Wednesday, 13 April 2016

PART SIX OF THE ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN COVER GALLERY...


Images copyright DC COMICS

BATMAN Vs. SUPERMAN doesn't seem to be making
the right sort of waves with film fans in the way that MARVEL
movies do.  Too grim, too dark, and too long (two and a half hours,
whew!) - whatever the reasons, DC's cinematic outings don't seem
able to capture the hearts and minds of audiences in the same way
that 'The House Of Ideas' celluloid superhero adventures
manage to.  Any thoughts on that, peeps?

While your cogitating on the matter, here are another six
sensational covers from a time when The Last Son Of Kryp-
ton was still a major draw.  If only his comicbook appeal could
be transferred to the big screen, WARNER BROTHERS and
cinema-goers would all be a lot happier, dotcha think?

Perhaps a sense of fun might help?  Just saying.





34 comments:

Phil said...

Ok you asked!
It's because the "heroes " act nonsensically and not like the characters we know. Spoilers ahead....................>.............>

Batman kills a lot of people. Superman is supposed to be hero who inspires hope but everyone hates and fears him. Even when he's saving people no one is happy they treat him like a god.
The first time they meet Batman is obviously in pursuit of criminals of some sort yet Superman wrecks the Batmobile and doesn't even bother finding out what Batman was doing!
Clark Kent had no personality. Ma Kent gives him bad advice yet again.
The whole fight could have been avoided if Superman just spoke rationally for three seconds.
The whole conceit that Batman could actually beat Superman is ludicrous. Just like a car crash or American football tackle, Batman may wear armor but his brain is still moving and he would be killed several times over during the fight. It made me guffaw.
Luthor was horrible, the acting was ridiculous.
Wonder Woman was the best thing because she acts like a hero come to fight doomsday. Meanwhile the two "heroes" have been fighting each other.
Other than that Batman's takedown of the bad guys was the best thing in the movie right up until he incinerates one guy.

It's not that there was no humor. It's that DC has no idea how to handle Superman.

Thank you for your time.

Kid said...

Oh, c'mon, Phil, stop flaffing about - what do you REALLY think? (I'll maybe see it when it comes out on DVD, but it'll more than likely be when it appears on telly!)

Looking forward to Civil War and Dr. Strange.

Phil said...

I forgot to mention the whole senate investigation subplot was a complete waste of time which led nowhere.
And we got to see Batman's origin. I guess I hadn't seen that before, ever ! Let's show it again everyone!
Oh yeah Superman let Jimmy Olsen get killed (though his name wasn't mentioned apparently he was credited).
Did I mention how DC was crapping all over Superman's legacy?

TC said...

The movie seems to be aimed specifically at comic book fans. Which would be OK for a comic book, but movies are more expensive to produce and distribute, so they need to appeal to a much larger audience. Someone besides the fanboys who argue all day about whether hero X could beat hero Y.

For that matter, I would think that even the fanboys would be tired of the formula "hero vs. hero" premise by now. Villain manipulates situation, heroes meet, each mistakes the other for a bad guy, they fight a battle that "could have been avoided" if one of them just "spoke rationally for three seconds," then they finally catch on (sometimes because a third hero intervenes), then they team up to fight the real menace. That plot was a already a cliche by the 1970's. (Mainly because Marvel recycled it over and over.)

The grimdark tone is another example of something that appeals to the hard core fan boys, but maybe not so much to general audiences. Of course, some characters (Batman, Deadman, Spectre) are well suited to a grim-and-gritty style, but others (Superman, Supergirl, Captain Marvel/Shazam) are not. Which is why, IMHO, Superman and Batman haven't worked well in team-ups and crossovers (with some exceptions) since Batman returned to his grim Dark Knight image ca. 1970.

I do like Gal Gadot.

Kid said...

Phil, DC seem to be cr*pping all over ALL their heroes' legacies all the time. Wasn't that what the New 52 was doing?

******

I haven't seen the movie, TC, but I like Gal Gadot as well. (Seen photos of her.) How do you think she compares to Lynda Carter as WW?

TC said...

Each is a good Wonder Woman in her own way. Lynda was perfect for the slightly campy TV series, and Gal is perfect for a more serious approach.

Her toned-down costume takes some getting used to. Admittedly, it looks a little too reminiscent of Xena, but what else would an Amazon warrior's outfit look like?

Some fans have complained that she's "too skinny," or that she doesn't look tough enough. But Gal is a veteran of the Israeli Defense Force IRL, and could probably take on all of her critics at once and mop the floor with them.

Phil said...

