worldwide.
I'm not here to talk about the benefits or disadvantages of turning Superman into a generic action hero. I'm just trying to discuss what Superman needs to do so he can be embraced by general audiences again. What can you do with Superman? Superman does not have the same problem Mickey does. Unlike Disney, DC is not afraid to make a movie that runs the risk of tarnishing their beloved icon and his reputation, which is a really stupid reason to not make a movie, if you ask me.
Superman is a highly versatile character that can be adapted into any kind of story, as we have seen in countless movies and TV shows, but considering the reluctance of people to see Superman as anything more than a generic Boy Scout, it would seem that he doesn't take to reinvention as well as Batman does. Since Superman is expected to behave in a certain way, it seems difficult to make a movie that could develop him as a character and give him a meaningful conflict to overcome.
We, as a society, are partially to blame for DC's reluctance to experiment with Superman beyond comics and, to a lesser extent, TV shows. Thanks the movies, Superman is mostly remembered either as a vanilla goody-two-shoes, an overpowered demigod and, to a lesser extent, a blank slate of an everyman. He just isn't allowed to get darker or more mature like Batman does, and this is coming from someone who actually enjoyed the DC Extended Universe.
Ever since the failure of Justice League 2017, DC has moved away from darker stories with Superman and stayed with the limits of family-friendly, light-hearted stories like Superman and Lois or My Adventures with Superman, and that obviously limits Superman's potential as an effective protagonist in a dramatic story. That's kinda disappointing because we don't allow creators to display their full potential and explore new stories with Superman.
How do you make a Superman movie? Do you focus on Superman and his journey to develop into something we haven't seen before or do you focus the movie on a secondary character, maybe Lois, who is transformed by his/her experience with Superman? Does Superman even need to evolve as a character or does he simply need to trigger another character's evolution? We could discuss these questions all day long and we wouldn't reach a definitive answer.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see till 2025 to see what James Gunn has in store for us. As a fan of Superman, I always look forward to my best to suppoert him in whatever he does, but for now, we still have a lot of content we can enjoy. It's true that Batman and Spidey are more popular than Superman these days, but if Superman didn't have dedicated fans, he wouldn't have two successful TV show or a cult following on his recent movies. Superman means a lot to those who love him, maybe now more than ever. Whether we like it or not, Superman will always be with us.
Well, that's all I have for you this time. Now, it's your turn to tell me what do you think about this. Do you think Superman: Legacy can help the Man of Steel achieve mainstream appeal again? If so, what do you think that movie should do? This is meant to be a friendly discussion, so please be polite and argue your points in a civilized manner. We are all fans of DC and, hopefully, Superman here. We just see things differently.
So leave a comment below, thanks for your time and stay safe out there!
June 12 is officially considered to be Superman Day!
Happy Superman Day, everyone! Enjoy it while lasts! Days might be temporary but Superman is forever!
On May 5, 1983, Henry Cavill, the actor for Superman in the DC Extended Universe, was born!
Happy birthday to such a fine and talented actor! Thank you for all of your hard work and dedication and may you continue enjoying life!
On April 18, 1938, Superman made his debut on the pages of Action Comics #1!
Today, the Man of Steel celebrates 85 years of life and history and clearly looks better than most of us would at that age. Happy birthday, Superman! May your legend endure for a long time to come!
230 Votes in Poll
On April 28, 2022, Superman Homepage started a poll, asking if Henry Cavill should be allowed to play Superman again, whether in a sequel to Man of Steel or a reboot.
Henry is a fantastic actor and I genuinely enjoyed his movies. Even people who otherwise dislike the DC Extended Universe admit that they like Henry, they just don't like the material he was given to work with. I would really like Henry to play Superman agaiin.
That said, I always do my best to stay grounded in reality. Warner Bros. DIscovery is going through a lot of changes right now and Henry himself is busy with other projects, most notably The Witcher, so there are logistic hurdles that prevent him from reprising the role, even if he has previously talked about how much he wants to play Superman again.
