The problem with cynicism is that while it's great at pointing out problems, it's not particularly good at doing anything about them. Sentiment, as a counter point to cynicism is something many of us are screaming for. Just look at the "wholesomeness" trend that has been gaining steam online over the last two years. But sentiment and wholesomeness and humility need a model--they need a paragon. And Superman is just the right hero for the occasion.
How CAN we fix the problems when we keep failing? "When we fight, we win" didn't work. The crazy space laser lady believes we can control the weather but can't affect the climate. Kill thousands with an AI system is fine if you make a profit but it's terrorism to retaliate. Things are messed up and it seems things are only going to get worse.
I think Guy Gardner is a good example of what its going to happen in the DCU after Superman starts doing things his way; Hal Jordan will demote him, and put John Stewart in his place to do things better, to make things right.
Basically what some of the “good” grimdark stories do well. Actually have the pathos to offer something good. Berserk, Vinland Saga, Vagabond. Funny how the japanese storytellers understand how to create pitch black dark worlds, and still give that emotional maturity for things to get better
Perfectly phrased. This is why I’m kind of tired of grimdark deconstructions being the norm, especially in the superhero genre. It was novel when Alan Moore and Frank Miller did it in the 80’s but it’s been played out since. We need a reconstruction and if I trust anyone to do it, it’s Gunn.
Cynicism used to be revolutionary back in the late 20th century. Now, it's like Aubrey Drake Graham: overrated, outdated, and has worn out its welcome in the world.
It really couldn't have began any other way -- Superman hasn't really been shown this way in cinema before, and his reputation has taken such a beating over the last decade. Starting anywhere else would feel dishonest.
In terms of the new Superman being a rebuke of the Snyder-Verse as well as the MCU's ideology, I'm reminded of the Folding Ideas video on 'Man of Steel' where they point out how bad it is for Superman to "announce himself" to the world by revealing his powers to the Military as opposed to the President or another politician, enforcing the notion that the Military is the definitive authority in Snyder's eyes (intentional or otherwise).
That's why Superman has traditionally introduced himself via an article written by Lois, where Lois names him and he lays out all of his weaknesses and powers so humanity trusts him.
That was both super weird for Superman and not weird at all for Snyder - Man of Steel was incredibly militaristic, both focusing on American military and picking a group of Kryptonian soldiers as the bad guys, but the resulting characters and themes were totally within Snyder's wheelhouse. He was just _such_ a completely wrong pick for this material - but then again, he was picked by execs who clearly didn't understand Superman either and he released Man of Steel to an audience which on the whole I think also very much lost touch with Superman. If anything, I've loved seeing people's strong negative reactions to the Snyderverse Superman and the wave of support for the classic Superman character that it brought about.
@@jadedheartsz This coming from the person who thinks LOTR is overrated, which is funny considering Snyder planned on drawing inspiration in both scale and narrative structure from that saga for his own DC saga- in a similar way that Gunn is taking inspiration from Star Wars for his- if he was able to see it through to the end.
The artists and writers who created the superhero genre and what we now call the Golden Age of comics were mostly the sons of immigrants, most of whom were Jewish and trying to grapple with the horrible things starting to happen in Germany at the time. James Gunn was pushed out of Marvel by internet f@scists. It is obvious from every superhero thing he's made since then that he now has a burning hatred for f@scists. I think this is interesting, because it means James Gunn is kind of in a similar head space to the people who created the superhero genre and the Golden Age. I'm hoping that we genuinely get something interesting out of his leadership of the DC movies.
I have to wonder: Batman was doing dark/gritty comics in the 1970s and 80s, but it wasn't until The Dark Knight Returns that mass audiences finally began to dissociate Batman from the Adam West era. Superman's had plenty of great adaptations this past decade with Supergirl, My Adventures With Superman, and Superman & Lois... but we're still consumed with Synderverse era Superman as the dominant pop culture image right now. So maybe James Gunn's film will pull a reverse Frank Miller?
The overwhelming popularity and success of Injustice probably damaged Superman's image in society as much as Snyder did but then again, there isn't a cult trying to revive Injustice.
@@BaithNa But again, Injustice didn't ruin Superman either. Unless you were already familiar with the Justice Lords/Cadmus arc from the DCAU or read all the prequel comics, Injustice was little more than a cool dystopian elseworld story. I mean the first game literally ends with OG hopeful Superman kicking his tyrant counterpart's ass for becoming a dictator.
Batman didn't really start to do dark/gritty comics until Frank Miller did The Dark Knight Returns in 1986, and then followed it up with Year One in 1987. That's when everybody jumped on that particular bandwagon.
@@BaithNa I don't think anybody in normie society even knows of Injustice Superman, other than maybe from the game, in which he got beaten by proper Superman.
