Hot Toys Justice League Superman

[Ppk487]

Justice league is doing great in China, so hopefully hot toys makes more figures

I don’t think they would cancel the rest of the line. I expect to see all 7 figures released eventually. Possibly even Deathstroke.

 

[SilverStar17]

And that's great man. If you loved these films than awesome. Hell, quite a number of my favorite films were torn apart by critics.

I just am addressing the people that thought they should have stuck to the path set forth in the early films for the sake of tonal consistency, even though it was clear that audiences and critics just weren't digging it.

No I get that. Which is I was merely also pointing out the inconsistencies of the criticisms from a lot of critics and audiences alike; mostly critics though. In the sense that if they despised the tone of films that preceded JL, why their main reason for now bashing JL is for it not being enough like them.

I only stated my sentiments towards the films because you stated yours.

I don’t think they would cancel the rest of the line. I expect to see all 7 figures released eventually. Possibly even Deathstroke.

Deathstroke would be a no. I'm 99% sure of that.

As for the rest of the JL figures, I don't think they'll get canceled. They wouldn't make 3/4 of the team and then just abruptly stop. Especially when they still have yet to announce Superman and Batman. They won't pass up an opportunity to at least make another Batman.

Then again, they still have yet to put the entire team from GotG2 up for PO.

 

[meanstreak]

I would love for a Deathstroke but we will probably have to wait for that one. Hopefully they don't waste him and actually show him in a future film.

I'm still holding out hope for a new Superman sculpt on the JL release. If not, I'll pass on him too.

 

[Jaymas]

No I get that. Which is I was merely also pointing out the inconsistencies of the criticisms from a lot of critics and audiences alike; mostly critics though. In the sense that if they despised the tone of films that preceded JL, why their main reason for now bashing JL is for it not being enough like them.

I think "tone" is an oversimplification, and a lot of people don't completely understand why they may like or not like something. That's why franchises are better served by those with both a strong visions AND a good understanding of storytelling and craft in general. You can rarely really "listen" to the critics and fans specifically; but rather studios need to filter such things through some honest self criticism of their craft. The oversimplification of things like "tone" is why studios and movie makers reject ideas they think "have proven not to work" when things fail, as they can't figure out that they failed not because of "tone" or some other generality, but because of ways it did not do those things well.

The problem with the DCEU wasn't that they were dark and gritty, it was the characters themselves failed in places to embody the essence of who those characters have largely been and there were some basic plot and story flaws to boot. A more "real world" Superman is a great idea and I don't think you would have heard the complaints about the desaturated color in Man of Steel as much as you did if Superman was shown a bit more to BE the hopeful character exposition and dialogue just said he was. It wasn't written and directed in a way to SHOW us the "hope" so people over simplify and latch on to the problem of the "tone".

To me the issues were with basic story, motives and character issues. One of my biggest disappointments with MoS was that it had so much potential to be amazing but it all fell apart in the last act (even though the action was amazing). See, it was a story issue, not in terms of the basic pitch or outline, but in the details executing strong characters beyond just creating some awesome iconic superhero images and visuals. The movie began with some incredible scifi themes with some truly biblical potential ramifications. The idea that Kryptonians were all grown in testubes and Kal-El was the first natural born Kryptonian in ages was a brilliant take on the moral degradation of Krypton which contributed to its demise, and Jor-El a visionary leader for a better way. But where did that go? what did that set up? It just turned into a MacGuffin for Zod to try and find the "codex" embedded in Kal-El as a catalyst for a battle without doing much else at all or providing a way for Superman to carry on the legacy of hope for a better world for earth. Superman says, "Krypton had its chance", but what should Earth do with its chance? What values did superman demonstrate, other than a conflict over self preservation, and who wins out between "new" krypton and earth, did Superman demonstrate to show that the destructive inhumane ways of Krypton could not continue on earth?

