Hot Toys Justice League Superman

[SilverStar17]

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.

Yeah, I can see what you mean regarding CW. And as you mentioned, I think the fact that it already had multiple films leading up to the conflict aided in it being able to be an easier story to follow superficially. However, at the same time, both conflicts were set in motion by the same catalyst, which was catastrophic damage on some level. Obviously in BvS, it was Superman's and Zod's battle in Metropolis. In CW, it was pretty much every film from the first Avengers and beyond. Then Scarlet Witch's mishap was the straw that broke the camel's back. It's not really different in the way of which you say Luthor was pulling the strings for Superman and Batman, because in CW, Zemo was pretty much the Luthor of CW and the one that was stoking the flames between the two characters at odds, while at the same time, having their own reasons to be at odds. Then, to add to the mix, throw in Winter Soldier. So when you think about it, BvS really only had two plots: the growing animosity between Batman and Superman and Luthor behind the scenes fueling it, while in Civil War, you had three: the animosity between Iron Man and Captain America, Zemo behind the scenes fueling it, and then Winter Soldier.

The difference is though that in the MCU, both Captain America and Iron Man are already established characters within the universe. In BvS, Superman is just coming off of his debut outing and is optimistic that he's going to help and that everyone is going to embrace him with open arms after him saving the planet, but realizes that not everything in the world is black and white. That good and bad aren't always easily discernible and that sometimes, you have to simply do the thing that simply has less negative ramifications than more. If right and wrong was always clear cut, then there wouldn't be such a thing as ethics because everything right and wrong is easily discernible, so the choice would always be easy. I like to think BvS is more less for Superman the equivalent of what Captain America was going through in TWS. Or, you could think of Superman as being the equivalent of Luke in ESB and RotJ, in the sense where he was full of hope but was learning on how exactly to discern the good from the bad, and in the face of adversity, refused to give in/up, whereas Batman was the Darth Vader who did give in, but the good within him was rekindled.

I personally preferred BvS though because I'm biased to DC's characters for one, but I just felt the way the same themes that were explored in CW, were deeper in BvS. In other words, I prefer my films to be more complex than straight forward, for my taste. Where the answers are indeed there, but it requires you to go beneath the surface and look for the clues, rather than have them spelled out for you. For instance, the Day of the Dead scene in BvS I thought was awesome because Snyder himself even confirmed that after Superman saved the young girl and all of the festival participants reached out to touch him in reverence, as if he was a tangible God, Snyder confirmed that actually the imagery in that scene with all of the participants wearing skull masks and reaching up towards Superman to touch him, as if almost pulling him down, was meant to represent the guilt that still haunted Superman and weighted him down regarding all the lives lost in his battle with Zod in Metropolis; that he couldn't save everybody.

And I would agree that BP at the end of CW was really the one who "won", as he was able to overcome his demons and find peace at the end. Whereas at the end of BvS, it was sort of all three characters (Superman, Batman and WW) who did. At least to me. The ending of BvS to me was more hopeful than the ending of CW, as other than BP finding peace and now being hopeful again, Captain America and Iron Man was basically just an "uh, sorry, bro."

DCEU and MCU sort of did it in reverse: Superman and Batman distrusted each other because they really didn't know one another, and only judged one another by what they saw on the surface and read in the media (similar to today with a lot of things). However, they eventually realized that they do indeed fight for the same cause. Whereas Iron Man and Captain America distrusted each other because they do know each other, and didn't like the other's style.

I think I'm just rambling now.