@@Carabas72 You might want to check out what started happening in Detective Comics around 1969. There's some pure Film Noir and Gothic horror entering the picture from that point onwards, with some stories eventually making their way into much, much later Batman animated shows in santiized versions. Batman was having dark and gritty stories long before Miller, but they were still stories about a Batman who was all about stopping gun violence, saving every life he reasonably could, and lifting people up out of the gutters of Gotham. By the early 1970s, of course, DC Comics was telling a lot of serious-minded political and socially conscious stories using their super-heroes, which was especially obvious with Green Lantern/Green Arrow. Batman's success with gritty stories paved the way.
@@lapislazuli5035 Agreed. "That thing you/they like is trash" is just generally not a very common attitude among creators, for I think obvious reasons. Doing a thing as a reaction to the previous thing and as a deliberate move to a new direction is not the same as saying the previous thing was trash.
@ristoravela652 now that is definitely a lie. Citizen Kane, Blazing Saddles, Raiders of the Lost Ark are just a few mentions of spite projects towards fellow Hollywood creators. That Snyderverse ain't coming back.
You could argue that Marvel comics were rooted in militarization from its inception since most of their creators served in WWII and nearly all of their early characters were tied to the cold war. The post 9/11 militarization of Marvel didn't start with Obama's campaign because Iron Man 1 was being created before the primaries started. The MCU's military roots come directly from the Ultimate Marvel comics that were a response to Bush era politics and were used as the inspiration for all of phase 1. These books, along with Civil War were called the books that "cinematized" comics and ita true because they lead to the most successful super hero movies ever made.
It's interesting because Marvel recently relaunched their ultimate line and while it is mostly its own thing it is interesting to compare it to the original ultimate line. Whereas the original Ultimate marvel was a marvel universe born into early 2000s post 9-11 world, the new ultimate universe is about a marvel universe born over 20 years after 9/11. Its really interesting to read and compare it to the original when you look at it from that lense
Iron Man 1 definitely feels like a very Obama style movie. The message of the film is essentially “the War On Terror isn’t bad, it’s just the way we’re going about it”, which is the exact same message Obama and his breed of 2000s era liberals had. Tony Stark is even portrayed similarly to how liberals viewed George Bush: not evil, but incredibly ignorant and fooled into doing terrible things by his evil advisor (Bush has Dick Cheney, Stark has Obidiah Stane). Iron Man is essentially a movie about George Bush learning the error of his ways and killing Dick Cheney who is revealed as the real villain.
An interesting note on Ultimate Marvel: It actually began during the Bush-years, and has an element of criticism of the Military-industrial complex as well -- the Ultimates and SHIELD for instance, assume that Thor is insane and imprison him, since his amazing world cannot possibly be real. Turns out it actually was, and there was a big plot of Loki's. There are other things as well, like when the Ultimates go in and topple a country (iraq-metaphor), but then eventually get come-upance-d by the USA's enemies using a similar Superhero-Industrial Complex against them. (which almost leads to the collapse of the USA) Following the Bush-years, and into the Obama-era, some of that changed, and some of the aestethics of Ultimate Marvel was applied to normal Marvel, which lacked the criticisms of the Military-industrial complex - that version, which flourished during the Obama-years, is what the MCU was based on.
i showed my grandmom the trailer and she loved it. she grew up watching the george reeves show after she came to the US from a german displaced persons camp. she took her kids to see the 78 movie in theaters. she smiled through the whole trailer, and seeing her reactions, i imagine it must have brought back some of those classic superman memories for her. i cant wait to see the movie with her, too.
That trailer reminded me of Babe Ruth pointing at the outfield fence when coming up to bat. It feels like it's playing to Gunn's strengths, too. As long as the studio doesn't screw it up, it's got the potential to be generation defining.
My dream vision of a Superman movie was to start out in a dark, Snyderish world, coded not just by the actions, but by an almost grey cinematography...And then Superman shows up, and as he does his Superfeats and just SAVES people, the brightness and saturation slowly turn up, almost unperceptibly, until the final act goes full bright Technicolor, symbolizing the return of Hope and Optimism! Sounds like we may be getting something like that, hopefully...
'Beneficent global quasi-militarized peacekeepers' is the ideal form that "Superheroes" can take if they are more powerful than a battalion, but not quite God-like. Thor and Carol should be doing more than beating up private armies, but for one man-two hands, hands on, everyone who doesn't have unlimited power or resources is right where they should be.
I'm looking forward to James Gunn's take. After over a decade where 80-90% of DC's movies were, if not terrible than not far from it. I'm excited again for this universe. Between this, the three Marvel films and Beyond the Spider-verse, 2025 is looking to be a good year for Super Heroes.
I used to like Gunn because I thought he was a chessmaster, thinking more steps ahead than anyone else. The more I see, the more I realize he's someone striving to be an independent thinker and an independent artist, and he's pretty darn good at both thinking and art. As such, he strayed from the AI predictable cliches, and did a good job at it. That just seems like seeing the future. But really? it's creating the future.
I really appreciate this, I've been personally grappling with my enjoyment of the MCU and my own feelings on it's THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX IS FINE DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT of it all. If you're right about this new approach to the cinematic DCU then... I'm going to approach this with cautious optimism.