It can work, just like those buddy cop movies. But the writers had no idea how to get these two factions together.
Yes I'm fed up with the Marvel style heroes fight, it's fun but you can't make a movie out of it. The superhero is an archetype and to risk sounding like one of those guys who read Joseph Campbell, the heroic arc must have the hero overcome an evil- not fight another hero. That's one of the big problems.
The other one is the inverting of the pyramid at DC. Once upon a time Superman was on top, followed by Wonder Woman. Batman was a crime fighter and everyone knew it, there were many stories about how Batman felt inadequate amongst all the super beings. Now Batman is the new Superman, he can't be allowed to lose a fight. In this DC universe Superman has never fought anyone with kyrptonite ( Luthor? Metallo? Titano the sore anyone). It only makes sense to fanboys. Though I am one my time has past and I'm happy to have my Curt Swan comics.
I forgot to add Batman's reasoning for hating Superman is bizarre. He blames Superman for the destruction in Metropolis. Despite Superman saving the planet . It would be like blaming the red army for the damage at Stalingrad. It makes no sense since the alternative was getting terraformed out of existence. The entire reasoning for the hero fight was ridiculous and you knew it was just an excuse to have the heroes fight.
Gal Gadot looked much better as Wonder Woman than as Diana Prince. I liked Aquaman but the Flash - get a shave you low life.

Kid said...

Sounds like mt kinda woman, TC. Got her 'phone number? I have the impression that the WW TV series set during the war wasn't quite as camp as the 'modern' day ones, but I've never seen the first series so don't know for sure.

******

Yeah, who'da thunk it would be called Batman Vs Superman instead of the other way around, eh, Phil? Poor Supes has been demoted in the superhero stakes. I think movie-makers sometimes think that the sheer spectacle will cover any holes in the plot, but audiences are smarter than that.

Graham said...

You hit the nail on the head, Kid.....no fun. It was almost like a chore to watch it. It looked like it was a chore for the two lead characters to act in, too. Just too dark and grim, except for Wonder Woman. I don't look forward to the DC movies like I do the Marvel ones. In fact, I've missed most of them in the theatre unless one of my kids wants to go.

Phil said...

http://panels.net/2016/04/12/no-one-stays-good-world-batman-v-superman/

And you thought I was being hard on the movie!
I was only angry DC didn't understand Superman.

Kid said...

I've seen the Superman and Batman films from the last few years at 'the pictures', G, but not Green Lantern - were there any others? Superman Returns had good moments, but overall was disappointing, and I can't remember much about Man of Steel (which isn't a good sign). The last three Batman movies were okay, but a bit overlong I thought - or maybe they just felt that way?

******

Read that link, Phil, but couldn't help thinking that the writer crying over the movie seemed a bit extreme, even allowing for her personal circumstances. I'd just've dismissed it as sh*t and let it go at that.

paul Mcscotty said...

The movie was to mixed up the first 20-30minute made very little continuity sense (to the film) and seemed all over the place. I think they just tried to do too much i.e. establish Batman’s origin (again although this time in a surreal way) introduce WW (the best thing in the film) the concept of the JLA (with cameos of Aquaman, Flash and Cyborg that to me at least made little sense) the feud idea between Bats and Supes and vice versa , try to make a film of the Frank Miler Dark Knight Superman fight etc etc. Saying that I liked the film once it got underway with Doomsday at the end (ok not the comic book version but was ok for me). I thought the interpretation of Lex Luther was strange having him a tad insane but he came over, to me at least, more like the Joker (then again you can’t establish his hatred of Superman based on him being responsible for making him bald in a film).

This was an awkward film to make the idea of hero v hero in comics is not new (as stated¬) but as the premise of a film it is for superheroes - and that got a lot of non-comic book fans that I know (and those I work with) with interested in and talking about it (ie how can Batman fight Superman he’d be killed- which is correct of course) but the mian issue I think was it was set up for the JLA film to follow (of more than likely “Batman and the JLA”)

Green Lantern for the money that was spent on it was a mess (for £3 for a DVD in “Fopp!” etc it is worth it) I was so looking forward to that film so much as well (which had its moments to be fair) -Whilst Marvel and spanking DC’s behind in films DC to me, are still miles ahead in animation shows and animated films (some of these are excellent) -They have previously done films BASED on a few of their characters including:
• Jonah Hex
• Constantine (I’m one of only a handful of folk that really liked that film)
• Catwoman
• Steel (oh dear)
o The Losers
o RED
o Watchmen
o V for Vendeta

The last 4 based on revamped comic titles or in case of Vendetta not really DCs)

The have a slew of films coming out over the next few years including Suicide Squad, JLA 1 and 2, Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, SHAZAM, Cyborg and (fingers crossed) Green Lantern Corp. Somehow I see a lot of these being cancelled!

