Amph Here's Some Money, Go See A Swap Thing: DCU/Elseworlds Discussion

Hugh Keayes-Bryne as Martian Manhunter---that would have been interesting.

 

That’s my perfect JL team. Ugh.

 

PALPATINE: "Darth Plagueis was a Dark Lord of the Sith, so powerful and so wise he could use the Force to influence the Midichlorians to create life ... He had such a knowledge of the dark side that he could even keep the ones he cared about from dying."

Not to mention that in TCW, Qui-gon told Yoda that he could communicate through the Midichlorians. But as to being a MacGuffin, no. The Codex was as it was something that everyone was looking for, which is the definition of a MacGuffin. The Midichlorians were not.

Superman's dragged into the hearing because the people want to know if he killed all the revolutionaries in Nairobi, because of Lois. As to being worshiped as a god by people, that's been a staple of the character since the 1986 reboot.





But what I was getting at was at the end.



Superman as a character isn't about his powers, but about what he inspires in others. That's why his memorial at the end was written with that epitaph.

No, the point Jonathan was conveying was that there will always be consequences for the actions that Clark takes. He cannot save everyone and be everywhere. But what he can do is take solace in the things that matter. That there is still good in people. Jonathan felt better in his life when he met Martha and Clark has Lois, who has been his beacon. That's why Bruce tells Diana that men are still good.

The comic was written in response to that scene, not the other way around. The point is that what's in the comic can be ignored or altered to suit whoever makes the next film. Remember that Wolverine comic? The comic which had Logan fighting the Silver Samurai and meeting Mariko, before Logan joined the X-Men. It was later ignored in favor of a film that told a different story. "Man Of Steel 2" would tell a different story about the open pod. They're not going to be beholden to some comic, that almost no one but the comic book reading faithful have read. Much less heard about.

 

Other than one specific thing (i.e. General Zod being the child of Superman's grandfather's "jilted" lover) I thought it was surprisingly good. I'm interested in the non-prequel-but-prequel aspect by making it a "save the past" thing with Adam Strange a lot more than I was when it was just a prequel.

I'm also curious if they're going full-Ouroboros and if the Voice of Rao will turn out to be Brainiac... but otherwise interested in the series. Also that Goyer seems to be both taking and throwing out a lot of his previously penned Krypton background from the movies...

 

Jonathan Kent was a huge jerk when he said "maybe" in MoS.

 

So it was a very lazy Sunday afternoon yesterday and I relented and rented JL. It was...not utterly terrible? Not good, nope, but not totally irredeemable bad either. There's a good movie somewhere in that two hour running time. But still, it's hampered for the obvious reasons already discussed here. Majorly it suffers as all rushjobs do: it was terribly undercooked, and the schizophrenic vision of two different directors didn't help either. DC was late into the game and sadly, as much as they may not have wanted to do it, the setup and buildup that helped the first Avengers was sorely needed here, especially after the generally badly received first two installments of this sorta kinda trilogy. And it certainly would've been a wiser decision to have split the movie into two films, with the first properly setting up the coming of Darkseid and the sequel having the big guy boom tubing into the scene.

But, it had its moments. I kinda found myself grinning when Elfman inserted part of his Batman theme here and there as well as the classic Superman theme when Big Blue finally entered the fray. The humor kinda worked at times (sometimes and especially at Batfleck's expense) and I suppose that was Whedon's touch, as well as the chemistry between most of the group. Case in point, my favorite scene: the mid credits scene with Flash and Superman starting their race. Charming and fun all at once.

I only wish we had had a better crafted movie. The JL certainly deserved one.

 

It's time for a HARD reset. Don't compete with your competition, but come out with a cohesive story that has a thread that can be carried throughout each film, maybe Brainiac for example. Start with a Superman adventure and Brainiac is mentioned as a brief aside. Next have a Batman movie where Bruce creates a power piece of technology to solve the problem at hand in his solo outing. Lastly, in the Flash movie have him go back in time to fix something, but ends up changing something else.
You could have Cyborg cameo if you want. In the Superman movie, you could have him playing football in the background on TV. In the Batman movie, you can Batman working with Cyborg's father or his company/team of scientists. In the third movie, Flash could have gone to the same high school. Whatever.

Take the Wonder Woman movie, leave it as is, and then have her assemble the above team when a piece of Kyptonian technology lands in Themyscira. While studying it, it bonds with Bruce's technology from his solo movie, and reveals itself to be Brainiac. Then it's revealed that thanks to Flash in his solo movie, it allowed Brainiac to do A, B, and C. Who knows.

