I don't know — you're the one who brought him up, asshole.

I don't like mopey Superman.

do they make these comic book films visually dark because they are afraid of the bright colors of the comic books themselves?

That's a very good point, actually, especially if you're talking about the customes. I think they believe Batman's light grey and yellow and Superman's pale red and blue would take you back to the Adam West series and the late Christopher Reeve movies and, well, look silly. From Batman Begins on, the DC films have gone out of their way to tell the audience, "LOOK, this is a clean slate, no 'Kneel before Zod' nonsense, we MEAN IT, this is REAL...".

DC comics seem very afraid of the audience mocking their characters, its why I've been pointing out the super serious loo of BVS. They seem so afraid of the audience not taking them seriously, so they gave you a super serious movie, and from the early reviews I'm seeing, its not successful. Early reviews have not been positive.

asshole?!?! I call you people geeks and you go and get yr panties in a twist. lighten up man. geeks. lol!

you live in a void? you should have tougher skin than that.

I've read some definite stinkers at this point, but also many good ones. Everyone seems to be united in saying it's better than Man of Steel, which I doubt.

Whatever, I expect I'll be entertained, but I'll shed a tear at the continuing public smear campaign poor Superman is going through. I think it's safe to say there won't be any more Supes solo films for a while, God morherfucking dammit.

He's not mopey. He's just serious. You would be too if you were an alien protector of a planet that did nothing but slam you on need blogs. ;)

As for DC being visually dark... Have you ever seen The Flash or Supergirl tv series? They're the opposite of dark.

Even Arrow, which tries to be dark so hard that it gets comical, is a pretty light affair these days. And what about the Green Lantern movie? Shit, but not dark.

And Superman Returns. Definitely not dark. Everyone hated it.

I don't really think of Man of Steel as dark; I think of it as epic and dramatic. It had plenty of light humor, but it doubled down on action because that's what everyone wanted from Superman. And then people hated it for having too many explosions. Ugh.

Superman needs to *bigger* than your average superhero, almost by necessity.

The Evolution of Good
By JOSÉ ALANIZ, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

Sorry for formatting issues ... Copied from a PDF. Will fix later.

the whole point of Superman in the comics is that he was RAISED RIGHT, by two loving people who taught him right from wrong, hard work, middle--America values, and that he should never ever ever use his powers to hurt, only to protect people.

His morals, like most of us, are ingrained in him since early childhood.

He is not and never was supposed to be a god, just an alien being whose home world was destroyed and he was the last one around.

what would be cool is a What If type story where Kal-El is not found by a middle-american couple, but by some sort of horrible motherfuckers who raised him to be a goddamn animal killing machine. THAT would be scary!!!!!!!!!

BTW, the premise of Watchmen is NOT about a godlike being and what he would do to society. It was, Who watches those who are designated or self-designated as our Watchmen? That comic is the best damn thing and I hate how, once a book is converted into cheap fluff film (comparatively speaking) every talking head idiot takes the films to be the TRUE iteration of the story. I HATE THAT SHIT!!!!!!

Almost all films made from books are as Reader's Digest Condensed Classics compare to the actual novels. They are but pale imiitations, crafted by conglomerates who care not for the source material, but instead want to create cash cows.

D.C. have played with the idea of a non-American-raised Kal-El on a few occasions, perhaps most famous being Red Son where he fights for Stalin's Russia.

I liked David Carradine's characters, or if you will, Tarantino's interpretation of Superman in Kill Bill.

always struck me as profound.

The film was fucking awful.

I agree that it's not about a godlike being. Not sure what the author was going for there. But it is about accountability to some extent, and the dangers of personal agendas of "good." The Comedian is a hero and a fucking monster. So is Rorschach, even though his character is the moral compass of the story.

That movie was an abomination of a comic that is frankly overrated. What nobody realizes about the book is that it's really NOT A SUPERHERO STORY ... Like... At all! It's a moral quandary in comic book form, that just happens to feature costume wearing characters. But as far as actual writing and story are concerned, I've always preferred V for Vendetta. The movie was way better than the Watchmen movie too.

Jesus... That sex scene set to Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah. Yuck.

I was gonna go apeshit if Man of Steel resembled that piece of smut filth. Thank god it didn't, but it had Chris Nolan as a producer, so... This time around it's all Zach Snyder, and I'm ready for anything.

I'm not eager to find out why "Superman tub sex" is a thing now. (cringe)

I have to disagree with you there. He's been a Christ analogue since his inception. Just like Harry Potter. Just like King fucking Arthur. But more so. I encourage you to read Our Hero by Tom DeHaven and (if for some reason you haven't) The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay if you doubt the depth of Superman's spiritual origins.

He's more fascinating as a god figure anyway. Take that away from him and what do you have? Fucking ... like... Luke Cage or some shit. Just a tough dude, with no world building mythology surrounding him. In other words, pretty much every Marvel character.

Also, the question of how the planet would (realistically) react to a person like that is an important one, and I believe it's the secret to keeping Superman relevant. We'd fear and hate him. Times Do change. It's not 1938 anymore. Superman either adapts and changes with it, or he stays in the past. Not an option.