Lex Luthor really would have been a valuable character to have in MoS because it's a character that could have partnered with Zod and latched onto wanting to control things the way Krypton did through top down rule; to tap into the ways we as human beings could potentially head down the same destructive path. Then Superman could have represented an alternative for earth before it is too late like it was for Jor-El and Krypton. The enemy needed to be shown to be us as much as the Krptonians. Evil isn't as simple as us verse them; Krypton destroyed itself, and we have that same potential if we are not careful. Obviously there would be a lot to work out on how that can be plotted and scripted, but those are great themes to explore they just left on the table without developing them or following them into the middle and last act. I am not saying they had to do it the way I just described, but something to pick up the themes they start with an actucally do something substantive with them. I feel like some people want to give the movie credit for mentioning such themes, but they really did nothing with them and didn't really say anything other than, hey, 'here are some 'deep' gritty themes. So from the flirting with those themes we get "tone"; some people over simplify and say, the tone didn't work. I can see why the say that, but I think it's because they didn't successfully work the tone in such a way to really deal with the themes they introduced in a complete way and didn't show how Superman overcomes the dark gritty hard realities that threaten us, threaten creation itself, and becomes a beacon of light in a dark gritty world; other than just SAY that he is with some dialogue from other characters here or there.

MoS and BvS flirt with some deep and complex themes. I think many over simplify and blame the "tone" of these themes for the problem. But I think the real problem is that story wise the flirting (to continue that metaphor) never consummated into anything which produced the kind of story wrestling with such themes deserve. Justice League then is just an outright retreat "fixing" the so called "tone" problem, but giving nothing of substance either with an over simplified plot without any real weight to it. It just chickened out never understanding what "went wrong" to begin with and "fixed" all the wrong things.

To sum up, if they handled the tone they used in MoS and BvS better, no one would have complained about tone. As movie and story telling professionals they should have understood what the complaint of "tone" was really about. But Hollywood is filled with more executives than artist so I think a lot of the time they don't know why things might work or not, they just want a big return on their money and panic when they don't get what they think they should out of something.

 

[Popnfresh98]

According to Fabian Wagner, the original cinematographer before Whedon stepped in, there WAS a black suit!

In an email interview with Inverse, Wagner says scenes with Superman wearing his black suit were removed in the final cut.

“There were scenes shot,” Wagner said. “It’s a cool looking costume. Sadly, we didn’t see that either in the final cut.”

Dang, I would have picked up a HT of that without any doubt. Too bad the potential was wasted in so many ways.

 

[snakeeyes171]

We will never see that suit now

 

[Johnny Utah]

Whedon can go **** himself for eternity.

 

[Futurion]

As for the rest of the JL figures, I don't think they'll get canceled. They wouldn't make 3/4 of the team and then just abruptly stop.

Rogue One, anyone?

 

[sj2106]

According to Fabian Wagner, the original cinematographer before Whedon stepped in, there WAS a black suit!



Dang, I would have picked up a HT of that without any doubt. Too bad the potential was wasted in so many ways.

Wow how dumb are WB to have allowed that to get cut. Would have pleased so many and made them more money through merchandise.

 

[WhoaItsJBot]

Rogue One, anyone?

Forgettable throwaway Rogue One characters aren't the same as big DC characters. Probably won't get villains but the main team will be there. Hopefully Superman is up next.

 

[Groovy34]

Did they CGI his mustache [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SilverStar17]

Forgettable throwaway Rogue One characters aren't the same as big DC characters. Probably won't get villains but the main team will be there. Hopefully Superman is up next.

 

[abake]

I'm terribly sorry that I'm this late to the discussion, but it's nice to see a well thought out argument instead of the usual memes and GIFs, so I'll indulge myself with some ideas...

That was the funniest sentence I have ever read.



it tried, it wanted to deal with those themes sure, but MoS and BvS delt with those themes on such a shallow level mainly trying to convey the ideas through exposition and visual spectacle. For instance we are told over and over in MoS that Superman stands for hope, but the character doesn't show us any hope. Or when Faora tells Superman, "The fact that you possess a sense of morality, and we do not, gives us an evolutionary advantage." It's just exposition because we are never shown superman's "morality" and his deep commitment to it. It's a great line, a similar was used by Ursa in Superman II, and though that film was cartoony for sure, the claim was more than just exposition because we saw from Superman why she would say that about him. MoS completely failed at this, which is why though the actor was good and he looked like Superman, most people didn't think he really embodied the character no matter how many times they TELL us he stands for "hope".