I'm just spit balling at this point, and maybe it was DC's intent to do something like this in the beginning, but it's not apparent. You can see somewhat of a plan with the Mother boxes and such, and the Superman public love/hate, but it wasn't played with finesse and you get the jumbled mess that is Justice League.

 

Hopefully Flashpoint will be used to reset everything, allow for a new cast as required.

One thin, I thought Steppenwolf was supposed to be setting up Darkseid. Is that still the plan? Because I didn't notice much set-up, and Darkseid will be in the New Gods, thing, won't he?

 

I guess that was the plan, with Steppenwolf (dat CG, Jesus...) gathering the MBs to 1) turn Earth into a world mirroring Apokolips and in the process 2) gain his boss' favor and end the exile he hinted at being in one scene or another.

 

Thanks for the refresher regarding the midichlorians, as I am obviously not well verse in the prequels to remember such details in dialogue.

As for midichlorians not being a MacGuffin, aka a plot device, I'm not sure how you could say that given you previously said,

​

I'm not arguing the "why" Superman was dragged into Congressional hearings, whether it be the events in Nairobi or just being a threat in general, but that the hearings provide the underlying point of Snyder's Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman, is that the world is rightfully fearful of Superman. One of the Snyder's ambition of the films was to make them as realistic and consequential as possible.

Zack Snyder interview with Movie.ie via comicbooknews.com: "I never felt like a movie should exist in the real world before, but I feel like Superman should. We've designed the movie that we shoot on location a lot, in real settings with real situations, because I feel like the most realistic movie I'll make is with Superman in it."

Zack Snyder interview with Herocomplex/LA Times: "It’s a more serious version of Superman. It’s not like a heart attack. We took the mythology seriously. We take him as a character seriously."​

Obviously, the comic books are very different from the story telling in Snyder's trilogy, as the comic books have decades to massage the "worshiped like a god" element and balance it out with Superman is as normal as anyone else. I mean, many defenders of Man of Steel cite the reason why Superman was complicit in the destruction of Metropolis with his battle with Zod is because, "he was only Superman for a day."

However, if you want to compare comic books to film and how Superman is depicted in one medium vs another, let's look at Grant Morrison's All Star Superman vs. Snyder's Man of Steel.



Again, the common defense is that "he was Superman for like a day." And in Batman v. Superman he was still mired in controversy, whether is be Senate hearings, news talk shows, or by two billionaires; Superman was hardly inspiring as a god-like figure. So that few second memorial at the end of Batman v. Superman really doesn't hold much of an impact or balance out the 98% of the film where a Senator wanted to question him (not inspiring); Bruce Wayne wants to kill Superman because if there's a chance he goes evil he must die (not inspiring); Lex Luthor wants to kill Superman because he believes he's a god that is not all good (not inspiring); Wallace Keefe (Scoot McNairy) vandalizes the Superman memorial by spray painting the words "False God" on the chest of the Superman statue (not inspiring). In fact, there's not even one character that supports the notion that Superman is inspiring. That they want to live up the inspiration of Superman. Nope, mostly all the featured characters have an agenda as to why Superman is a threat to humanity.

I think we're on the same page here. That there are consequences and burdens of being a hero. That being Superman is not all fun and admiration. Thus, Snyder keeping it real. Thus, it's not all inspiring. It highlights the dark side of being a hero.

So, we agree the conveying point that Jonathan was making is that there's a dark side to "eating hero cake."

As for Jonathan's life being better because of Martha? Well, that kind of gets lost in the point of what Jonathan was conveying earlier. And I'm not sure if Lois was a bigger beacon to Clark than Martha. I mean, Luthor uses Martha as leverage for Superman to fight Batman over Lois; so much so, that it brings Superman to his knees. At any rate, I don't feel Lois or Martha demonstrate the notion "that there is still good in people," but rather as ponds to be used by Luthor.

As for Bruce telling Diana that men are still good, I believe Bruce was referring to himself as he embodies that remark. That despite wanting to kill Superman, there was still good in him. And it plays on Bruce's earlier comment of "How many good guys are left (Alfred)? How many stayed that way?" Moreover, there is no possible way of Batman knew that Clark had a hallucination with Pa Kent on that mountain top, much more, knew what they said. So, no, Bruce did not tell Diana men are still good because of what Jonathan was conveying to Clark. Additionally, Bruce refers to the funeral in DC as a circus.

I think you're contradicting yourself. On page 420 of this thread you said:

darth-sinister: "Supergirl's story would be covered in a solo film, which became the plan once BvsS came into being. "​

Furthermore, the official prequel comic book to the Man of Steel featuring Supergirl debut a month or so before the film was released in theaters and therefore not a response to that scene but rather an Easter egg for the readers of the comic book.