Everyone need to get over their gripes about what a character "should" be. These films are just reflective of one era... Sometimes just one year or one weekend. They pass. There will be others. The character is what it is, and it's different at different times. I think Man of Steel maintained the essence of Superman very well without being a silly little joke.

Starting to worry about BvS though.

Well, there's always The Lego Batman Movie. Voiced by Will Arnett!

http://news.google.com/news/story?cf...l5F X06K_m-LM

sees upper man isn ont conflicted like bateman, tge geejs kuve tgus abd tgat . icneruc gerei gere. I lunch today and couth a gleinp of booting

Will Arnett? Really? I saw that in the store the other day and briefly considered watching it. Now I'm definitely going to.

I've read some terrible reviews, and a few glowing ones... But mostly so-so ones that say "there's some cool stuff, but ultimately.. It's a goddamn mess."

You know what's weird and kind of embarrassing? I honestly just want everyone to shut up about the movie so I can see it and tell people how it really is. I legitimately feel like I'm more qualified to comment on this movie than anyone I've ever known in my life, certainly more than some blogger whom I know nothing about.

Looks like I'm going to be able to write a review though. Which is cool in a really satisfying way. Even if I hate the film, being paid to write about it as a fun side-project to my actual job as a reporter is just totally and objectively fucking badass.

You write for a living?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!?!

I loved the Watchmen movie. I hated the change at the end but otherwise I thought it was fucking awesome.

The comic is the single greatest thing I have ever read in graphic storytelling. I have re-read it 5-6 times and every single time I am astounded by the depth, complexity, intricacy, and rigor of the writing and the art. It is the greatest graphic novel to me.

I am gonna rewatch that shit tonight!!!!

Um... yes. Well, I work for a newspaper. I do layout and design and handle small publications, but I also spend a lot of time reporting and writing features. The opportunity came out of nowhere last year, and I took it.

I'm not getting a great vibe from the barrage of question marks and exclamation points. But, you know... think what you want to think. My life has been very weird. Nothing went according to plan. I feel very fortunate to have this job and I put a lot of myself into it.

Oh. Well. I definitely misunderstood you then. I thought we were on the same page... that it was "fluff" (or, as I'd put it, terrible beyond any measure and positively agonizing to watch. Genuinely hilarious in its awfulness, and possibly the worst film of the past 20 years.)

Whatever though.

I hope your editor is well paid.

You may need to rewatch it with an open mind!!!!

I think it's genuinely funny that you think you know anything about my writing, or my intelligence. I haven't made a post here that wasn't hastily typed up on an iPhone since 2012.

But whether I'm a good writer or a bad writer, I'm still paid to write, and attend films, and go to Sanders rallies, so.... :fuckyou:

Actually I did, a few years ago. I always forget about that. I wanted to show my girlfriend the "worst movie ever made," and when we were done I felt silly. It had some of the worst acting I've ever seen, but it was beautifully filmed and the music sequences added a lot.

Yeah, it wasn't THAT bad.

you guys still talking about batman and superman? the hell. and who the fuck visits a message board on a smart phone? isn't that PC relaxed time while your washing clothes, doing dishes and listening to music AT HOME? smart phones ruined the message board. I will not own one ever. fuck, we should just post randomly on a sonic youth FACEDICK.

I have a flip phone so im a shady mysterious crack head drug dealer filling your head with lies. love it.

You're a weird guy p_greezy. Like, a super weird guy. I don't think I actually "lol'd" at something I'd read on the internet until I encountered you though.

But yeah, man. I have a MacBook and shit, and an iPad Pro (which I got from the office, presumably for being such a talentless writer ;) ), and a Mac desktop, but work is a constant thing for me these days. It's after 8 on Good Friday and I'm taking emails. So I spend a hell of a lot of time on my iPhone.

But you do your thing man.

shit was wack. even the dopest part of the movie; batman, was wack. he aint supposed to kill but the nigga was smokin fools like i smoke blunts. it was dope that a movie finally showed his combat and stealth skizzillz like they should be represented

lex luthor was gay as fuck too. that nigga cannot act. i was like seriously!?!?! shit was straight outta a b movie.

I thought it was perfectly fine. Not enough Superman. Not nearly enough. And the end was like.... uhh... Really? But I have no idea why the critics are busting it up. It's a smart fun film, for the kinds of comic book fans who, like myself, prefer darker and more mature themes, but my only real beef with the movie is the goddamn ending.

I guess I'll just say this: if you love Superman, and he's the main reason you're seeing the film, you're gonna feel conflicted about it. Anyone else should find plenty to love about it.

Luthor was fine.
Affleck was fine. I'd totally watch an Affleck Batman movie.

But I don't need more Batman. I need Superman. I want Superman. And that's the only thing I took issue with. There's not enough Superman, and what there is is often muted by voiceovers or cut short by scene changes.

If you can't follow this movie you're a goddamn moron.
If you want to see the Avengers, go watch the Avengers.

I mostly loved it.

i was entertained. and batman was dope. doper than the nigga bale's. the flick aint as good as nolans but the character portrayal was on point.fool shouldnt of been smokin niggas like that though. he didnt even give a fuck. im all for a brutal batman but he aint supposed to kill; he just cripple niggas. luthor was retarded. at the end when bats left the him in the cell that shit made me cringe. horrible acting. and the niggas hair lookd ridiculous.

