Superman (July 11th, 2025)

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Will SuperPop be in this too?

How about SuperEx-Girlfriend? She cray-cray.
GIF by WE tv
 
I can't figure out the tone Gunn is going for yet with the character or DC universe...





James Gunn tells the exact same story over and over again - "Island Of Misfit Toys Unite For A Mission/Surrogate Family You Always Needed But Never Wanted"

GOTG3 even had multiple smaller "Misfit Toy" groups within the larger scope of the Guardians as a surrogate family. Peacemaker is often less about Peacemaker and more about the ensemble "group" he has around him. He's at the center, but he's not at the same time.

I just don't get the fandom handwringing here. Gunn only tells one kind of story, but he does it well. He made you all care about a violent PTSD ridden raccoon and a talking tree that only said one thing over and over again. Look at the Superman concept. Clark is an orphan. Raised by "surrogate" parents. You could argue in the Smallville conception, there were times that Lex Luthor was treated like a surrogate brother to Clark. The natural pathway is to form a Justice League, which again, is just another potential Island Of Misfit Toys. The potential here is basically built around the concepts where Gunn has shown pure strength.

From a screenwriting perpective, what does Gunn do well? He can compress exposition without losing an audience. That's huge. That's very very very hard to do at a high level and at speed. Anyone can write a good Hollywood screenplay if you give them 50 years to make a single one. The people who keep getting hired can churn one out at a rate 50 times faster than that. They can also write around a practical budget and understand the limits of the logistics in the other aspects of filmmaking. For example, a good executive , not just a director and writer, can assess that certain scenes are too expensive to film. Or it would be impossible to get the lighting correctly in the specific location/venue. Or how to place certain performers where they can optimize their strengths. Also which sub units on the film can be left alone, and which need to be micromanaged.

Gunn can tell a lot of story in a short amount of running time. He can generate a lot of character backstory without too much dialogue and without too much explaination. Again, this is not easy at all to do. He can squeeze out pretty good performances out of mostly middling performers at times. He understands the audience just want to have a good time and you have to create characters that the audience will care about in multiple ways.

Gunn was hired to create EXACTLY what he has always created. This is not Chubby Checker doing the macarena. It's just The Twist, over and over again.

I just don't see the problem here. It's not like the regular posters here are NOT going to watch the film. If you are going to watch the film anyway, then why not actually give it a real chance? You aren't obligated to like the film. But then again, you aren't obligated to decide the film is unworthy before anyone has actually seen it.
 



James Gunn tells the exact same story over and over again - "Island Of Misfit Toys Unite For A Mission/Surrogate Family You Always Needed But Never Wanted"

GOTG3 even had multiple smaller "Misfit Toy" groups within the larger scope of the Guardians as a surrogate family. Peacemaker is often less about Peacemaker and more about the ensemble "group" he has around him. He's at the center, but he's not at the same time.

I just don't get the fandom handwringing here. Gunn only tells one kind of story, but he does it well. He made you all care about a violent PTSD ridden raccoon and a talking tree that only said one thing over and over again. Look at the Superman concept. Clark is an orphan. Raised by "surrogate" parents. You could argue in the Smallville conception, there were times that Lex Luthor was treated like a surrogate brother to Clark. The natural pathway is to form a Justice League, which again, is just another potential Island Of Misfit Toys. The potential here is basically built around the concepts where Gunn has shown pure strength.

From a screenwriting perpective, what does Gunn do well? He can compress exposition without losing an audience. That's huge. That's very very very hard to do at a high level and at speed. Anyone can write a good Hollywood screenplay if you give them 50 years to make a single one. The people who keep getting hired can churn one out at a rate 50 times faster than that. They can also write around a practical budget and understand the limits of the logistics in the other aspects of filmmaking. For example, a good executive , not just a director and writer, can assess that certain scenes are too expensive to film. Or it would be impossible to get the lighting correctly in the specific location/venue. Or how to place certain performers where they can optimize their strengths. Also which sub units on the film can be left alone, and which need to be micromanaged.

Gunn can tell a lot of story in a short amount of running time. He can generate a lot of character backstory without too much dialogue and without too much explaination. Again, this is not easy at all to do. He can squeeze out pretty good performances out of mostly middling performers at times. He understands the audience just want to have a good time and you have to create characters that the audience will care about in multiple ways.

Gunn was hired to create EXACTLY what he has always created. This is not Chubby Checker doing the macarena. It's just The Twist, over and over again.

I just don't see the problem here. It's not like the regular posters here are NOT going to watch the film. If you are going to watch the film anyway, then why not actually give it a real chance? You aren't obligated to like the film. But then again, you aren't obligated to decide the film is unworthy before anyone has actually seen it.

Those are very good points.