Why do you say the character doesn't show us any hope?
All his selfless acts to help and save people throughout his years of wandering aren't a sign of the goodness in him? Of hoping for the best in our nature? To help selflessly?
As for Faora's line, didn't he show his sense of morality by going out of his way to help innocent bystanders and even the military as best he could during the battle in Smallville, in detriment of his fighting position against his fellow Kryptonians?
That is not exposition...

As for character motivations in BvS, again the most childish motivations were given to the characters. Bruce Wayne is a fearful Xenophobe which leads him to want to murder Superman even if there is a 1% chance he might be bad, which can apparently be undone even after having committed himself insanely to the cause in just two seconds once he finds out Superman has a mommy and their mothers share the same name. WTF? I am not sure how this is an "excellently rendered motivation". Batman goes from murdering rampage to besties in two seconds. Utterly ridiculous. I actually laughed out loud in the theater when this happened. It's not Ben Aflleck's fault, he performed it the best he could, it just wasn't believable writing at all. Sure, the potential was there, it could be a story about Batman going unhinged from PTSD after the events of Man of Steel, that would be deep and then about him needing a conflict with Superman who demonstrates himself to truly be good to snap him out of it. Again, I think they may have tried to tell that story, but the execution of it was awful, though beautiful visually to look at. I feel like the apologist for BvS must just get sucked into the beautiful cinematography and the dark look of the film which mentions deep complex topics and somehow thinks that it actually deals with those topics in a intelligible way. I just don't get it.

To me it was pretty clear that Batman/Wayne was suffering from PTSD, not just from the events at Metropolis, but also Robin's death. He has become a zealot, an extremist. That is made very clear throughout the movie through his actions and methods, and Alfred's disapproval of them. He clearly dehumanizes his enemies/victims, which is clearly demonstrated by the way he brands them.
And he does the same with Superman, but once he is made to see the humanity of Superman, he can't just kill him. He sees him as a human being, not an enemy he has to destroy, and that finally disarms him.
But I do agree it's not the strongest scene and it could've been done better. Still, it's not ridiculous by far.

sigh... maybe visually, but the execution of the story is typical Hollywood crap.



"You keep using that word (literary), I don't think it means what you think it means." – Inigo Montoya


Yeah... again not sure it did. Why did the world (or even part of the world) mourn Superman? I like the idea that the world would be conflicted about the existence of Superman, but they never made the case between MoS and BvS for him to contrast the fear of him. Any feelings of the "goodness" of Superman we bring with us out of our familiarity with the character over all, but it's never shown on film for THIS Superman. So the weight of losing Superman isn't really there, though the movie TELLS you its there. The same is true with Batman who made a 180 when it comes to his position on Superman, what really and realistically changed his mind so that he now wants to put a team together in honor of Superman? Again, I get what they were trying to do, but I am not giving them credit for trying when they arn't actually able to do it.

Why wouldn't the world mourn Superman?
Throughout the movie, but especially in the news montage, we're shown the good deeds of Superman: he saves a family (and probably hundreds more) from a flood, he saves some cosmonauts from a huge explosion, he saves an entire ship caught in the ice, etc, etc... We also see the reverence of the Mexican families after he saves the girl from the fire. Of course his good side, his heroic side, is shown. As well as the conflict that his presence creates. It's very well done, actually.
As for Batman's change of mind, well, he saw Superman sacrifice his life to save mankind, even though a lot of them didn't like him, and two were actually trying to kill him... He saw the true hero Superman was, which brought home the error of his (Batman's) ways home in a brutal manner.
How is that unclear or farfetched?

Sadly this is true, and they ate through a bunch of wonderful comic material (like Millers Dark Knight, and the Death and Return of Superman) that it will be a long long time if ever until we can get a decent adaptation or interpretation of those things on film again. It's a lost opportunity.



A counter point would have been nice. I give them credit for trying to make BvS a counter point to MoS, I thought that was the right idea, just poorly executed. My hope for Justice League was for them to try it again and get it right, and in doing so they could even redeem the earlier "chapters" of the previous movies (there was some good stuff there just a lot of holes). I think the execs got scared because the plan to do that didn't work like they hoped in BvS so they chickened out and tried to pivot the themes of the series rather than writing a satisfactory conclusion to the themes they already started. I think in the end they made more of mess trying to "fix" it. the thing is, you have to understand what needs fixed and what doesn't and executives rarely have a clue.