 

[Jaymas]

Yeah, I can see what you mean regarding CW. And as you mentioned, I think the fact that it already had multiple films leading up to the conflict aided in it being able to be an easier story to follow superficially. However, at the same time, both conflicts were set in motion by the same catalyst, which was catastrophic damage on some level. Obviously in BvS, it was Superman's and Zod's battle in Metropolis. In CW, it was pretty much every film from the first Avengers and beyond. Then Scarlet Witch's mishap was the straw that broke the camel's back. It's not really different in the way of which you say Luthor was pulling the strings for Superman and Batman, because in CW, Zemo was pretty much the Luthor of CW and the one that was stoking the flames between the two characters at odds, while at the same time, having their own reasons to be at odds. Then, to add to the mix, throw in Winter Soldier. So when you think about it, BvS really only had two plots: the growing animosity between Batman and Superman and Luthor behind the scenes fueling it, while in Civil War, you had three: the animosity between Iron Man and Captain America, Zemo behind the scenes fueling it, and then Winter Soldier.

The difference is though that in the MCU, both Captain America and Iron Man are already established characters within the universe. In BvS, Superman is just coming off of his debut outing and is optimistic that he's going to help and that everyone is going to embrace him with open arms after him saving the planet, but realizes that not everything in the world is black and white. That good and bad aren't always easily discernible and that sometimes, you have to simply do the thing that simply has less negative ramifications than more. If right and wrong was always clear cut, then there wouldn't be such a thing as ethics because everything right and wrong is easily discernible, so the choice would always be easy. I like to think BvS is more less for Superman the equivalent of what Captain America was going through in TWS. Or, you could think of Superman as being the equivalent of Luke in ESB and RotJ, in the sense where he was full of hope but was learning on how exactly to discern the good from the bad, and in the face of adversity, refused to give in/up, whereas Batman was the Darth Vader who did give in, but the good within him was rekindled.

I personally preferred BvS though because I'm biased to DC's characters for one, but I just felt the way the same themes that were explored in CW, were deeper in BvS. In other words, I prefer my films to be more complex than straight forward, for my taste. Where the answers are indeed there, but it requires you to go beneath the surface and look for the clues, rather than have them spelled out for you. For instance, the Day of the Dead scene in BvS I thought was awesome because Snyder himself even confirmed that after Superman saved the young girl and all of the festival participants reached out to touch him in reverence, as if he was a tangible God, Snyder confirmed that actually the imagery in that scene with all of the participants wearing skull masks and reaching up towards Superman to touch him, as if almost pulling him down, was meant to represent the guilt that still haunted Superman and weighted him down regarding all the lives lost in his battle with Zod in Metropolis; that he couldn't save everybody.

And I would agree that BP at the end of CW was really the one who "won", as he was able to overcome his demons and find peace at the end. Whereas at the end of BvS, it was sort of all three characters (Superman, Batman and WW) who did. At least to me. The ending of BvS to me was more hopeful than the ending of CW, as other than BP finding peace and now being hopeful again, Captain America and Iron Man was basically just an "uh, sorry, bro."

DCEU and MCU sort of did it in reverse: Superman and Batman distrusted each other because they really didn't know one another, and only judged one another by what they saw on the surface and read in the media (similar to today with a lot of things). However, they eventually realized that they do indeed fight for the same cause. Whereas Iron Man and Captain America distrusted each other because they do know each other, and didn't like the other's style.