Kid said...

When you consider the impact that Superman the Movie made in 1978, McS, it makes me wonder why they haven't been able to replicate the success of that in subsequent Superman movies. (Contrary to popular opinion, I didn't think Superman II was superior to its predecessor - it had some good moments, but was disappointing overall.)

Also, I don't think that, good as some of them were, any of the Batman movies have had the impact that the 1989 one had - that was something special. Perhaps DC will eventually throw in the towel with their movie plans if they don't have a stonking blockbuster hit soon, and just stick to TV shows. Suicide Squad, going by the trailer I've seen, looks interesting, but I think it'll probably confuse non-comic fans even more. It's time that DC got back to an established continuity for its characters and stopped playing fast and loose with them, in my opinion.

Aquaman just seems like a ludicrous idea. Would it really work as a film? I find it difficult to even generate an interest in him as a comicbook character.

paul Mcscotty said...

If I was at DC I would commission films of the "Spectre" and the “Meal Men” and (if not already planned) have Darkseid as a villain with Superman and the JLA. Aquaman is a pretty strange choice I can’t see that being a hit (although I like the original Aquaman comic character).

I never liked the original Superman films that much (apart from the first one) saying that I have not liked any of the new Superman movies either – Batman has been hit and miss for me I liked the 1989 film and the last 3 were good especially the Keith Ledger Joker film which I thought was excellent some of the others from the franchise have been awful.

I have to say that I am pretty “fanboy” excited over the JLA movies - oh I forgot to add “Swamp Thing” to the DC list of films above.

I meant to ask have you seen the latest Dr Strange film clip looks good to me BUT you miht not like it as I think the Ancient one MAY be a lady!!!

Kid said...

Although, remember, McS, there have already been two Swamp Thing movies and they weren't that great. Yeah, saw the Dr. Strange clip, but didn't like the 'Ancient One'. First of all, not ancient-looking enough, didn't like her voice, and yup, you guessed right - don't like the fact that it's not the Ditko Ancient One. Why the change apart from some PC agenda pish? Having said that, it looks as if it'll be a good movie, but one never can tell for sure from the trailers.

paul Mcscotty said...

I wasn't to impressed with the Dr Strange still pictures I saw but it looks really good in the clip (I'm a big Dr Strange fan) looks like th eDitko costume to me as well

Sorry I meant to add Swamp Thing to the list of DC movies already made not a new film wish (they were really poor imho but not as bad as Man Thing)

Kid said...

There was a Man-Thing movie? Never knew about that, McS. Just how bad was it? Which version of the Dr. Strange Omnibus are you going to get - the one with the Alex Ross cover or the Steve Ditko cover?

paul Mcscotty said...

Yep they made a "Man Thing" movie Kid it was pretty boring to say the least (couldnt finish it andl put it on fast forward - I taped it from the TV) - I think I wll get the Alex Ross cover of Dr Strange what about you?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR1uw4IAe6I

Phil said...

As the resident Dr. Strange cosplayer ( and Asian) I liked most of the Dr. Strange clip except for the inception city bending ( seen it! Not Comic book accurate ) and the ancient one ( makes no sense changing an old Asian man to a white woman, don't give me that PC crap you cast Wong as an Asian man). But I did like the sanctum sanctorum and Strange's astral body.

I think we are all on general agreement, bats v supes was too dark and was just an excuse to fight. I did like the last half hour better. Ok it's was generic super fight and Bats fight with the kidnappers was better than his Superman fight. But it shows a real lack of understanding of what makes these heroes appealing.

I thought the first half of the 78 Superman movie was the best up till Luthor appeared then it went downhill for me. Superman Returns was a really interesting movie, but only appealed to comic fans.also it was a bit slow.

Kid said...

It's a tough one, McS. I'll probably go for the Ditko cover, but the Ross one is tempting. Thanks for the link, I'll take a look.

******

Yeah, they got the pacing of Superman Returns wrong, Phil. Also, Brandon Routh didn't quite cut it - too much of a Christopher Reeve impersonation, but not quite good enough. Although I liked the first half of Superman the Movie ('78), I thought it really took off in the second half.

Colin Jones said...

Tilda Swinton is playing the Ancient One in the Dr. Strange film and didn't she play Bob Dylan in a recent film so this will her second time in a male role !! And Baron Mordo is black in the new film but changing a character's race seems to happen regularly now - from white to black of course, if it happened the other way around there'd be total uproar.

Kid said...

It's PC pish, CJ. I (and others) want to see the characters the way they were in the comics I grew up reading. Why can't movie-makers understand that?

Colin Jones said...