(I'm a Thor fan, who's pretty far removed from a lot of the "military industrial complex" stuff, but still, it's there and once you notice you can't UNnotice)
It made some sense that they went that direction in Iron Man right after 9/11. But it’s been hard for it to get away from that, even after SHIELD was revealed to be controlled by Hydra.
@@Rozillathat's still the most military friendly version of Thor. The Ultimates inspired all of Phase 1 and that version of Thor is not only anti government, he's an eco terrorist.
I'd be interested to see what their alternative to government or corporate-regulated superheroes are. They're bad but unregulated vigilantes are bad too.
I gave up trying to reason with people who screed against the "military industrial complex" because they either voted for tRump, Stain, or nobody at all. And I already forgot who was the Libertarian Party's candidate for President and their platform.
The thing I like the most about the teaser is how bright and colorful it is. That's quintessential Superman, the bright side of heroism that gives you hope. Just with the color pallette, it feels like a director who knows exactly what the material is supposed to be.
I'll be ecstatic when we get Superman villains that aren't just Lex and Zod. Brainiac is my favorite of his villains and we have yet to see him in a live action movie.
I wanna see Livewire adapted in this universe, I think her origin in the DCAU of being a shock jock talk radio host would be a poignant bit of social commentary in today's age.
I’m surprised not a one of them has ever run with Parasite. A story where Superman not only can’t punch his way through the problem (because that just powers the guy up) but maybe doesn’t want to (because Parasite fundamentally is a guy who had an accident and got sick and Supes is exactly the sort of guy to find that sympathetic) might actually be interesting
I'd love to see some of Superman's less world-ending foes appear that can still stand toe-to-toe with him. Villains like Metallo, Parasite, Livewire, Bizarro, Atomic Skull.
That bit at the end. I feel the same way. I don't want to set expectations too high for this movie, but if ever there was a movie that "saves the day" it feels like all the pieces are there for this one.
Me being old enough to remember when WB let Christopher Nolan essentially hand pick who would develop what would be known as the DCCU, and James Gunn being on the shortlist, just makes me believe sometimes, in some instances, its never too late to correct an error.
Dude, I’ve been watching you since I was in high school (I’m in my 30s now; I’m so sorry) and this is kind of video that reminds me of when I would procrastinate on homework watching escape to the movies or game overthinker. GREAT video, great trilogy, please don’t stop :)
I said once that no Superman property was going to ever beat out STAS and then i saw My Adventures with Superman and man is that a good show. This looks like they're taking some of that MAwS energy for plain ol fun and putting it on the big screen.
I think this is a fair enough shot from what seems to be on show. Superman is clearly the focus of controversy in a world with already established hero types, so it makes sense he would be the moral foil of those other heroes. There's something he's doing that causes strong opinions. He's unique.
The problem with the Snyderverse was that it was trying WAY too hard to mimic the style of Nolan’s Dark Knoght trilogy. Because that was the last big superhero success they’d had. Ironically, the more successful a company is, the more-risk adverse it becomes. Whereas, now that WB is in much more precarious situation, they’re more willing to roll the dice and bet big.
I want this for you so bad. I've loved what you've been doing for years, and it's great to hear you speak with this much optimism! I've always though Superman needs a good Hurrah Moment y'know? A Glorious return to Hope! Can't wait to see how this turns out.
10:34 - once more for those in the cheap seats: the political philosophy of the core concept of superheroism is small-L libertarianism, specifically the part about individual rights and agency, because any superhero who is not in some way deputised to act by the state is essentially a vigilante taking the law into their own hands, usually because they believe that the state is not equipped or not willing to confront the problem; even as a concept in opposition or juxtaposition to the politics of the day, superheroes as an institution and memetic concept are inherently political. How they go about it and what their bonds, flaws and ideals happen to be are the thing that makes them distinct from one another. There's a great Brennan Lee Mulligan quote stating that most people are not motivated by idealogical codes like politics, religion etc - they're motivated by impulse and build their idealogical codes around the person they already are like a scaffold. On a scale of individuals and civilisations, personality predates ideology - meaning, before you were a fascist, you were a bully and an asshole. We see this writ large in the superhero genre through the concept of noblesse oblige, ie "with great power comes great responsibility" and in the words of Dr Erskine to Steve Rogers: a strong man, who has known power all his life, may lose respect for that power, but a weak man knows the true value of strength and compassion.
@mabusestestament - fine, but if you think about it, it's not that crazy a proposition. Most people wanna believe their opinions and beliefs are justified and backed up by evidence or experience, but at the end of the day, all of that is at the mercy of bias and prejudice - the core of our personality is based on those experiences that stick with us, the traumas that we experience in infancy and youth. QED, Bruce Wayne doesn't become Batman because he has some high minded idea that he can save Gotham from an endless cycle of crime and corruption by becoming a symbol of vigilante justice; he may say or even think he does, but the thing that canonically sets him on that path is the trauma of witnessing his parents get murdered and the loss of his childhood innocence that goes with that. Without that twist of fate, he'd be just another spoiled rich kid. His personality predates his ideology.