You make a lot of great points SilverStar, thanks. I have enjoyed this conversation. I wish I felt MoS and BvS communicated the things you see as well as you see them. I do see what they were trying to do, and think there was some really good beats, but just don't feel they executed them as well as you think they did. When Whedon came on board to finish up JL I was one of those who thought it would be a good thing in light of Snider needing to step away. But I'll be the first one to admit now that I was wrong. I didn't know he would take out so much of Snyder's vision, I thought he would just add his strength's on to Snyder's. In fairness to myself, I didn't realize that he was there to "fix" anything, just finish things and maybe add a bit more interpersonal dynamics he is famous for bringing. I like what Snyder was trying to do, but I also think there is a lot of fair criticism of how he either missed the mark of what he was trying in a few places or included elements which greatly distracted from what he was trying to do ("Martha!!!"). Regardless this is where a strong studio can help and where weak studios can make things a lot worse. I think WB is showing itself to be real weak with those running the DC movies right now. I actually think the difference between the MoS and BvS films being as controversial among fans as they ended up and the potential to have been embraced more universally as some of the greatest Superhero movies ever is actually very very small. My criticism of those movies is well documented here, and aren't all that unique to what many critics have said (not counting outright haters), but just subtle changes and clarifications here and there would have made a tremendous difference to those movies. They didn't need, and never needed and overhaul, which is why I kept giving the DCEU a chance. Sometimes big time directors can be like great football coaches who sometimes earn the right to be GM too and "buy their own groceries". It sometimes works, but often even great coaches and directors need the accountability of a strong organization and someone that while giving the director or coach a lot of leeway understanding their talents and gifts along with giving them all they need to succeed, but also can step in here and there and occasionally say no and help where that director or coach has a blind spot. The only problem is every organization and executive thinks they know how to do that, but most actually don't; so in those cases they actually drag down good coaches and directors. This happens in sports and Hollywood all the time. So Snyder may have failed to live up to the potential even the critics have of his DC films but I don't think rests all on him. I think it is clear now that the issue is the studio more than anything else. Snyder just did Snyder, he did what they asked him to do and he is good at what he does. I think the movies could have been far better and it wouldn't have taken much to win over most of the other half of fans that were disappointed rather than divide them; but to reach that level you almost always need great collaborators at all, or at least most, levels. Sometimes movies embraced more universally as great are made without it, but rarely.

Oh, on a side note... great point about the similarities of Luthor and Zemo and their incredibly particular plans.

 

[Omega Boost]

i just hope the new superman from hot toys don't come with the cgi mouth piece lmao. Haven't had a cavil superman yet so I'm looking forward to this new one.

 

[Griff WV]

i just hope the new superman from hot toys don't come with the cgi mouth piece lmao. Haven't had a cavil superman yet so I'm looking forward to this new one.

That's the deluxe version, lol.

I'm right there with you, though. I passed on BvS Superman (and wish I hadn't), but I'm hoping this one will be my first DC Films Superman.

 

[jcj77]

So do we have any idea when this might go up for pre-order?

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

 

[**16k**]

So do we have any idea when this might go up for pre-order?

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

Sure, it'll go on PO the day JL 2 is released in theaters

 

[TheBatman]

I think that means "hope".

 

[fiveainone]

Arg. You gave me hope, but it's false. It says the same on Thor and Blade Runner. It's just a generic disclaimer..

 

[JorjeCroft]

I have a feel they are sculpting something really different and special as it took like FOREVER. maybe it will came with a 2 headsculpts

 

[DasMuse]

I can't stop thinking about the potential for this figure. They can wait as long as they want as long as they nail it.

 

[sj2106]

I can't stop thinking about the potential for this figure. They can wait as long as they want as long as they nail it.

With so much to pay for this month, selfishly I hope it doesn't go up before January. Would love if it came with two sculps but not getting my hopes up.

 

[Malgus]

Yeah, I can see what you mean regarding CW. And as you mentioned, I think the fact that it already had multiple films leading up to the conflict aided in it being able to be an easier story to follow superficially. However, at the same time, both conflicts were set in motion by the same catalyst, which was catastrophic damage on some level. Obviously in BvS, it was Superman's and Zod's battle in Metropolis. In CW, it was pretty much every film from the first Avengers and beyond. Then Scarlet Witch's mishap was the straw that broke the camel's back. It's not really different in the way of which you say Luthor was pulling the strings for Superman and Batman, because in CW, Zemo was pretty much the Luthor of CW and the one that was stoking the flames between the two characters at odds, while at the same time, having their own reasons to be at odds. Then, to add to the mix, throw in Winter Soldier. So when you think about it, BvS really only had two plots: the growing animosity between Batman and Superman and Luthor behind the scenes fueling it, while in Civil War, you had three: the animosity between Iron Man and Captain America, Zemo behind the scenes fueling it, and then Winter Soldier.