Speaking for myself though, I just think there is a difference between an enhanced maniac raccoon and a super dog. And although I had fun (mostly) watching Gunn's GOTG and Suicide Squad movies, I was never really invested in them, so I didn't care either way. Superman, while not necessarily my favourite hero, is a different story. And I never liked the Super Family stories, least of all the Krypto thing. So all of that makes me really wary of Gunn's take.
Having said that, it sure is a bold move. I'm curious to see how it plays out and I'm looking forward to seeing the first trailer (with very low expectations).
 
Superman, while not necessarily my favourite hero, is a different story.

Let's try this a different way.

The Nolanverse Batman Trilogy was considered a huge success. A lot of people were iffy about the third film and Tom Hardy mumbling non stop, but it was a huge lift for anything Batman in that timeline. But whether the Nolanverse was a success or not, financially or critically, it's always apparent that a new Batman movie is going to come out 3-5 years after the last one of the previous franchise ends. Superman is the same way.

Let's say, as a hypothetical, the Gunn version of Superman bombs. OK, you'll get a new version in five years. Or it's a success financially, and maybe critically, and it can squeeze out a trilogy. In which case you probably have a full decade of Gunn Superman films, then a five year break, and a new Superman overall. The age timeline of a lot of collectors here is somewhere between 40-60 years old. This is an "antiquated" type of forum and discussion board format.

If someone here is in their 60s or close to it, yeah, I can see the complication. A lackluster Superman trilogy from Gunn might take up the rest of your lifespan. ( Most people here are males, and most males die off in their early 70s, but a lot die before that) But, without doxxing anyone here, most people here can probably squeeze out the next iteration of Superman past the Gunn conception. It's a function of time, but it will happen. Once actuaries got their hands on crunching the numbers for these IPs, now it's all on a schedule. Win or lose, you'll get more Superman. And Batman. And Spiderman. Etc, etc.

Personally, and I can only speak for myself, I'm OK with a little risk taking in theses super hero stories. If what worked for GOTG1 doesn't work for Superman, well OK. At least to me.

From an industry standpoint, what I can say with locked in certainty, is that the core Superman story and character is incredibly difficult to write for and about. He can't die. He is a good person. He had good parents. Much of what is ideal about Superman is locked into a different time in our society. This isn't very fertile ground. If you observe The Boys, what is most effective about Homelander is how others react to him and how they have to adjust because he's such a juggernaut. But he himself is almost written as a trope to the very edge of almost self parody. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy what Antony Starr does with the character and the show is fun to watch, but even Homelander is incredibly limited in scope because it's difficult to write for a character like that.

If this blows, you'll get a new Superman in short order. If you live that long. Very likely I won't. Rough odds I have probably 10 years left. Maybe 18 months or so ago on this forum, I discussed that war is coming. I wasn't kidding. Once it expands, good chance I'll eat it much sooner than that. If Gunn scratches out a trilogy, good chance this is my last shot at a big tentpole Superman. But I'm OK with it.

You know what I find I enjoy? A good burrito. When they cook the carnitas just the right way. Not from a chain but from a small hole in the wall kind of sleeper place. Also deep dish pizza if it's made right. I still enjoy sparring. Sometimes I get hit in the head, and I have a hard head. Sometimes I can dish out a few solid shots and floor someone. Blowjobs are still great. The five minutes I get sometimes in a day in a brick and mortar on a toy hunt, and I find something cool. Or I don't, but it's still five minutes that truly belong to me, when most of the time, my time and duty belong to other obligations and people.

Superman film is awesome? Blowjobs still rock. Burritos and deep dish pizza never go bad. Toyhunts still sometimes make me smile. Maybe I still get punched in the face.

Superman film is horrible? Blowjobs still rock ( assuming no braces). I'm not yet outpriced on good burritos and deep dish pizza, even with this bonkers inflation. Sometimes I'm going to find a cool Transformer or GI Joe Classified on clearance and putting it on a shelf will make me smile. A coin flips and I might power shot someone to the dome.

One of the very best things for me about taking about a full decade away from this hobby is it recalibrated my viewpoint and value system on what it means to be pleasantly surprised. I can't speak for the rest of the regulars here, but IMHO, if you lose the ability to be pleasantly surprised, and not notice it, it's chipping away at one of the few freedoms that guys still have left in this society. You know who never gets to be pleasantly surprised anymore? Grown ups. And f&^% growing up. To me, that's why we collect, so a part of us never has to grow up. But that's just me. I accept I have less life in front of me than behind me. And, where I see the world going right now, good chance I'll die violently. But I'm OK with it.

"It's Toasted" Superman is toasted. And I'm at peace with it. I don't care if people here like one movie or another or one superhero or another. I'm just saying, as a fellow collector, never lose that little part of yourself that can still be pleasantly suprised. Because it represents freedom. Was true when we were kids, is still true today.
 