21:00 - Remember, Bob, Superman's saying was improved a few years ago to better fit his heart. Truth, justice, and a better tomorrow. (Edited out typos.)
Civil War was American exceptionalism embodied by Cap and his statement that the safest hands "are our own" and represents the US' refusal to be bound by international law or authority. They quite specifically were being asked to be answerable to the UN and not the US government. Meanwhile Stark was convinced of the need for oversight by being brought face to face with the civilians casualties their actions in a foreign country caused.
Thats... that's a really good take. I hadn't ever quite seen it that way and I kinda love it. Interesting that both sides basically lose at the end. Cap has to drop the American exceptionalism (literally with the shield) and Stark drops his by joining them in the first place and then dropping any ideology over simple revenge. Damn yo, I'm gonna be thinking about this one a lot. Thank you and happy holidays.
I remember during the Civil War comics coming out that was my stance. The allegory of "we need to hold America accountable" is the more fitting metaphor than whatever they were going for with personal liberty versus police state. But then that event was a mess and best left overshadowed by the superior movie.
I can never quite get behind that viewpoint as I feel it skips a lot of details. First that Cap's complaint is a LACK of oversight in the law. Particularly after seeing how corrupt the US is in Winter Soldier, he has concerns over any group having unilateral control of The Avengers. Carried further when told the law is coming into affect, and he has to join or leave, he leaves and throughtout the film is braced for the consequences of his actions. He does not expect a happy ending. Second Tony is motivated by personal guilt and his own emotional instability. He's a billionaire industrialist too rich to face real consequences. Best seen in how he is the one who created Ultron, yet is given a position over power by the Accords, while impoverished immigrants like Wanda are branded weapons and locked up. Tak3n further in his efforts to kill Bucky (essentially a victim himself) for his own personal pain. If anything, I feel Tony represents American exceptionalisim. Born rich and powerful, able to avoid reprecussiins by his wealth. Ignores laws and morality for his own want, yet takes important positions within their hierarchy and makes copius use of their resources.
@@Rocketboy1313 But somehow, it made money, prompting Marvel to publish a status-quo-shaking Crossover Event every year. Especially ones that shit on previous character development and turn heroes into villains (side-eyes AVENGERS v. X-MEN, CIVIL WAR II, SECRET EMPIRE).
It’s still blowing my mind that the guy who made Super (2010) is now doing Superman. I could tell back then that he had some really provocative perspective on super heroes and their cultural impact. I never thought I’d see the day that specific perspective would be telling the stories of the most iconic super hero.
Some people "who pretend to be real comic geek fans" sometimes attack Bob as a casual, because he enjoys good things that are also digestible by new comers and kids. But then he makes a little 2 seconds side commentary that shows he knows his stuff better than anybody else (from the golden era of comics to these days), and then casually continues to talk about themes instead of obscures references.
not peter jackson.... but Sam Raimi getting signed on to work onto Spider-Man. Back in 2000, the rumors were Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich just getting the option to sign on, and then it was Chirs O'Donnel considered as Peter Parker...... And Movie News was a MESS THEN, Because they were quick with, "If James Cameron's on board, than it's Leo as Peter." No, Cameron wanted John Cusack as Peter Parker.... but that would have been 80s Cusack, Better off Dead teen comedy era. It was such a weird time and it still is.
This looks genuinely exciting. The second I saw how colorful the trailer looked and how Clark Kent looked different enough from Superman that, yeah, I could buy those are different guys, I knew it would be at least good. I haven't had hope for a super hero movie in a while, and I actually want to see this in a theater.
it has been said (specifically in the movie Talladega nights) that the Beatles couldn’t have been the Beatles without the Rolling Stones. Or there would be no Diane Sawyer without Katie Couric. Which is another way of saying that DC could help the MCU by giving them a real competitor to go up against. By the way, the rivalry between DC and Marvel is usually in the heads of fanboys. If Gunn is able to pull off what he’s planning there is no reason there can’t be a DC/Marvel crossover.
Considering the Beatles wrote the first hit by the Rolling Stones, that doesn't really stand up to scrutiny... and creatively there was a much stronger competition with The Beach Boys
@@WaitingForTheHook Yes, you are right. No Rolling Stones without The Beatles is more true. How else are you going to explain Their Satanic Majesties Request? 😏
If you’re right (and you’ve got a good track record), I think that would be a much better way to differentiate the DC movies from the MCU than just making it depressing and grimdark like the old ones did. Also very interesting thing you brought up about the MCU being the key pop culture totem of the Obama era in an “American power but more benevolent” way I didn’t consider. I think they’re slowly evolving away from that but especially if you look back at Phase 1 especially, like I did recently, that is definitely how they started out. And I do think having Superman, Batman, Green Lantern and co. be the more direct counterargument to that would be interesting
As always, love your insights into all things comic-s are weeeeird-book movies. I unchecked from DC movies after Batman v Superman and even though Gunns Suicide Squad was great it still had to prop up designs and characters i just didnt want. This movie is what i want, it's what i need, and i cant wait to see what unfolds after it's taken us all home
Okay, but ... that's not the Engineer, that's clearly one of the Fortress of Solitude robots that have been smashed up. This is like the third different briefly glimpsed background character I've seen erroneously called the Engineer by some commenter -- there must be a lot of eagerness to see that character.
