Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Cyel wrote:
To be honest the most basic superhero genre's premise* is so absurd at its core, it's hard not to deconstruct or lampoon it.

*- due to a pseudoscientific event that doesn't make much sense I get an an ability out of a 10yo boy's power fantasy that also doesn't make much sense and that urges me to dress like a Cirque de Soleil performer, adopt a silly pseudonym and fight villains who are similarly absurd.

I mean it's basically the closest equivalent of today's mythology, people (particularly boys) always like having some sort of aspirational figure to strive towards especially in today's age where men's original purported role in society as the provider/protector is increasingly marginalized.

They’re also tales of responsibility.

The MCU traditionally matched a new character to a villainous equivalent. Someone with the same powers and abilities, but without a moral compass type thing.

For me, that serves to heighten the heroism. They’ve all that power, and they could abuse it to gain real world wealth, power and influence. But….they don’t. To one degree or another (Staaaaaaaaaaaarrrrk!) they use it in service of their society, rather than to entirely selfish ends.

I can't remember where it was said but I recall someone saying something along the lines of Superman not fitting into a simple adolescent power fantasy because those ask "what would I do with these powers" whereas Superman ask "what can I do for others with these powers".

Crispy78 wrote:
A friend had a really weird reaction to this one - my wife told me about it after seeing her the other day. Apparently she was really looking forward to it but then discovered that Superman (and I don't think this is a spoiler!) has a dog in it. Her reaction was "That wasn't in the old (Christopher Reeve I assume) films! I'm not watching that!"

May have to find a way of gently letting her know that Krypto was introduced as a character in 1955, well before either of us were born...

Spoil the movie for her & reveal that the dog ISN'T his.

My favorite part was when he saved that squirrel. That was peak Superman. No other Superhero would have taken the time to save that squirrel.

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
My favorite part was when he saved that squirrel. That was peak Superman. No other Superhero would have taken the time to save that squirrel.

Except for Squirrel Girl...

 Ghaz wrote:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
My favorite part was when he saved that squirrel. That was peak Superman. No other Superhero would have taken the time to save that squirrel.

Except for Squirrel Girl...

Though in Squirrel Girl's case, saving the squirrel would have inadvertently toppled the monster.

Apparently their test audiences Hated the squirrel to the extent Gunn had a cut where the squirrel was removed, but he decided he just didn’t like that and put it back in.

 Ghaz wrote:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
My favorite part was when he saved that squirrel. That was peak Superman. No other Superhero would have taken the time to save that squirrel.

Except for Squirrel Girl...

Squirrel Girl would’ve sent it (safely) right through the baddies Brian.

Everyone knows that!

On the now disappeared Marvel Super Heroes online game (think Diablo but with Marvel characters) I had a maxed out Squirrel Girl with a squirrel army. It was quite a bit of fun.

That was probably one of the best films I've ever seen.

Everything felt natural, no character forced. The story was great, the actors were great, there were nods for fans of the comics, but not so many that it felt out of place.

Oh, and Guy Gardner was in it.

 Ghaz wrote:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
My favorite part was when he saved that squirrel. That was peak Superman. No other Superhero would have taken the time to save that squirrel.

Except for Squirrel Girl...

I was going to say that but I knew someone would call it out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AduroT wrote:
Apparently their test audiences Hated the squirrel to the extent Gunn had a cut where the squirrel was removed, but he decided he just didn’t like that and put it back in.

What!? Outrageous! I'm not joking, that's was my favorite part. Superman is a giant, boy scout and Gunn knows you don't run away from it. You lean into that. I also like how Superman feels bad for the giant monster he's fighting. He's just a good guy and he can't help himself.

I just saw the movie the other night, and I found it refreshingly upbeat. Lately all the superhero movies are grim and dark and morose; it was nice to get back to a genuinely fun superhero movie where the good guy wins without there having to be a huge cost to his victory. Sure, a little darkness has to happen in order to give the story any kind of stakes, and this movie handled that flawlessly. Lex Luthor came off as genuinely ruthless and threatening, at least through his superpowered minions. And Krypto made a nice bit of comic relief.

All in all, one of the best superhero movies I've seen in a long time. Let's have more like this (and whoever the current MCU writers are, please take notes).

 The_Pilot wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
It is such a sad thing that test audiences complained about Superman saving the squirrel.

What??? That part was good and showed character how could they?

A dog or a cat would have had people applauding, a squirrel seems like a waste of Superman's limited time, he can't be everywhere, and what if a more important lifeform was in danger while he saved a squirrel?

Yeah it bugged me too.