The possibility of WBD casting a new actor for Superman is becoming more likely with each passing year and that is an outcome I would rather avoid, but if push comes to shove, I'm willing to make some concessions to ensure the continued survival of the Superman franchise. At the end of the day, Superman is more than just the actor who plays him. Henry wasn't the first actor who played Superman in any form of entertainment and he most certainly won't be the last.
Well, those are my opinions on this matter. Now is your turn to tell me what do you think about all of this. Do you want Henry to return or do you feel more comfortable with the casting of a new actor? Whatever your opinions on this matter might be, please write them in a polite, civilized manner.
Writing my opinions on this website doesn't make my opinions any greater or more valid than yours and I'm just glad to have this privilege and this honor to share my opinions with you. Trust me, I do take the time to read all of your comments and I always look forward to a friendly conversation with you. We're all fans of Superman and DC Comics here, we just see things differently. So leave a comment below, thanks for your time and stay safe out there.
June 12th is considered as Superman Day!
Enjoy the day while it lasts! Days are temporary but Superman is forever!
Hello, ladies and gentlemen! I'm Leader Vladimir and I'm here to talk about my love for the Superman from the DC Extended Universe.
This particular Superman has resonated so well with me, thanks in large part to Henry Cavill's amazing talent as an actor. He brings Superman a level of moral complexity and emotional nuance not seen since the DC Animated Universe. This Superman breaks the "goody-two-shoes boy scout" stereotype that has plagued the character for a very long time and instead shows us, the viewers, the struggle of doing the right thing in a world that constantly scrutinizes Superman's actions.
Henry portrays Superman as a very human character and I think Superman has very human responses and very genuine reactions to his experiences, and for some, he might remind them of how they went through or got through some struggles of their own or some dark times. Since Henry himself has expressed interest in putting on the cape again, I thought now would be as good a time as any to talk about why I love DCEU Superman.
Personal choice is an important theme in Superman's journey throughout what I call "the Superman saga" of the DCEU. Each film presents Superman with a choice: he can either accept he has a personal stake in the main conflict of each movie and get involved, or he can just go home and hope for things to magically sort themselves out. His fathers, Jor-El and Jonathan, always told Clark that while he had great potential and a special destiny, they wouldn't be something that Clark would achieve easily. He would have to actively to choose to develop that potential and pursue that destiny. By accepting the mantle of Superman and choosing to help people despite the personal discomfort it might bring him, Clark truly proves himself to be the son of his two fathers.
And this is probably the point where a lot of you will criticize, call me horrible things and ask me, in the most aggressive way possible, how is it possible for me, or anyone else for that matter, to like this "fake" or "inferior" Superman who will never be considered be one of the all-time greats like Christopher Reeve, George Reeves or Tim Daly. That's fine, that's perfectly fine. There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting and expecting different things out of the same character and the same franchise. We're all Superman fans here, we just see things differently.
The truth is that I love DCEU Superman is because while crafting his story, Henry and Zack Snyder chose "confrontational and compelling" over "safe and boring". They decided to make this particular version of Superman more fallible and human compared to other incarnations of the character. I myself enjoyed that this particular Superman was created for the purpose of fighting this supremely annoying misconception of Superman being an overpowered, unrelatable god whose only function is to inspire people to be and do good and that has no emotion beyond eagerness to do the right thing.
The DCEU is ultimately about the power of DC stories and I love how Zack and Henry used the legend of Superman to try to understand why Superman matters so much to us. While there are fans who see the DCEU movies as betrayals to Superman and his community, the stories within those movies are what so dramatically effective in achieving the DCEU's thematic goals. The whole point of the Superman saga is to show that, maybe, the legend of Superman isn't necessarily best used as an escapist power fantasy because, despite his feats and accomplishments, Superman isn't perfect and he will always have flaws, and when those flaws are exposed, they will always feel like a betrayal to the ideals and expectations we have placed upon the character and his community. Instead, the DCEU uses the legend of Superman as a tool to galvanize people behind a cause and make people believe in that cause. If an insecure, rookie Superman can choose to save a world that fears and hates him and then inspire others to follow him into the light, then maybe there's hope for us. All of us.