I've actually showed the trailer to a few of my superhero fatigued nerd friends and they've all gone "Ooooooo" when Krypto shows up. It's at least piquing interest so they're doing something right!
I know I'm probably the only one worried about this, but I'm very nervous about the Authority being in the DC films. The whole point of that team, back in their Wildstorm days, could be summed up as: "This is what superheroes become without someone like Superman to light the way." If these upcoming movies paint them as the Elite from Action Comics #775, that's going to feel really unfair to me. The Authority _wanted_ to be the Justice League for their version of Earth, with no outside model of how a super-team free of government or corporate controls should work. If they're used in these new films as examples of what not to do, well, that would be a betrayal of the point of that team as originally created. The original writer for the first year of the Authority's comic made them imperfect idealists who struggled to find the right way to use their awesome power and freedom. Later writers turned them into pretty horrible people and corrupted the concept quite badly. I have very little hope that Gunn intends to give us something new and good with them -- an Authority who get the opportunity to follow Superman's lead and become their best selves. I don't want to see them portrayed as cynical monsters again in a bid to make DC's homegrown characters look better. I don't know which way Gunn will move the Authority, but it would complete DC's waste of the team if they're used as bad examples. Maybe Gunn has a better idea, who knows? It's still early days.
That Superman issue with the Elite is IMO one of the worst, most cynical DC comics I have ever read. At best, it just does not understand its subject matter.
@@Carabas72while I mostly enjoy the premise. I kinda agree the elite despite beign proxy of the authority came of as villanous parodies and Superman while mostly correct is only so because the elite come up as straw men. On the other hand I do think the acttually autorithy are better candidates for that kind of story. As long as they are well written. They could learn. Or beign redeem. Or even if neither they are far more simpatetic and nuance than the elite.
@@Carabas72 It's weird, but I actually liked that issue because the Elite weren't the original Authority. By the time Joe Kelly wrote that issue, the Authority had already been derailed by a change in authors, going from flawed heroes trying their best to careless egomaniacs built to kill. AC #775 was essentially a response to fans arguing online that super-heroes should be killers to solve their problems. Joe Kelly's response: Superman wouldn't want that, so why would the fans want it? The Authority's world was a mess because that Earth's supers were all either terrorists or on kill teams (or so it appeared to the public). That was the point of the Wildstorm setting: things were worse without heroes. It's ironic that the original point of the Authority in its first year was that they were going to try to be an unironic "big good" and prove that non-cynical heroes could work.
@@SingularityOrbit My main gripe (other than not understanding The Authority) is that the only reason in the story that Superman can be nicer is that he's so ridiculously powerful that he has the luxury of being able to go non-lethal. He can preach about truth and justice and the American way all he wants, but if he were less powerful The elite would have just turned him inside-out and have a good laigh about it.
Great video Bob. I am looking forward to this one. I have a feeling they’re taking a page out of My Adventures with Superman and let Lois figure out the secret identity by act 2.
I appreciate your commentary on James Gunn, because it makes me appreciate works I might have otherwise dismissed as not for me. I am not a fan of Gunn's superhero works because I think he has a problem establishing stakes - whether it's Squad or Creature Commandos or Guardians, there's rarely a premium placed on the lives of the people in the film, whether the characters or people they come up against. That makes it hard for me to feel any kind of investment. It's hard to not get a bit of a Tarantino vibe, where the characters are frequently unlikeable and their motives rather base and the whole thing is so drenched in crimson that it just doesn't resonate emotionally. The characters don't feel like people and their world doesn't feel like one where I can understand the meaning of anything. But you sharing your perspective lets me see things I might've missed or dismissed, and that's what makes for a great critic; someone who has strong insights and a passion for the works. Thank you for sharing it with the world. I might've otherwise let this pass me by.
Actually, the new logo might not be a Kingdom Come reference. The new suit seems to be modelled on the one from My Adventures With Superman (different shaded areas and all). And that's the logo from that.
The problem with releasing a movie like this with a character driven by "inherent belief in human goodness" as Gunn put it is that 2024 has proven definitively to me there really is no such thing as inherent human goodness.
Great analysis Bob - you brought up some very interesting things that I hadn't thought about all of this, at all. Cheers mate. :) I wonder... will Superman potentially be a generally anti-establishment hero this time around? Sort of how he was in Grant Morrison's New-52 Superman. All the big corpo's you mention is an interesting note, since a big reason why Lex Luthor gets involved in the New-52, is because Superman is getting in the way of plans the establishment (mega-corps, governments) had made.