Let's try this a different way.

The Nolanverse Batman Trilogy was considered a huge success. A lot of people were iffy about the third film and Tom Hardy mumbling non stop, but it was a huge lift for anything Batman in that timeline. But whether the Nolanverse was a success or not, financially or critically, it's always apparent that a new Batman movie is going to come out 3-5 years after the last one of the previous franchise ends. Superman is the same way.

Let's say, as a hypothetical, the Gunn version of Superman bombs. OK, you'll get a new version in five years. Or it's a success financially, and maybe critically, and it can squeeze out a trilogy. In which case you probably have a full decade of Gunn Superman films, then a five year break, and a new Superman overall. The age timeline of a lot of collectors here is somewhere between 40-60 years old. This is an "antiquated" type of forum and discussion board format.

If someone here is in their 60s or close to it, yeah, I can see the complication. A lackluster Superman trilogy from Gunn might take up the rest of your lifespan. ( Most people here are males, and most males die off in their early 70s, but a lot die before that) But, without doxxing anyone here, most people here can probably squeeze out the next iteration of Superman past the Gunn conception. It's a function of time, but it will happen. Once actuaries got their hands on crunching the numbers for these IPs, now it's all on a schedule. Win or lose, you'll get more Superman. And Batman. And Spiderman. Etc, etc.

Personally, and I can only speak for myself, I'm OK with a little risk taking in theses super hero stories. If what worked for GOTG1 doesn't work for Superman, well OK. At least to me.

From an industry standpoint, what I can say with locked in certainty, is that the core Superman story and character is incredibly difficult to write for and about. He can't die. He is a good person. He had good parents. Much of what is ideal about Superman is locked into a different time in our society. This isn't very fertile ground. If you observe The Boys, what is most effective about Homelander is how others react to him and how they have to adjust because he's such a juggernaut. But he himself is almost written as a trope to the very edge of almost self parody. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy what Antony Starr does with the character and the show is fun to watch, but even Homelander is incredibly limited in scope because it's difficult to write for a character like that.

If this blows, you'll get a new Superman in short order. If you live that long. Very likely I won't. Rough odds I have probably 10 years left. Maybe 18 months or so ago on this forum, I discussed that war is coming. I wasn't kidding. Once it expands, good chance I'll eat it much sooner than that. If Gunn scratches out a trilogy, good chance this is my last shot at a big tentpole Superman. But I'm OK with it.

You know what I find I enjoy? A good burrito. When they cook the carnitas just the right way. Not from a chain but from a small hole in the wall kind of sleeper place. Also deep dish pizza if it's made right. I still enjoy sparring. Sometimes I get hit in the head, and I have a hard head. Sometimes I can dish out a few solid shots and floor someone. Blowjobs are still great. The five minutes I get sometimes in a day in a brick and mortar on a toy hunt, and I find something cool. Or I don't, but it's still five minutes that truly belong to me, when most of the time, my time and duty belong to other obligations and people.

Superman film is awesome? Blowjobs still rock. Burritos and deep dish pizza never go bad. Toyhunts still sometimes make me smile. Maybe I still get punched in the face.

Superman film is horrible? Blowjobs still rock ( assuming no braces). I'm not yet outpriced on good burritos and deep dish pizza, even with this bonkers inflation. Sometimes I'm going to find a cool Transformer or GI Joe Classified on clearance and putting it on a shelf will make me smile. A coin flips and I might power shot someone to the dome.

One of the very best things for me about taking about a full decade away from this hobby is it recalibrated my viewpoint and value system on what it means to be pleasantly surprised. I can't speak for the rest of the regulars here, but IMHO, if you lose the ability to be pleasantly surprised, and not notice it, it's chipping away at one of the few freedoms that guys still have left in this society. You know who never gets to be pleasantly surprised anymore? Grown ups. And f&^% growing up. To me, that's why we collect, so a part of us never has to grow up. But that's just me. I accept I have less life in front of me than behind me. And, where I see the world going right now, good chance I'll die violently. But I'm OK with it.

"It's Toasted" Superman is toasted. And I'm at peace with it. I don't care if people here like one movie or another or one superhero or another. I'm just saying, as a fellow collector, never lose that little part of yourself that can still be pleasantly suprised. Because it represents freedom. Was true when we were kids, is still true today.
I think we agree on mostly everything... my point was just that GOTG was a different beast to Superman, and the Gunn Superman will be judged differently than GOTG. Unknown rabid raccoon as part of a troupe of intergalactic heroes in a super-hero-space-opera-comedy is different from super-dog in a Superman movie.

But as I said, I think we agree on mostly everything :duff

Oh, and I do hope to be pleasantly surprised, but Gunn's track record with me is not the best.
 
Back
Top