I know I have been hard on the DCEU here. I am not a hater. I was rooting for it. I want it to do well. I think there was some good things in all the movies. But none of it qualifies as some sort of movie or literary greatness of any sort.

I agree with you on the Studio chickening out, that's as clear as day. I disagree on your assessment of the earlier films as poorly executed. They do have their issues, but nowhere near as glaring as most people seem to think IMHO.

 

[SilverStar17]

Good posts, Jaymas and abake.

Your post was nicely thought out and also quite verbose, so I was trying to find a good way to put my sentiments towards the films into words. I'd use that one Stormtrooper GIF with them getting hit by the door of words, but I couldn't find it.

However, abake's post pretty nicely summarizes my sentiments as well towards both MoS and BvS, as far as what I saw and gleaned from them. To me, even though Batman had more screen time in BvS and the darker tone was more representative of a Batman film, it was Superman's idealism and unwavering hope in the face of extreme adversity that was intended to carry the film; to be the light in the dark, so to speak for both Batman and actually WW. In Superman, WW saw Steve Trevor, when she realized in the WW film that humanity is worth saving through Steve Trevor's actions out of his love for her. In BvS, it was Superman who continued to believe that mankind is worth helping as a result of his love for Lois and to him, she vicariously represented all the people who do believe in and see him as an inspiration; similar to how Steve Trevor to WW represented the good that mankind has to offer. So in a way, it was a Superman film in that sense.

So while you feel that the themes in the films weren't explored as deeply as they could have been, I actually feel they were explored quite deeply to the point where it's difficult for me to transfer into words what I saw and gleaned from the films. Even though I enjoy Civil War, I feel both BvS and Civil War intended to explore the same themes, but CW did it kind of lazily while BvS went pretty deep with it. I really like all these characters in both universes, some more than others, so when it comes to superhero films for me, I really enjoy them being complex and thought provoking by going deep with the themes explored.

However, I still totally agree about WB having knee jerk reactions and going about this whole thing haphazardly.

 

[Jaymas]

I'm terribly sorry that I'm this late to the discussion, but it's nice to see a well thought out argument instead of the usual memes and GIFs, so I'll indulge myself with some ideas...

Yeah, I am not into the Marvel DC feud just trying to have honest conversation. thanks.

Why do you say the character doesn't show us any hope?
All his selfless acts to help and save people throughout his years of wandering aren't a sign of the goodness in him? Of hoping for the best in our nature? To help selflessly?

Those help, but it was a montage to show a journey he hadn't really completely reconciled yet; still discovering who he was. For instance, he trashed that jerks truck in the first act, not that I blame him, he is till working things out. I love that idea, but if they were going to do that, to explore his own questioning about being hope, then they needed to show him finally embracing it a conclusive way. Unfortunately this story got lost and obfuscated by a finale where they wanted Superman to deal with the "impossible choice" theme when he kills Zod. So in the end hope to live beyond the violence we see as impossible to avoid is never embraced. Superman just lives into the same old drum beat of our world that we need to kill or be killed.

As for Faora's line, didn't he show his sense of morality by going out of his way to help innocent bystanders and even the military as best he could during the battle in Smallville, in detriment of his fighting position against his fellow Kryptonians?
That is not exposition...

I guess I just didn't see enough of that to be convinced that Faora would have picked up on it enough to understand that this is a defining characteristic of Superman.

To me it was pretty clear that Batman/Wayne was suffering from PTSD, not just from the events at Metropolis, but also Robin's death. He has become a zealot, an extremist. That is made very clear throughout the movie through his actions and methods, and Alfred's disapproval of them. He clearly dehumanizes his enemies/victims, which is clearly demonstrated by the way he brands them.
And he does the same with Superman, but once he is made to see the humanity of Superman, he can't just kill him. He sees him as a human being, not an enemy he has to destroy, and that finally disarms him.
But I do agree it's not the strongest scene and it could've been done better. Still, it's not ridiculous by far.