I wonder if the Guy Gardner/Hawkgirl/Mr. Terrific team will actually be the Justice League (Int'l), or if it's a rework of The Conglomerate with the matching jackets? That feels like it fits more with your theory and it saves a Justice League reboot for later.
There isn't really a difference there. The Justice League was a corporate-sponsored superteam at the time. It was Maxwell Lord who had bought him a superhero team because someone had let the trademark lapse in-universe or something like that.
hmmmmm I would go that far... A LOT of 80s comics were anti authority comics while still trying to remain hopeful. Dark Knight Returns was a HUGE INFLUENCE on the genre.... but so war Teen Titans and Uncanny X-men were the best selling comics at the time. Just reminded Rob Liefeld tried to do his EDGY BLOOD COMICS in the 90s, he did let Alan Moore use Supreme to write golden age Superman story because the industry wasn't making them.
I can only imagine how many times Kevin Smith jizzed himself watching the trailer for Superman. Myself, I'm not really digging Corenswet in the role. I won't say I was underwhelmed by the trailer, but I'm leaning more that way than overwhelmed, for sure. Maybe a longer trailer, closer to the release, will sell it better. I sure hope so.
I wish Cavill had this chance. Nothing against the new cast but man of steel should have had a better script and vision instead of the Snyderverse crap
The problem with cynicism is that while it's great at pointing out problems, it's not particularly good at doing anything about them. Sentiment, as a counter point to cynicism is something many of us are screaming for. Just look at the "wholesomeness" trend that has been gaining steam online over the last two years.
But sentiment and wholesomeness and humility need a model--they need a paragon. And Superman is just the right hero for the occasion.
How CAN we fix the problems when we keep failing? "When we fight, we win" didn't work. The crazy space laser lady believes we can control the weather but can't affect the climate. Kill thousands with an AI system is fine if you make a profit but it's terrorism to retaliate. Things are messed up and it seems things are only going to get worse.
I think Guy Gardner is a good example of what its going to happen in the DCU after Superman starts doing things his way; Hal Jordan will demote him, and put John Stewart in his place to do things better, to make things right.
Basically what some of the “good” grimdark stories do well. Actually have the pathos to offer something good. Berserk, Vinland Saga, Vagabond. Funny how the japanese storytellers understand how to create pitch black dark worlds, and still give that emotional maturity for things to get better
Perfectly phrased. This is why I’m kind of tired of grimdark deconstructions being the norm, especially in the superhero genre. It was novel when Alan Moore and Frank Miller did it in the 80’s but it’s been played out since. We need a reconstruction and if I trust anyone to do it, it’s Gunn.
Cynicism used to be revolutionary back in the late 20th century. Now, it's like Aubrey Drake Graham: overrated, outdated, and has worn out its welcome in the world.
The irony of batman in BvS saying "do you bleed" and corenswets superman literally first starting as we see him bleeding, is not lost on me
It really couldn't have began any other way -- Superman hasn't really been shown this way in cinema before, and his reputation has taken such a beating over the last decade. Starting anywhere else would feel dishonest.
In terms of the new Superman being a rebuke of the Snyder-Verse as well as the MCU's ideology, I'm reminded of the Folding Ideas video on 'Man of Steel' where they point out how bad it is for Superman to "announce himself" to the world by revealing his powers to the Military as opposed to the President or another politician, enforcing the notion that the Military is the definitive authority in Snyder's eyes (intentional or otherwise).
That's why Superman has traditionally introduced himself via an article written by Lois, where Lois names him and he lays out all of his weaknesses and powers so humanity trusts him.
That was both super weird for Superman and not weird at all for Snyder - Man of Steel was incredibly militaristic, both focusing on American military and picking a group of Kryptonian soldiers as the bad guys, but the resulting characters and themes were totally within Snyder's wheelhouse. He was just _such_ a completely wrong pick for this material - but then again, he was picked by execs who clearly didn't understand Superman either and he released Man of Steel to an audience which on the whole I think also very much lost touch with Superman.
If anything, I've loved seeing people's strong negative reactions to the Snyderverse Superman and the wave of support for the classic Superman character that it brought about.
that video was crap, Man of Steel i s a damn good movie, Angry Joe did an excellent review of it.
@@KillahMate i think he was the perfect pick actually, just cause people liked the film does not mean they "lost touch" that's nonsense.
@@jadedheartsz This coming from the person who thinks LOTR is overrated, which is funny considering Snyder planned on drawing inspiration in both scale and narrative structure from that saga for his own DC saga- in a similar way that Gunn is taking inspiration from Star Wars for his- if he was able to see it through to the end.
James Gunn is giving hope. And, with Superman, that’s the best place to start.
100% agree.
The artists and writers who created the superhero genre and what we now call the Golden Age of comics were mostly the sons of immigrants, most of whom were Jewish and trying to grapple with the horrible things starting to happen in Germany at the time.
James Gunn was pushed out of Marvel by internet f@scists. It is obvious from every superhero thing he's made since then that he now has a burning hatred for f@scists. I think this is interesting, because it means James Gunn is kind of in a similar head space to the people who created the superhero genre and the Golden Age.
