seen from Türkiye
seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from Poland
seen from South Africa
seen from Sweden
seen from Russia

seen from Malta

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Malta
seen from Maldives
seen from Hong Kong SAR China
seen from United States
seen from United States
Matthew Vaughn is rumoured to be in WB’s sights for Man of Steel 2, and it’s being reported that he’d want a lighter, more “fun” approach.
Now, while all defenders of the DCEU know that there’s plenty of fun in those movies, this idea does make sense, so long as it’s not too silly.
The first movie has him on a journey of self discovery, in which the burden of his powers and how the world will treat him holds him back.
BvS was him dealing with the burden of responsibility, whether or not he’s doing the right thing, and if he’s not doing enough or doing too much.
Justice league will have him return to a world where the burden is shared between himself and other heroes.
So Man of Steel 2 should be a Superman movie where he can focus more, knowing he’s not only not alone anymore, but he has friends. So logically, it would need to be relatively lighter, but the villain/s should always feel like a threat. Because if we start seeing superman movies where his villains aren’t a match for him, they’ll get really boring, really fast.
On the subject of "Superman should save cats and smile 24/7"
The way in which people think Superman should behave depends entirely on their world view. Whether you prefer him portrayed as a perpetual source of constant positivity, or as someone who experiences the full range of human emotions in their position of unfathomable responsibility,
it all depends on how you view the human condition and what you're looking for in your entertainment.
Maybe you're oblivious to the chaotic nature of our species and just want to have a good time at the theater. Maybe you choose not to concern yourself with the suffering of hundreds of millions of innocents elsewhere; or maybe you're fully informed but seek out a different reality in the escapism you consume. Perhaps you want to see an Atlas like figure shoulder this burden of power and face these harsh truths head on.
These are all valid subjective preferences.
Oftentimes when it comes to discussing comicbook heroes, people value the relatability of a fictional character above all else.
However, this has different meanings from person to person, does it not? We want something to aspire to be, but these aspirations are not universal. Someone is completely entitled to disliking God-figure characterizations and preferring an upbeat smiling Superman
, but to someone else that won't make sense. To that second person they'll think: "how is a constantly upbeat Superman relatable?", do we not face anxiety and pressure in our everyday lives? That second person will also think: "What's he doing saving cats? what of the countless other crimes and atrocities that are happening simultaneously, and if this upbeat Superman has already solved them then how can someone so perfect NOT be considered a God-like figure?".
The point is there is no point in arguing which portrayal is outright superior. People will like what they like because when it comes to this subject, it appeals to us in different ways on such a fundamental level. To one person, what's inspiring is thinking that there's a likeable hero selflessly overcoming any obstacle; to another person what's inspiring is thinking there's someone out there, powerful but one of us in spirit...imperfect but giving his absolute all to fight for what's right.
Note that I’m not the one making all the commentary above. All credits goes to @titletownrelo for the awesome post above.
How has Man of Steel been out for almost 4 years and I'm still defending it against the same fucking idiotic arguments!? A guy even said to me "The argument hasn't changed, because we're right!" No, prick, the argument hasn't changed because you watched the movie once almost 4 years ago and weren't paying attention. The argument hasn't changed because you're all drinking from the same well and repeating the same fucking arguments that you've read on some half-assed, biased reviews or comments thread on some shitty click bait article. That's why the argument hasn't changed, because you all are just stubborn and ignorant. I think I'm just going to respond with salty GIFs from now on. I'm sick of the stupidity.