My sister walked out.

Batman was definitely doing a lot of indiscriminate grenade launching for someone with such a big problem with "collateral damage" ... But the same thing happened in Tim Burton's films. There were automatic weapons on the batmobile, and he blew the shit out of a ton of people.

But whatever. I don't really care much about that.

Not sure why anyone would walk out. I've never walked out of a movie in my life. Even the really shitty ones. I'd rather sit there and watch dumb shit happen than waste my money and leave. I am a finisher, though. I don't quit books I don't like either.

There was nothing bad about the acting. Jesus, the combined acting "talents" of the Avengers comes out to a far lower average. Nobody sucked in the film. Pretty much everyone sucks in the Avengers, except for RJD... Chris Evans grows on you, and I like him now, but even the good actors have horrendous delivery (Scarlet, looking at you)

Luther was cool to me. Definitely tweaked, definitely insane. Definitely weird, but it worked for me.

The only thing I struggle with is the end. Damn.

As for the whole movie, it's not for everyone. It is definitely thrilling for DC comics fans who have waited their entire lives to see some of their favorite story arcs come to life. But (for instance) if you don't know who Darkseid is, then Luthor's ramblings aren't going to mean much to you.

I really just want to see Superman get his own movie. Man of Steel was what I wanted and needed, and Man of Steel was only present in this film in fits and spurts. That epic music, (Superman's "theme") is just excellent, but there wasn't enough of it. Seems unlikely now that Superman will have his own film any time in the near future. I went twenty years waiting for him to come back, and now I'll probably have to go twenty more.

Fuck that ending, and fuck the critics. And fuck the studio for asking so much of Zach Snyder (who should really just be a cinematographer... he's good with that shit.)

Did she say why? Is your sister a fan, or just a casual viewer?

The movie really SHOULD appeal to both, but I don't think it will. Just curious.

nigga i cant believe you thought luthor was good. its like ever since the joker they think they gotta make the villains all mentally ill and they just come out looking like weakass joker imitations. it woulda been cool if the actor coulda pulled it off but the nigga cant pull off psycho as an actor. he just look stupid

Yes I agree that Heath's Joker kinda ruined all comic book villains, by simply being the best goddamn villain of all fucking time. I mean, he won an OSCAR. And yes, Eisenberg's whacked out Luthor is like a mash-up of Joker, Riddler, a gay stereotype, and Eisenberg's own portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg.

Was he the best choice? No. But the film was a bad choice altogether. They should have made Man of Steel 2 PROPER, and they should have cast BRYAN CRANSTON as Lex Luthor, and used his acting chops to bring new life to a more traditional take on Lex.

BUT, this was an experiment of sorts. And in their effort to cast a villain and make him menacing and unnerving, they succeeded. It's not really "Lex Luthor," in fact, I read that the character is literally supposed to be Luthor's son, but that makes zero goddam sense.

For an experiment, I think it worked. At the very least, it did not suck, nor did it ruin anything about the movie for me. So I see where you're coming from, but I'm ok with experimentation in these things.

The Penguin in Burton's Batman Returns was NOTHING like the original Penguin. He was a monster, he was goddamn disgusting. But he worked!

The only parts of the film I didn't like were the dream sequences and the ending. And I only disliked the ending because, y'know... nooooo! and whatnot.

Plus the Flash scene looked DOPE. And Wonder Woman really did kind of steal the show. Gal Gadot was great. Seeing the "trinity" stand together on the big screen is a feat that probably should have never been attempted, because the characters don't make much sense in a "real life" adaptation, where all of their worlds exist. I would have preferred solo flicks, but god DAMN it was awesome to see them standing together like that.

The real problem here is that people don't like Superman anymore. Only true hardcore comic fans even see the point of his character. But he's my guy, and my heart races whenever I see him in action on a big screen (which again, there wasn't enough of in this film).

I truly don't understand the super negative reviews though. I know bad movies when I see them. This was a spectacle, and was a bit overdone, but it was INFINTELY better than Age of Ultron, or even the Avengers.

I'm looking forward to Civil War, which looks like a couple rival gangs fighting in a parking lot compared to BvS, but it's not going to be this good. And it's also very deliberately trying to rip off the idea. They're turning Cap into Marvel's Superman (which he always kind of has been), but they're doubling down on it. And I'll wager Cap's going to die at the end. (Or Iron Man is, but they'll probably follow the comics and kill Cap off).

Whatever, Batman and Superman are the best. Critics are acting like this is some Batman & Robin like abomination, but that's utter bullshit.

Doomsday was really something, huh?

Anyway, I hope they keep on keeping on. I'll watch more "Batfleck" ... He was good. He doesn't deserve that viral video of him going all sad-face to "the sound of silence" when that interviewer asked him what he thought of the negative critic reviews. Poor guy.

hell naw it aint that bad. it was entertaining as hell and batman alone made it worth it for me, nigga. they had to put batman in it so it would sell. superman on his own dont sell as good