I'm hoping that we genuinely get something interesting out of his leadership of the DC movies.
And he was pushed out by Disney.
it's OK you don't have to censor the word fascists.
James Gunn was forced out of Marvel by the racist right because Rosanne Barr was forced out of her show for being racist.
I have to wonder: Batman was doing dark/gritty comics in the 1970s and 80s, but it wasn't until The Dark Knight Returns that mass audiences finally began to dissociate Batman from the Adam West era. Superman's had plenty of great adaptations this past decade with Supergirl, My Adventures With Superman, and Superman & Lois... but we're still consumed with Synderverse era Superman as the dominant pop culture image right now. So maybe James Gunn's film will pull a reverse Frank Miller?
The overwhelming popularity and success of Injustice probably damaged Superman's image in society as much as Snyder did but then again, there isn't a cult trying to revive Injustice.
@@BaithNa But again, Injustice didn't ruin Superman either. Unless you were already familiar with the Justice Lords/Cadmus arc from the DCAU or read all the prequel comics, Injustice was little more than a cool dystopian elseworld story. I mean the first game literally ends with OG hopeful Superman kicking his tyrant counterpart's ass for becoming a dictator.
Batman didn't really start to do dark/gritty comics until Frank Miller did The Dark Knight Returns in 1986, and then followed it up with Year One in 1987. That's when everybody jumped on that particular bandwagon.
@@BaithNa
I don't think anybody in normie society even knows of Injustice Superman, other than maybe from the game, in which he got beaten by proper Superman.
@@Carabas72 You might want to check out what started happening in Detective Comics around 1969. There's some pure Film Noir and Gothic horror entering the picture from that point onwards, with some stories eventually making their way into much, much later Batman animated shows in santiized versions. Batman was having dark and gritty stories long before Miller, but they were still stories about a Batman who was all about stopping gun violence, saving every life he reasonably could, and lifting people up out of the gutters of Gotham. By the early 1970s, of course, DC Comics was telling a lot of serious-minded political and socially conscious stories using their super-heroes, which was especially obvious with Green Lantern/Green Arrow. Batman's success with gritty stories paved the way.
Just the idea of Gunn using a whole film to subtly tell us the Snyderverse is complete trash...is exactly how you get my money 👍🏽
I really doubt that, Gunn and Snyder are friends..
@@lapislazuli5035 Agreed. "That thing you/they like is trash" is just generally not a very common attitude among creators, for I think obvious reasons.
Doing a thing as a reaction to the previous thing and as a deliberate move to a new direction is not the same as saying the previous thing was trash.
@lapislazuli5035 still trying to save face for a dead Snyderverse huh?
@ristoravela652 now that is definitely a lie. Citizen Kane, Blazing Saddles, Raiders of the Lost Ark are just a few mentions of spite projects towards fellow Hollywood creators. That Snyderverse ain't coming back.
You could argue that Marvel comics were rooted in militarization from its inception since most of their creators served in WWII and nearly all of their early characters were tied to the cold war.
The post 9/11 militarization of Marvel didn't start with Obama's campaign because Iron Man 1 was being created before the primaries started. The MCU's military roots come directly from the Ultimate Marvel comics that were a response to Bush era politics and were used as the inspiration for all of phase 1. These books, along with Civil War were called the books that "cinematized" comics and ita true because they lead to the most successful super hero movies ever made.
It's interesting because Marvel recently relaunched their ultimate line and while it is mostly its own thing it is interesting to compare it to the original ultimate line. Whereas the original Ultimate marvel was a marvel universe born into early 2000s post 9-11 world, the new ultimate universe is about a marvel universe born over 20 years after 9/11. Its really interesting to read and compare it to the original when you look at it from that lense
Iron Man 1 definitely feels like a very Obama style movie. The message of the film is essentially “the War On Terror isn’t bad, it’s just the way we’re going about it”, which is the exact same message Obama and his breed of 2000s era liberals had. Tony Stark is even portrayed similarly to how liberals viewed George Bush: not evil, but incredibly ignorant and fooled into doing terrible things by his evil advisor (Bush has Dick Cheney, Stark has Obidiah Stane). Iron Man is essentially a movie about George Bush learning the error of his ways and killing Dick Cheney who is revealed as the real villain.
An interesting note on Ultimate Marvel: It actually began during the Bush-years, and has an element of criticism of the Military-industrial complex as well -- the Ultimates and SHIELD for instance, assume that Thor is insane and imprison him, since his amazing world cannot possibly be real. Turns out it actually was, and there was a big plot of Loki's. There are other things as well, like when the Ultimates go in and topple a country (iraq-metaphor), but then eventually get come-upance-d by the USA's enemies using a similar Superhero-Industrial Complex against them. (which almost leads to the collapse of the USA)
Following the Bush-years, and into the Obama-era, some of that changed, and some of the aestethics of Ultimate Marvel was applied to normal Marvel, which lacked the criticisms of the Military-industrial complex - that version, which flourished during the Obama-years, is what the MCU was based on.