Ultimately, this all comes down to personal taste, like most things, really. I'm not demanding that you like DCEU Superman. I totally get why Superman fans, both long-time and new, prefer more idealized Supermen like Christopher Reeve or Tim Daly and why their respective stories as so highly regarded as they are, but just because they are the Supermen you prefer, please don't suggest that the fans that like DCEU Superman are in any way fans of a less legitimate kind of Superman because, whether you prefer an idealized and highly cheerful Superman or a flawed and more human Superman, these are all official and valid versions of Superman.
We have to remember that Warner Bros. and DC Comics are not singular entities that have remained mostly unchanged throughout the passage of time, but rather, publically owned companies with ever-changing infrastructures and hierarchies and that they operate within the highly competitive market that is the entertainment industry. In our modern society, people have virtually unlimited forms of entertainment at their disposal, which means Warner and DC have to make a lot of... controversial decisions to grab their audiences' attention for more than just a few microseconds. I may not agree with some of their decisions, but I do understand them.
Superman and his community have been around for 80+ years, which means Warner and DC must continously reinvent them, deconstruct them and reconstruct them in order to make them more interesting and appealing for modern audiences, lest Superman and his community will become parodies of themselves. As far as Warner Bros and DC Comics are concerned, DCEU Superman is a valid and legitimate interpretation of the character, so why should we believe otherwise? In 2013, Henry, Zack and their co-workers were tasked by Warner and DC to make a movie that would revitalize Superman for a modern era and honor his legacy. Whether they succeeded or not is a matter of opinion, but DCEU Superman's an official and legitimate version of the character that has endured the passage of 80+ years is not.
Well, that's all I have for you this time. Now, it's your turn to tell me what do you think about all of this. As always, this is the start of a dialogue and you have my thanks for participating in it and for taking the time to read what I had to say. Posting my opinions in this website doesn't make them any greater or more valid than yours and I'm just glad to have this privilege and this honor to share my opinions with you, although I do admit I did hijack this particular topic a little bit. The only thing I ask of you is to deliver your opinions in a polite and civilized manner. We're all Superman fans here, we just see things differently. So leave a comment below, thanks for your time and stay safe out there!
On May 5, 1983, Henry Cavill, the actor for the DC Extended Universe's Man of Steel, was born!
Happy birthday to such a fine and talented actor! Thank you for all your wondrous work throughout the years and may you wear the cape again, sooner rather than later!
On April 18, 1938, everyone's favorite Man of Steel made his debut on the pages of Action Comics #1!
It's safe to say that Superman looks better than most of us would at 84 years old. Happy birthday to such a legendary hero and may he keep fighting the good fight!
Hello, ladies and gentlemen. I am Leader Vladimir and I'm here to talk about a recent change of mind I had in regards to Superman's attire. I want to talk about the black suit that has been seen in recent comic books, movies and TV shows.
Once upon a time, I severely disliked the black suit because I saw it as an unnecessary addition to the Superman mythos. Back then, I saw the black suit as a blatant attempt to make Superman cool and edgy, but in time, I came to realize that it was stupid and reductive of me to think like that, especially because the black suit is simply a way to continue Superman's character development in whatever story the suit appears.
In Zack Snyder's Justice League, the suit was featured in the Fortress of Solitude because Superman believed himself unworthy of the blue suit and needed to start over in order to become the superhero Earth and the Justice League needed. It wasn't just a form of fanservice, it had a reason to be in the story.
Don't get me wrong, I still prefer the traditional suit over the black suit, but at the end of the day, the black suit is a minor change to Superman's appearance. It's nonsensical to dismiss something simply because it forces you to challenge your preconceptions about Superman and the world he lives in. While the core aspects of Superman (including his suit) remain mostly unchanged throughout the years, the fact is this: Superman is whatever a story and its audience need him to be.
Well, that's all I have for you this time. Now, it's your turn to tell me what do you think about the black suit. Do you think it's a great addition to the Superman mythos, do you think it's unnecessary or perhaps you find yourself in the middle, with no strong feelings either way? Whatever your opinions might be, please write them in a polite and civilized manner. We're all fans of Superman and DC Comics here, we just see things differently. So leave a comment below, thanks for your time and stay safe out there!