The difference is though that in the MCU, both Captain America and Iron Man are already established characters within the universe. In BvS, Superman is just coming off of his debut outing and is optimistic that he's going to help and that everyone is going to embrace him with open arms after him saving the planet, but realizes that not everything in the world is black and white. That good and bad aren't always easily discernible and that sometimes, you have to simply do the thing that simply has less negative ramifications than more. If right and wrong was always clear cut, then there wouldn't be such a thing as ethics because everything right and wrong is easily discernible, so the choice would always be easy. I like to think BvS is more less for Superman the equivalent of what Captain America was going through in TWS. Or, you could think of Superman as being the equivalent of Luke in ESB and RotJ, in the sense where he was full of hope but was learning on how exactly to discern the good from the bad, and in the face of adversity, refused to give in/up, whereas Batman was the Darth Vader who did give in, but the good within him was rekindled.

I personally preferred BvS though because I'm biased to DC's characters for one, but I just felt the way the same themes that were explored in CW, were deeper in BvS. In other words, I prefer my films to be more complex than straight forward, for my taste. Where the answers are indeed there, but it requires you to go beneath the surface and look for the clues, rather than have them spelled out for you. For instance, the Day of the Dead scene in BvS I thought was awesome because Snyder himself even confirmed that after Superman saved the young girl and all of the festival participants reached out to touch him in reverence, as if he was a tangible God, Snyder confirmed that actually the imagery in that scene with all of the participants wearing skull masks and reaching up towards Superman to touch him, as if almost pulling him down, was meant to represent the guilt that still haunted Superman and weighted him down regarding all the lives lost in his battle with Zod in Metropolis; that he couldn't save everybody.

And I would agree that BP at the end of CW was really the one who "won", as he was able to overcome his demons and find peace at the end. Whereas at the end of BvS, it was sort of all three characters (Superman, Batman and WW) who did. At least to me. The ending of BvS to me was more hopeful than the ending of CW, as other than BP finding peace and now being hopeful again, Captain America and Iron Man was basically just an "uh, sorry, bro."

DCEU and MCU sort of did it in reverse: Superman and Batman distrusted each other because they really didn't know one another, and only judged one another by what they saw on the surface and read in the media (similar to today with a lot of things). However, they eventually realized that they do indeed fight for the same cause. Whereas Iron Man and Captain America distrusted each other because they do know each other, and didn't like the other's style.

I think I'm just rambling now.

Why would someone sit and type all that? Who will actually sit and read through all that?

 

[abake]

I guess not all of us have short attention syndrome?

 

[TheBatman]

Why would someone sit and type all that? Who will actually sit and read through all that?

People that are so up and up about defending DC?

 

[abake]

Actually, it was a pretty interesting and thoughtful discussion around MCU and DCEU movies, contrasting merits and pitfalls of each franchise.
Surprisingly (and thankfully) free of memes, gifs and snide remarks.

 

[SilverStar17]

Why would someone sit and type all that? Who will actually sit and read through all that?

Apparently not someone who opts to sit and type that ^.

People that are so up and up about defending DC?

People having a discussion and not just typing one liner opinions that have little to no substance that they pass off as "fact" by stating things like it sucks, end of discussion?

 

[sj2106]

I guess not all of us have short attention syndrome?

Lol exactly, it's just a few paragraphs! Does everything have to be reduced to text speak or 140 character tweets these days?

 

[TheBatman]

People having a discussion and not just typing one liner opinions that have little to no substance that they pass off as "fact" by stating things like it sucks, end of discussion?

You definitely got me there. For the record, I did read your post. Good analysis/opinion.

 

[Antihero]

I'd rather read lengthy, constructive critiques over short, destructive one-liners.

 

[SilverStar17]

You definitely got me there. For the record, I did read your post. Good analysis/opinion.

Ha. Thanks.

I'd rather read lengthy, constructive critiques over short, destructive one-liners.

Agreed. Same here.