Yeah, I think the failure to tell a story about his PTSD is not in showing the trauma he has endured, they did a good job of that in the opening sceen, but what gets him "over" it. Recognizing Superman's humanity is one thing, but he failed to ever really deal with his own destructive actions and how he became what he feared (and not in the cool Batman way he uses to impart fear on evil doers; he actually became part of the problem of contributing to the evil around him). Again, it is an awesome beat and a great journey to explore for the character. But like Superman in MoS they never really complete the journey. As I said before it's like they said, 'here's a cool gitty theme to include' but they don't really run with it and in the end it just becomes an excuse for them to fight rather than a true character arc.

Why wouldn't the world mourn Superman?
Throughout the movie, but especially in the news montage, we're shown the good deeds of Superman: he saves a family (and probably hundreds more) from a flood, he saves some cosmonauts from a huge explosion, he saves an entire ship caught in the ice, etc, etc... We also see the reverence of the Mexican families after he saves the girl from the fire. Of course his good side, his heroic side, is shown. As well as the conflict that his presence creates. It's very well done, actually.

A montage is never going to be able to show the hope they said he represents alone if it doesn't come through in the core of the story too. Superman was still ambiguous about maybe having to kill Batman to save his mom when he confronted Batman. And in beginning of the film there is still ambiguity for Superman about why he does what he does as he saves Lois but not sure why else he is doing all of this. Again, a cool idea to play with, but the journey should have been completed in MoS. Superman never got to really completely prove himself to the world as the embodiment of hope. The movie makes a great case against him and why people are leery of him, but doesn't make as strong a case for him. Superman isn't hope, he might be a nice guy, but no one is really sure. That's not the same as hope.

As for Batman's change of mind, well, he saw Superman sacrifice his life to save mankind, even though a lot of them didn't like him, and two were actually trying to kill him... He saw the true hero Superman was, which brought home the error of his (Batman's) ways home in a brutal manner.
How is that unclear or farfetched?

Well for one, it felt contrived. After seeing how bad ass Wonder Woman was, she could have used the spear against Doomsday without having to worry about being weekend by the kryptonite. Or it might have been more impactful to see her and batman try to use the spear and fail first only have Superman directly save them directly before he dies uses it against Doomsday himself. But while I don't want to downplay how brave it is to lay down one's life for others, it's also something that I think Superman should transcend. The hope embodied in the character of Superman should be bigger than that of just soldiers that die in battle for others. Again, not that this isn't good or heroic, but Superman should be that and more, he is not just a soldier in the worlds machine of competitive violence. I can see Superman making such a sacrifice, but the harder sacrifice sometimes is not if we will die for others, but if we will live for them first. Superman never decided he would, he was still unsure, his own mother says the world doesn't owe him anything and he just didn't know. Batman was willing to die too, he puts his life on the line all the time, he did confronting the greatest power in the world in Superman believing him to be dangerous. Batman represents most of us, especially when we allow fear to consume us and get the best of us. We will die to protect ourselves, but we often don't know how to live life and really give of ourselves. This should have been the contrast. Batman consumed with fear and anxiety over protecting verses Superman's commitment to living and doing good. Without that Superman really doesn't do anything in his sacrifice that Batman wouldn't have done if he could have, or in fact already tried to do when thought Superman, not Doomsday, was the greatest threat in the world.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you on the Studio chickening out, that's as clear as day.

yup, clearly they did.

So while you feel that the themes in the films weren't explored as deeply as they could have been, I actually feel they were explored quite deeply to the point where it's difficult for me to transfer into words what I saw and gleaned from the films. Even though I enjoy Civil War, I feel both BvS and Civil War intended to explore the same themes, but CW did it kind of lazily while BvS went pretty deep with it. I really like all these characters in both universes, some more than others, so when it comes to superhero films for me, I really enjoy them being complex and thought provoking by going deep with the themes explored.