Hello, ladies and gentlemen! A few days ago, Superman redditor Tammi1545 made a post in which he dismissed the Henry Cavill vs Tyler Hoechlin debate, saying that both Supermen are equal in their legitimacy and that people are allowed to like both Supermen, and you know what? I agree with him, which motivated me to make a post (both here and on Reddit) in which I debunked, or at least tried to debunk, the idea of a definitive version of Superman and argued that each version of Superman had their own legitimacy and their own appeal to a particular audience.
You can consider this post as a fun little addendum to my previous post, and now I begin to ask: is it even fair to compare the multiple versions of Superman? Let's use Henry and Tyler as examples. In a logical world, Henry and Tyler wouldn't be compared because the Supermen they play live in completely separate worlds and their stories are very different. The Superman played by Henry is an insecure rookie trying to find his place in a world that fears and mistrusts superhumans, while Tyler portrays a veteran Superman that has started a family in a world that has largely accepted superhumans as part of daily life.
Some people would say that the only thing these stories have in common is that Superman is featured in them, although that's not entirely true. Yes, it's the obvious element between them but there are other similarities. There is the very serious and dramatic tone, there's the presence of Kryptonian antagonists in both stories (although Man of Steel is more direct in its depiction of Kryptonians), there is Superman's association with the U.S. military, and of course, there's the fact that both stories are full reboots of the Superman saga. But even then, that's not really enough to justify a full comparison because of how those respective stories develop.
It would be like comparing Batman to the Punisher. They're similar, but only in very superficial ways, and in the end, you'd find that a comparison wouldn't be entirely fair because, invariably, you'd find more differences than similarities between the characters, so the question is "should these Supermen even be compared?". Normally, I would have said "no", but let's face it, we're Superman fans. We were bound to compare these Supermen (Henry and Tyler, in particular) sooner or later. It was inevitable.
Both Supermen star in different stories. On one hand, you have a movie series that focuses on Superman's origin and struggles to become a symbol of hope, and on the other hand, you have a TV show with a veteran Superman who has also carved out a place for himself in the world and whose biggest struggle right now is how to raise a family. Both stories take different approaches in their storytelling, but at the same time, those approaches are inspired by past versions of Superman, whether they are comics, movies or TV shows, while still adding new elements. As a result, both versions of Superman have the potential of being the definitve version of Superman for an entire generation.
But then, come the long-term fans, myself include. We've all formed our opinions on the stuff that's come beforehand, and suddenly, here's something brand new. Naturally, we were gonna get excited and we were gonna talk about it and because there are so many of us, opinions were going to be very different. Now, suppose that you're talking to a fellow fan about these new stories and he has the exact opposite stance that you do. No, I'm not gonna specify which one it is, whichever you think is better, he thinks the opposite. Well, you'll want to know why, won't you? And if the other guy starts dishing out reasons that appear to miss the point or are just flat-out lies and are kinda disparaging to the character that disagrees with him, you'll want to set him straight, and thus we have a debate.
The more passionate people are about which one is better, the more stubborn they will be about it and suddenly, the debate will turn ugly. Next thing you know, this debate is no longer about the quality of the story, it's the about the quality about the people talking about these stories. The main point is suddenly "you aren't a true fan because you like that Superman story. That means you don't understand Superman, not like me. I like this story and I do understand Superman. I'm a truer fan than you." And this brings my journey back full circle to my previous post, in which I tried to debunk the idea that somewhere, out there, is a true Superman, a single, definitive version by which all the others are judged and can't measure up to. There are Superman stories I genuinely dislike, but I still stand by what I said: "the definitive Superman does not exist".
Even if there are versions of Superman I dislike, such as the Clark Kent from Smallville (he doesn't even call himself Superman), the tyrannical dictator from Injustice or the flying plot device from Young Justice, they are still considered true versions of Superman, at least as far as I'm concerned, and thus the "you're not a true fan of Superman because you like that movie/TV show/comic book/whatever" is rendered completely invalid. Hell, both Warner and DC consider those Supermen I mentioned as legitimate and valid, so why should my opinion be any different from those of the official creators?