 

But accurate. If Pete's mom had gone to the authorities, the Kents would have to go on the run. They'd never have a normal life again because he chose to use his powers without some kind of protection.

The Midichlorians don't drive him to the dark side. The knowledge that a Sith Lord was capable of stopping other people from dying did and their role in that, was a confirmation of Anakin's own existence, as he was created by the Midichlorians.

The point is that he can be anything to the people. He can inspire hope, or he can inspire fear. The film focused on the negative, yes, because that was the intent of the film. The fact that Metropolis erected a statue in the first place, the people still cheered for him while others booed and then the world mourned, showed that he had a positive impact.

Even in the comics when Superman inspires, he also has to deal with the burden of not being able to save everyone. Same with all the other heroes. Snyder wasn't keeping it real, he was being true to the source material. The dark side of being a hero is fighting the temptation to kill, or become evil themselves.

Clark asked if the nightmares that he had for years, ever went away. Jonathan said that they did after he met Martha and she became his world. She reminded him that there was good things in the world.

That doesn't negate anything. No more here, than in "Superman II", when Lois was brought to the Fortress to try and keep him in line. Being used as a shield against him, doesn't change their role in being an inspiration for what he does. That's why he didn't just fry him with his heat vision from the sky. Or smash his head in with one hard punch, before Bruce could deploy the Kryptonite weapons. Why he decides to ask for his help. And Lois proves that there is good in people because she believes in Clark and believes in the truth, and she goes out of her way to find the proof that will exonerate him and convict Lex. She has already shown her goodness by not telling the world that Superman and Clark Kent are one in the same and went out of her way to help him fight Zod and his crew. That's why before dying he says, "You're my world". She is the thing that keeps him going.

I never said that he knew about that conversation. I was referring to the notion that there are good people in the world. Not just himself, but someone like Superman, who didn't bend to Lex's will. Who held firm to his convictions and died for them. And he realizes that he needs to have faith in people again. Just as Steve Trevor was Diana's proof that there was good in men, when he had sacrificed himself to detonate the plane.

And it is a comic that can be ignored.



Just like this comic was later ignored and contradicted by this film.



As to the release of the Supergirl comic, my statement still stands. It's whole existence was due to that one quick scene. A scene that can be contradicted.

 

I still think that contradict's your original statement:

​

The film tries to show that Superman had a positive impact through a few seconds of visuals, which amounts to maybe less than 2% of the films. But again, the erected Superman statue is soiled with the "false god" vandalism. And I totally agree that the films "focus on the negative."

Again, the comic/source materials are very different from what Snyder presented in his films. As you know, the comics balance Superman with Clark Kent so the character is grounded and humanized. Snyder's Superman is presented as god-like and therefore wrapped in controversy. Anytime Snyder show Clark, it's always tied to the world being in fear of Superman. Snyder keeping realistic.



And again, Jonathan Kent noted the darkside of being a hero in Batman v. Superman in the dream sequence on top of a mountain. There was nothing in that dream sequence where Pa Kent told Clark that the dark side of being a hero is fighting the temptation to kill. Here's what Jonathan Kent said in Batman v. Superman:

​

What's the sentiment that suggest Jonathan tells Clark "the dark side being a hero is fighting the temptation to kill" in that scene?

Yes, that there are good things in the world, not anything that Bruce had said to Diana.

Let's not drift off into a tangent here and use Superman II. Let's just stay on topic and discuss what Snyder does in his trilogy.

Superman doesn't kill Batman, because he needs his help in finding Martha. Superman has not idea where Lex is holding Martha. He tells Lois that. Moreover, in an interview with IGN, Snyder said there was a deleted scene where Superman went looking for Martha:

​

Lois is an investigative reporter. She was in Nairobi to cover a story not to prove Superman's innocence. Lois had no idea that Lex was involved in framing Superman until it was too late.

Let's read what you said:

​

You said, "that's why Bruce tells Diana that men are still good."

Okay. But to you still stand by your statement of...

darth-sinister: "Supergirl's story would be covered in a solo film, which became the plan once BvsS came into being" ?​

 

‘Aquaman’ Director James Wan Reveals Why We Haven’t Seen a Trailer Yet

 

It will care after May?

 

Better than your average DCU misadventure.

 

Better than your average DCU misadventure.

 

5/10 for lack of punctuation.

I am actually looking forward to Aquaman. The director has me enthused.

 

ppl pls don't engage slowpoke. Everything he says is nonsense, garnished with rubbish.

 

I'll be generous and give that score to JL. Despite its shortcomings, it was dumb fun and it was great to finally see that team of demigods in a live action setting.

 

I imagine Yogi Bear saying #1.

Also, were people that worried about a trailer?