That's interesting, I actually think CW did a better job of clearly defining characters motives in the conflict (it helped they had multiple films to set this up though). I felt the conflict between Batman and Superman felt a bit contrived. then they try to add that it was all really Lex Luthor pulling the strings. But besides the fact that such a plan was ridiculously complex with zero room for error it still didn't really account for conveying clear motivation for the Bats and Sups. I think the difference in the films is the conflict in CW is very specific and therefor easier to follow the internal logic of the story. I think BvS tries to tackle such things in a bigger, vaguer, messier way; they were taking large themes but painting them with such a broad brush it was harder find the characters motivations and track the story as well. BvS does a better job of giving us the impression just how messy and dark the world can be and how hard it is to see the light in the darkness; but the contrast between Batman and Superman should be greater than the contrast between Cap and Iron man. By the way, the most hopeful character in CW was Black Panther who was the only one to find any kind of real hope in the end.

However, I still totally agree about WB having knee jerk reactions and going about this whole thing haphazardly.

Yup, that's the biggest tragedy here to me and why things don't look very promising for the DCEU; but who knows.

 

[halbert]

Can't wait to get this figure!

 

[**16k**]

Can't wait to get this figure!

If the movie is any indication, he'll be the last, after Cyborg.

 

[JorjeCroft]

I wonder if there is any chances for SUPERMAN REBORN version

 

[abake]

Yeah, I am not into the Marvel DC feud just trying to have honest conversation. thanks.



Those help, but it was a montage to show a journey he hadn't really completely reconciled yet; still discovering who he was. For instance, he trashed that jerks truck in the first act, not that I blame him, he is till working things out. I love that idea, but if they were going to do that, to explore his own questioning about being hope, then they needed to show him finally embracing it a conclusive way. Unfortunately this story got lost and obfuscated by a finale where they wanted Superman to deal with the "impossible choice" theme when he kills Zod. So in the end hope to live beyond the violence we see as impossible to avoid is never embraced. Superman just lives into the same old drum beat of our world that we need to kill or be killed.



I guess I just didn't see enough of that to be convinced that Faora would have picked up on it enough to understand that this is a defining characteristic of Superman.



Yeah, I think the failure to tell a story about his PTSD is not in showing the trauma he has endured, they did a good job of that in the opening sceen, but what gets him "over" it. Recognizing Superman's humanity is one thing, but he failed to ever really deal with his own destructive actions and how he became what he feared (and not in the cool Batman way he uses to impart fear on evil doers; he actually became part of the problem of contributing to the evil around him). Again, it is an awesome beat and a great journey to explore for the character. But like Superman in MoS they never really complete the journey. As I said before it's like they said, 'here's a cool gitty theme to include' but they don't really run with it and in the end it just becomes an excuse for them to fight rather than a true character arc.





A montage is never going to be able to show the hope they said he represents alone if it doesn't come through in the core of the story too. Superman was still ambiguous about maybe having to kill Batman to save his mom when he confronted Batman. And in beginning of the film there is still ambiguity for Superman about why he does what he does as he saves Lois but not sure why else he is doing all of this. Again, a cool idea to play with, but the journey should have been completed in MoS. Superman never got to really completely prove himself to the world as the embodiment of hope. The movie makes a great case against him and why people are leery of him, but doesn't make as strong a case for him. Superman isn't hope, he might be a nice guy, but no one is really sure. That's not the same as hope.




Well for one, it felt contrived. After seeing how bad ass Wonder Woman was, she could have used the spear against Doomsday without having to worry about being weekend by the kryptonite. Or it might have been more impactful to see her and batman try to use the spear and fail first only have Superman directly save them directly before he dies uses it against Doomsday himself. But while I don't want to downplay how brave it is to lay down one's life for others, it's also something that I think Superman should transcend. The hope embodied in the character of Superman should be bigger than that of just soldiers that die in battle for others. Again, not that this isn't good or heroic, but Superman should be that and more, he is not just a soldier in the worlds machine of competitive violence. I can see Superman making such a sacrifice, but the harder sacrifice sometimes is not if we will die for others, but if we will live for them first. Superman never decided he would, he was still unsure, his own mother says the world doesn't owe him anything and he just didn't know. Batman was willing to die too, he puts his life on the line all the time, he did confronting the greatest power in the world in Superman believing him to be dangerous. Batman represents most of us, especially when we allow fear to consume us and get the best of us. We will die to protect ourselves, but we often don't know how to live life and really give of ourselves. This should have been the contrast. Batman consumed with fear and anxiety over protecting verses Superman's commitment to living and doing good. Without that Superman really doesn't do anything in his sacrifice that Batman wouldn't have done if he could have, or in fact already tried to do when thought Superman, not Doomsday, was the greatest threat in the world.



yup, clearly they did.