Let me ask you something: what is Superman to you? Everyone has a different idea/interpretation for the character. Some stick to the aggressive and intimidating vigilante from the Golden Age, some prefer the campy and light-hearted superhero from the Silver Age, others prefer the more serious and grounded character from the John Byrne era. They're all Superman.
There are many different aspects of Superman's personality that have been emphasized over the years. The DC Extended Universe and the Arrowverse emphasize different aspects, but they are still both valid interpretations of Superman, no matter which way you slice it. Therefore, saying that one or the other is a greater validation of one's fandom is nonsensical. You cannot base your understanding of this whole franchise on just one story. You can't even base it on 10 stories! Your understanding of Superman must take everything into consideration and I do mean everything, including comic books, movies, TV shows, video games, and so on and so forth.
Although the core elements of Superman have remained intact over the years, the fact is this: Superman is whatever society needs him to be at the time. When society needs him to be a champion of social justice, he'll be a champion of social justice. When society needs him to be an intergalactic protector, he'll be an intergalactic protector. Hell, Injustice even proved that Superman can work as a villain, of all things! Obviously, not every version of Superman will appeal to everyone, but there's nothing wrong with that. The same can be said for every other long-running character in the realm of fiction, like Sherlock Holmes, Godzilla and James Bond.
This is ultimately the reason this debate has gotten as ugly as it has. It's not that one story is inherently better than the other (criticism and preference are subjective, after all), it's that people have been using it to boost their own egos and tear others down. Like I said, a comparison between these two stories was always gonna happen. Debates between those who make those comparisons were always an inevitability. The ugliness, though? That's avoidable. That's something that, honestly, never should have happened and this is why I have approached this topic the way I have.
This is a debate about a subjective topic. Neither side was ever going to win. We can only speak for ourselves as individuals. I certainly won't discourage debate or discussion, so long as it remains civil. I'm sick and tired of debates about the "definitive Superman". They just need to stop. We're all fans here, we just see things differently. Is it really so hard to understand that we can want different things out of the same stories? This whole debate is basically anathema to what Superman stands for! Superman is supposed to bring people together, not tear them apart!
In closing here, this post was never meant to be a definitive answer on which is the definitive and perfect Superman. It's meant to be an example on how anyone, regardless on which side they fall on, should approach the topic.
Well, that's all I have for you this time. Now, it's your turn to tell me what do you think about all of this. As always, this is the start of a dialogue and you have my thanks for participating in it and for taking the time to read what I had to say. Posting my opinions in this website doesn't make them any greater or more valid than yours and I'm just glad to have this privilege and this honor to share my opinions with you, although I do admit I did hijack this particular topic a little bit. The only thing I ask of you is to deliver your opinions in a polite and civilized manner. We're all Superman fans here, we just see things differently. This post is also present on Reddit, so feel free to check it out, leave a comment below, thanks for your time and stay safe out there!
Hello, everyone! I'm here to talk about a particular topic that has been around for quite some time, a topic has had me scratching my head a little. Whenever a new adaptation of Superman gets announced, a section of the Superman fanbase (I don't know if they're a vocal minority or a very sizeable crowd) will often claim that the new Superman is very different and distant from the real Superman. This is an idea that needs to be nipped in the bud before too many people start believing it.
Let me ask you a question: if none of the guys pictured above is the definitive Superman, then who is? No, really, this is a sincere question. Can you answer it? By saying that none of the men above aren't the true Superman, the implication is that somewhere, out there, is a true Superman, a single, definitive version by which all the others are judged and can't measure up to. So, which one is it? You have dozens of movies and TV shows and thousands of comic books to choose from, so which one of them contains the true Superman?
The answer is that none of them do. The definitive Superman does not exist. We're talking about a media franchise that has run more or less consistently for the past 83 years, making it one of the longest-running media franchises in the history of entertainment and Superman, as a character, has the kind of career most actors would kill for. He's played just about every role imaginable: champion of social justice, space-faring adventurer, reluctant Messiah, loving father, awkward teenager with no idea of what to do with his life (I'm no big fan of Smallville, BTW).