Probably because they aren't making the movies for us,Kid - a couple of weeks ago Radio 4's The Film Programme was reviewing Captain America: Civil War and the presenter, Antonia Quirke, said "The billionaire inventor Tony Stark was obviously inspired by Elon Musk" - I was gobsmacked, she didn't even know Tony Stark had been a comic-book character for 50 years !! The modern films are made for audiences that have no connection to the comics and don't care or even know when fundamental changes are made to the characters.

Kid said...

Yes, but that being the case, these audiences aren't going to bother if the Ancient One is Asian, or Baron Mordo is white, so the movie-makers could keep general audiences AND comicbook readers equally happy. It's really not too hard. Is a non-comicbook viewer going to think Dr. Strange is a better film because the Ancient One is a woman? Doubt it. It just shows how pointless some of these changes can be.

Paul McScotty- Muir said...

Phils comments on the Ancient One and Wong are well observed (wasn't aware of Wong) and spot on. I wasn't aware of Wong in the film .

I have to say I do like Tilda Swinton (who is not Scottish a is being reported in US press she was born in England, she is half Scots and lives up here with her hubby and Kids) as an actress but I think an old male and especially an Asian ancient one is far more in keeping with the mysticism of Dr Strange (and the role should have gone to an Asian person even if female for many reasons imho mostly as its just right for the character). Saying that I wont die in a ditch over it I am more annoyed that she (as good an actress as she is) is being touted to play my ultimate hero, David Bowie ( a role that is perfect for Eddie Redmayne) in a forthcoming Hollywood biopic (arghhhhh) its one thing to look like the androgynous young Bowie (she is herself very androgynous and does look a bit like Bowie) but come on playing a bloke in a full film (the Dylan role was a bit different in some ways)!

In general I do not have a lot of issues with minor changes to comic book characters/ situations when moving it to the bi screen such as costumes being toned down (i.e the X-Men) and minor character changes but like you I see no reason to change the premise for the sake of change - a good PC change to me would be to change Luke Cage from his 70s costume and attitude (a bit stereotypical) etc. SAYING THT im looking forward to Dr Strange it looks great

Kid said...

Some changes are inevitable, McS, and can be for the better. Like you say, the change to the X-Men's costumes I didn't mind, because what works for a drawing in a comic can sometimes look a bit silly if transferred directly to live-action. Although I really enjoyed the X-Men movies, my main beef was with the departure from X-Men history as portrayed in the comics; I think they could have found some way to incorporate the sequential history of the original X-Men while doing a movie about the newer team.

Another change I didn't mind was the updating from Vietnam to Afghanistan in the first Iron Man movie. That made sense - the only other way to do it would be to have the movie set in the '60s and that would mean Iron Man wasn't a contemporary character.

So some changes I can live with, but some are just utterly pointless. Wonder if Steve Ditko is going to profit from the Dr. Strange movie. Apparently, the makers of the first Spidey movie offered him a million dollars (just as a sort of 'thank you'), but he knocked it back.

Paul McScotty- Muir said...

Wow I wasn't aware of that about Ditko what a diddy lol

Kid said...

Yeah - but, nevertheless, may his amulet never tickle. (A million dollars - Gasp!)

Colin Jones said...

Paul says Luke Cage should be updated from his '70s look - well, in the comics he now has a bald head and looks like a total badass muthaf*cka...so he still looks like a stereotype.

Kid said...

Perhaps he just meant the costume should be updated, and the '70s way in which he spoke, CJ. Idris Elba would make a good Power Man.

Phil said...

Speaking of changes,does it bug anyone that Iron Man's secret identity is known? He's not the Fantastic Four. He's not an explorer. He's a " crime fighter" and he's a huge target right in New York. I recall one issue of Iron Man when he didn't turn up for a senate hearing and those froze his bank accounts and closed his factories. I guess in the movie world he doesn't fight crime? Has no enemies ? Know what I mean that being an unmasked super hero is a bad idea?

Kid said...

Civil War is the kind of idea that editors should have said "H'mm, that's interesting" at the proposal stage, but then rejected on the grounds that it would require too many heroes acting out of character. And what hero would trust corruptible politicians with their secret identity, or want it on record when computers are hackable. The whole idea is preposterous. Let's hope the movie handles it in a better way. Iron Man, having already rejected the secret identity concept (in the first movie) doesn't have any more to lose than he had already (which, admittedly, was a lot), but the others are laying themselves wide open to attacks on their friends and family, as well as themselves. Just doesn't add up.

Phil said...

My last comment on casting is the first pics have come out for Scarlett Johansson in an adaptation of Japanese anime Ghost in the Shell, she plays Motoko Kusanagi.
my head hurts.

Kid said...

Tilda will be kicking herself for missing out on that part.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...