That's interesting, I actually think CW did a better job of clearly defining characters motives in the conflict (it helped they had multiple films to set this up though). I felt the conflict between Batman and Superman felt a bit contrived. then they try to add that it was all really Lex Luthor pulling the strings. But besides the fact that such a plan was ridiculously complex with zero room for error it still didn't really account for conveying clear motivation for the Bats and Sups. I think the difference in the films is the conflict in CW is very specific and therefor easier to follow the internal logic of the story. I think BvS tries to tackle such things in a bigger, vaguer, messier way; they were taking large themes but painting them with such a broad brush it was harder find the characters motivations and track the story as well. BvS does a better job of giving us the impression just how messy and dark the world can be and how hard it is to see the light in the darkness; but the contrast between Batman and Superman should be greater than the contrast between Cap and Iron man. By the way, the most hopeful character in CW was Black Panther who was the only one to find any kind of real hope in the end.



Yup, that's the biggest tragedy here to me and why things don't look very promising for the DCEU; but who knows.

Good discussion, thanks!

I'll just go back to CW, where I had a hard time accepting Iron Man and the Cap's conflict. For two people who had known each other for long, and counted on each other for so long, they just seemed stupidly stubborn in their views. Kind of a reverse of your feelings towards Batman's change of heart, which you (and many others) feel was too quick and too easy, for me the conflict in CW was too gratuitous.

But anyway, I look forward to seeing more pics of this Superman.

 

[Jaymas]

Good discussion, thanks!

Thank's I appreciated it too. thanks for the thoughtfulness of your contributions.

I'll just go back to CW, where I had a hard time accepting Iron Man and the Cap's conflict. For two people who had known each other for long, and counted on each other for so long, they just seemed stupidly stubborn in their views. Kind of a reverse of your feelings towards Batman's change of heart, which you (and many others) feel was too quick and too easy, for me the conflict in CW was too gratuitous.

That's interesting, clearly the relationship is different between the misunderstanding of two stranger and friends in conflict. Of course CW is appropriately named "civil war"; a story of brother against brother. There certainly is stubbornness there, but tragically civil wars of all sorts do happen all the time. We don't want to believe it, but it happens and I think it mirrors the world. I certainly see it in how polarized "brothers" of where I am from have become as each side digs its heels in on how "right" their position is, and we can't help but to think in terms of "sides" the gulf between "brothers" just gets wider and wider. While the "politics" of the CW movie were certainly comic bookish it's not really a far fetched parable of what is happening to us in America and other places in the world too. But the themes with the relationship between Batman and Superman are just as real and tragic in the fear of the "alien" and stranger and how easy it is to let the need to protect ourselves skew and blind our perspective so that we think we are fighting for justice when we really arn't. Both movies reflect similar but also distinct and real issues in our world.

But anyway, I look forward to seeing more pics of this Superman.

Me too, even though I don't think I will get it. While I am critical of the DCEU I don't completely hate it, I do appreciate parts of it and have bought the movies. But I also don't LOVE them (except for Wonder Woman). And when it comes to collectibles that cost this much it's hard to buy something if it doesn't represent something you love. But, I do think visually they nailed the way these characters look so as a fan of the characters in general I am tempted to pick up both Superman and Batman. I went to see Justice League opening day mainly with collecting in mind; otherwise I wouldn't have been in a hurry to see it. I wanted the movie to make me want to get these figures, to have figures which say how much I like these versions of the characters. But, that didn't happen.

JL Wonder Woman is the only figure I have committed to getting and have on pre-order from the DCEU. I am only very slightly tempted to get Superman and Batman to pose WITH Wonder Woman to have the "Trinity" and core of the JL to contrast my Avengers on the other side of my office. But, I think it is more likely that my Trinity will be made up of milestone movie representations of this Wonder Woman with my Reeve Superman and Keaton Batman. Still, I can't help peaking over here to see how the JL Superman looks, and peak at the JL Batman too (though in retrospect if I would have gotten any DCEU Batman I think I would have preferred the SS version).