Why does a single character has so many interpretations? Well, because Superman has always been whatever the audience needed him to be. When the audience needed him to stand for the poor and the oppressed, he stood for the poor and the oppressed. When the audience needed him to fight alien invasions, he fought alien invasions. When the audience needed him to offer someone, anyone, a helping hand or a shoulder to cry on, he did that as well, regardless of the story. These are all different interpretations and each of them are equal in their legitimacy and you can't say that one Superman is truer than another.
Some of you might ask: "what about the comic books? Superman originated as a comic book character. Wouldn't that mean that the definitive Superman can be found in the comics? Action Comics #1 is considered the most valuable comic book of all time. Does that mean that the Superman in that comic book issue is the definitive Superman?" Well, I don't think so. In fact, Superman's appearance in that comic book supports the idea that he is whatever the world needed him to be.
Action Comics #1 featured a very different Superman from the one modern audiences are used to. He was a very aggressive character who attacked men who brutalized their wives, intimidated criminals with his imposing physique and extraordinary powers and was not afraid to break laws if it served the greater good. In the Silver Age, he was interpreted as a more lighthearted character that had a healthy respect for law and order and was, for all intends and purposes, a superpowered lawman. That was the way the franchise progressed because that's what audiences needed.
Besides, you can't really make the claim that the original Superman from 1938 is the definitive version because no one has ever done that for any character in the history fiction. For example, look at this picture of Sherlock Holmes, also played by Henry Cavill.
Many will tell you that this is the definitive version of Sherlock Holmes, but it's not the original Sherlock Holmes. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle never once described the great detective as wearing that costume, and he certainly never pictured Sherlock as looking exactly like Henry. Even if Henry doesn't play the original Sherlock, many people will consider him the definitive Sherlock because they're already used to that version of Sherlock. Ironically, if you try to change that image, even by using things present in the original books, people will freak out because you're not respecting Doyle's vision, by which they mean you're not respecting the vision they're used to.
But even then, Henry doesn't play the definitive version of Sherlock Holmes. Sherlock has been around for longer than Superman and seen far more adaptations in different media, and in each of them, he's been slightly different and each version has its own legitimacy and its own appeal to a particular audience.
If you wanna keep playing the "original version is the definitive version of the character" card, then the one, true version of Godzilla is the nuclear-powered monster from the 1954 movie. What? It was directed by Ishiro Honda, the original creator of Godzilla, and the character himself was portrayed by Haruo Nakajima, the very first actor to ever play Godzilla in any form of entertainment. I don't know who this impostor is, but he clearly isn't Godzilla. By that logic, Godzilla vs Kong can only work if the titular characters are the giant lizard from 1954 and the giant monkey from 1933, respectively.
Have I made my point clear yet? Just because a version of Superman is different from what you're normally used to doesn't mean he isn't Superman. You can't just write off a version of Superman simply because he doesn't cater to your particular tastes as a Superman fan. Superman has and will always have different interpretations, again, each with their own legitimacy and their own appeal to a particular audience. If you don't like a particular version of Superman, that's perfectly fine, but it's unfair to call that version a "fake" or an "impostor", which I was always try to keep an open mind about new Superman stories so I can make informed decisions about them. Perhaps you could do the same.
Well, that's all I have for you this time. Now, it's your turn to tell me what do you think about all of this. As always, this is the start of a dialogue and you have my thanks for participating in it and for taking the time to read what I had to say. Posting my opinions in this website doesn't make them any greater or more valid than yours and I'm just glad to have this privilege and this honor to share my opinions with you. The only thing I ask of you is to deliver your opinions in a polite and civilized manner. We're all Superman fans here, we just see things differently. So leave a comment below, thanks for your time and stay safe out there!
Hello, everyone. I found this discussion thread at CBR's Superman forum so I thought it would be a good idea to bring the discussion over at the DC Database and see if people think Superman is a badass or not.
This is meant to be a friendly discussion, so please be polite and argue your points in a civilized manner. We're all DC fans here, we just see things differently. So leave your comments below, thanks for your time and stay safe out there.
Hello, everyone. I spent some time thinking about Superman's portayal within the DC Extended Universe and I found him a bit too similar to Luke Skywalker from the Star Wars original trilogy.