I suppose a devout Buddhist or Jain would smile approvingly but I think most Yanks feel you have to draw the line somewhere.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

We’ve all seen political hot takes on subtext where the point of view must surely have involved wearing someone else’s glasses, 20 pints of very strong beer, both eyes being poked with a sharp stick and all in a pitch black room, regardless of the commentator’s political leanings.

Why do I suddenly feel attacked!


I think the point of the squirrel is a reminder that all creatures, great and small; are worthy of protection and support.

Probably why so many Yanks hate it.

 Easy E wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

We’ve all seen political hot takes on subtext where the point of view must surely have involved wearing someone else’s glasses, 20 pints of very strong beer, both eyes being poked with a sharp stick and all in a pitch black room, regardless of the commentator’s political leanings.

Why do I suddenly feel attacked!


I think the point of the squirrel is a reminder that all creatures, great and small; are worthy of protection and support.

Probably why so many Yanks hate it.

No. The Black Templar level of Hatred that some of us feel come from the harm they've caused us.

One of my mom's friends (a minister) was out moving some firewood and was attacked and hospitalized by one of those furry rodents.

I see a tree rat and remember the $379.00 in pool screen repair costs caused by the bastards.

I really liked this movie.

The leads were good.

Barring the ‘what are my eyes trying to see?’ Black Hole bits the SFX as you young folks call it was pretty good.

Lex’s stupid use of all that tech did make sense when we got down to him just being obsessed with destroying Superman.

Dog needs to go to training. Not cool, dog bro.

I really liked Mr Terrific. Well played and some great lines.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 The_Pilot wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
It is such a sad thing that test audiences complained about Superman saving the squirrel.

What??? That part was good and showed character how could they?

A dog or a cat would have had people applauding, a squirrel seems like a waste of Superman's limited time, he can't be everywhere, and what if a more important lifeform was in danger while he saved a squirrel?

Yeah it bugged me too.

I suppose a devout Buddhist or Jain would smile approvingly but I think most Yanks feel you have to draw the line somewhere.

Its not like he had to flly to the other side of the world to save the squirrel. It was right there, he just had to reach out. Maybe some people disagree with saving a squirrel if it involves moving one of their limbs but that is what makes Superman different than those people.

Zac Snyder really wanted to drive home the idea that Superman will kill a man if he needs to. Gunn wanted to show his other side.

If you watch the final episode of the first season of Peacemaker you will find that it is changed. In the original the Snyder Justice League show up but now it is Corenswet's Superman, the Justice Gang (Guy Gardner, Mr. Terrific, Hawk Girl) and Supergirl.

Wait. Really?

But that bit with Aquaman was actually hilarious and basically the only win Jason Mamoa got as the character across two films and a near-credits cameo XD

This would almost be a travesty if I really cared that much.

LOL Stalinist censors in the DCU!

It's an update so that the new Peacemaker is part of the same timeline.

The events happened in both the new universe and the old, this just means there's no confusion about which universe the show primarily takes place in.

Went to an empty theatre on Friday and saw this. It was way way better than I expected. I got a lot of the Tom Welling version of Superman out of Corenswet's performance and it really really worked. I didn't feel like anything was really shoe horned in. When your biggest gripe is the Kent farm not looking like a farm property it's probably a decent movie

It's already gone from our local theaters. It came and went super quickly.

Here too.

Mine still has one theater showing it, but it has eighteen theaters so there is room. It isn't in one of the big Dolby theaters anymore, though. Not really a surprise as the digital and physical home release isn't far off.

Yeah, I was surprised it was still there. But it's a 16 screen theatre and it was in one of the smaller ones. But it's not like there is a ton of competition the last few weeks to push it out of the bigger theatres.

My wife and I went to see it last weekend for our 20th anniversary. I liked everything but admit that I also found the Kent Farm kinda......underwhelming, for something that is so established on-screen. Even Mark Walburg's character's farm from one of the later Transformers looked more like the Kent Farm. Hell, HAWKEYE's farm was better even.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
My wife and I went to see it last weekend for our 20th anniversary. I liked everything but admit that I also found the Kent Farm kinda......underwhelming, for something that is so established on-screen. Even Mark Walburg's character's farm from one of the later Transformers looked more like the Kent Farm. Hell, HAWKEYE's farm was better even.

It was pretty clear they were going for as down to earth basic a rural farming couple as you could get. The giant houses of yesteryear that have been Kent farms are Gone with the Wind levels of romanticised.

It makes them less believable if they have a mansion.

They released the date for the sequel and the title: Man of Tomorrow July 2027