Both stories are representations of the hero's journey, which George Lucas directly used to craft Luke's story. No, the comparisons are not perfect, and even if they are, I don't think Zack Snyder copied what Lucas did while creating Superman's story for the movie, but they still work to a certain extent. Think about it:
In the first chapter (Man of Steel/A New Hope), the hero (Clark/Luke) has a normal life as a farmer until an old mentor (Jor-El/Obi-Wan Kenobi) reveals to him that he has a great destiny. The hero discovers his powers and embarks on a journey to defeat a villain (General Zod/Darth Vader) who is connected to his family and has a weapon of mass destruction (World engine/Death Star) at his disposal. The first act ends with the hero destroying the villain's weapon and helping a resistance group (U.S. military/Rebel Alliance) to victory.
The second chapter (Batman v Superman/The Empire Strikes Back) is absolutely brutal to the hero, breaking him physically, mentally and emotionally. Not only does the hero struggle at everything he tries to do, he continuously makes the wrong choices. The villain (Lex Luthor/Emperor Palpatine) manipulates the hero and lures him into a trap, either by threatening his loved ones or undermining his ideals. By the end of the second chapter, Superman gets killed by Doomsday while Luke loses his hand to Darth Vader. The only difference here is the small victory the hero gets. Superman manages, at least indirectly, to get Lex to face justice for his crimes while Luke ultimately rejects the dark side and chooses death, but as we all know, he survives, either by pure luck or by the will of the Force.
It's only in the third chapter of the story (both versions of Justice League/Return of the Jedi) that we see true growth in the hero, that he starts coming into his own and achieving his heroic destiny. The hero has become more powerful and we get to see him use his powers in ways we've never seen before. The major difference is in the outcome of the story. The only victory Luke gets is a moral one, while Superman ultimately succeeds in everything he does. Yes, Luke defeats Vader, but only after briefly tapping into the dark side and almost throwing away everything he learned over the course of the story. Even he had destroyed Vader, it's unlikely he would have stood a chance against the Emperor. The only moral failing Superman has is when his resurrection goes badly and he attacks the Justice League.
Like I said before, the comparisons aren't perfect but they still work. Overall, I've enjoyed the DCEU and its version of Superman. No, his story isn't perfect, but it was enjoyable enough and with some polishing, it could have redefined the hero's journey for a new generation of moviegoers. DCEU Superman could have been the Luke Skywalker of the superhero genre, and maybe to some people, he already is the Luke Skywalker of the superhero genre. No, I don't think Superman is perfect or infallible, nor do I believe he should try to live up to those expectations, because more often that not, he will fail. Even so, I can appreciate the DCEU's efforts to put Superman's character before his archetype, and in my opinion, Superman's character development was handled correctly in the DCEU and he did become the hero the Justice League needed, even if that journey took him to some dark places.
Ultimately, Superman is an escapist power fantasy and a highly versatile character that can fit multiple roles, depending on the era and the preference of authors and audiences, and I do my best to have an open mind to his story and evolution.
Well, that's all I have for you next time. Now, it's your turn to tell me what do you think of DCEU Superman and his similiarites to Luke. Just be polite and leave your comments in a friendly and civilized manner. This is meant to be a friendly conversation and we're all DC fans here, we just see things differently. I already made a post as to why it's okay to have different opinions. So leave your comments below, thanks for your time and stay safe out there.
Today marks the 8th anniversary of Man of Steel, Superman's first solo movie since Superman Returns and the beginning of the DC Extended Universe.
Now, a lot of people disliked the movie, and that's perfectly fine, but this movie means a lot to me for a lot of personal reasons. First of all, like I said, it was Superman's first solo movie since Superman Returns, meaning that he was the main character of his own story, without having to share the spotlight with another superhero.
Second, I thought this movie was much better than the comic books at the time (the New 52 weren't all too kind to Superman, if you ask me) and I do believe that it did a good job at modernizing Superman and understanding what it means to be a man who could change everything.
Now, it's your turn to tell me what do you think about Man of Steel. Remember, this is meant to be a friendly conversation, so please be polite and leave your comments and civilized comments. We are all fans of both Superman and DC here, we just see things differently. So leave your comments below, thanks for your time and stay safe out there!