I think you're right on. Also, the baby cry sound effect had me rolling.
That Henry Cavill baby wail 😂😂😂
If you keep one stock clip from 2024, it's that.
i showed my grandmom the trailer and she loved it. she grew up watching the george reeves show after she came to the US from a german displaced persons camp. she took her kids to see the 78 movie in theaters. she smiled through the whole trailer, and seeing her reactions, i imagine it must have brought back some of those classic superman memories for her. i cant wait to see the movie with her, too.
This is the kind of wholesome I live for. Grandmom sounds awesome.
I hope you both love it when it comes out.
One quick note. Gunn and marketing have emphasized that it's no longer "the American way" but "a better tomorrow".
Hogart: And all that it implies.
@@gautambudidha1110 there is no better tomorrow, a better tomorrow is a delusion
Great work as always Bob. Merry Christmas mate.
That trailer reminded me of Babe Ruth pointing at the outfield fence when coming up to bat. It feels like it's playing to Gunn's strengths, too. As long as the studio doesn't screw it up, it's got the potential to be generation defining.
I’ll put it this way: this trailer made me want me go back to the comic shop and pick up first run monthly comics for the first time in a decade.
This has been a wonderful series thank you! Merry Christmas!
Gunn GETS Superman
The DCU is in good hands
Since the broken robot is wearing a blue cape, probably a Kryptonian robot, maybe Kelex?
BOB: KEEP UP THE DRIP. You’re looking fire my dude!!!
My dream vision of a Superman movie was to start out in a dark, Snyderish world, coded not just by the actions, but by an almost grey cinematography...And then Superman shows up, and as he does his Superfeats and just SAVES people, the brightness and saturation slowly turn up, almost unperceptibly, until the final act goes full bright Technicolor, symbolizing the return of Hope and Optimism! Sounds like we may be getting something like that, hopefully...
'Beneficent global quasi-militarized peacekeepers' is the ideal form that "Superheroes" can take if they are more powerful than a battalion, but not quite God-like. Thor and Carol should be doing more than beating up private armies, but for one man-two hands, hands on, everyone who doesn't have unlimited power or resources is right where they should be.
I'm looking forward to James Gunn's take. After over a decade where 80-90% of DC's movies were, if not terrible than not far from it. I'm excited again for this universe. Between this, the three Marvel films and Beyond the Spider-verse, 2025 is looking to be a good year for Super Heroes.
I used to like Gunn because I thought he was a chessmaster, thinking more steps ahead than anyone else. The more I see, the more I realize he's someone striving to be an independent thinker and an independent artist, and he's pretty darn good at both thinking and art. As such, he strayed from the AI predictable cliches, and did a good job at it. That just seems like seeing the future. But really? it's creating the future.
I really appreciate this, I've been personally grappling with my enjoyment of the MCU and my own feelings on it's THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX IS FINE DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT of it all. If you're right about this new approach to the cinematic DCU then... I'm going to approach this with cautious optimism.
(I'm a Thor fan, who's pretty far removed from a lot of the "military industrial complex" stuff, but still, it's there and once you notice you can't UNnotice)
It made some sense that they went that direction in Iron Man right after 9/11. But it’s been hard for it to get away from that, even after SHIELD was revealed to be controlled by Hydra.
@@Rozillathat's still the most military friendly version of Thor. The Ultimates inspired all of Phase 1 and that version of Thor is not only anti government, he's an eco terrorist.
I'd be interested to see what their alternative to government or corporate-regulated superheroes are. They're bad but unregulated vigilantes are bad too.
I gave up trying to reason with people who screed against the "military industrial complex" because they either voted for tRump, Stain, or nobody at all. And I already forgot who was the Libertarian Party's candidate for President and their platform.
The thing I like the most about the teaser is how bright and colorful it is. That's quintessential Superman, the bright side of heroism that gives you hope. Just with the color pallette, it feels like a director who knows exactly what the material is supposed to be.
I'll be ecstatic when we get Superman villains that aren't just Lex and Zod. Brainiac is my favorite of his villains and we have yet to see him in a live action movie.
Ultra Humanite
Lex is always necessary, you can't have Clark, Lois and Jimmy without Lex but Zod has been used way too much.
I wanna see Livewire adapted in this universe, I think her origin in the DCAU of being a shock jock talk radio host would be a poignant bit of social commentary in today's age.
I’m surprised not a one of them has ever run with Parasite. A story where Superman not only can’t punch his way through the problem (because that just powers the guy up) but maybe doesn’t want to (because Parasite fundamentally is a guy who had an accident and got sick and Supes is exactly the sort of guy to find that sympathetic) might actually be interesting
I'd love to see some of Superman's less world-ending foes appear that can still stand toe-to-toe with him. Villains like Metallo, Parasite, Livewire, Bizarro, Atomic Skull.
Absolutely LOVE the use of the Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back "fictional characters" clip. 😂
That bit at the end. I feel the same way. I don't want to set expectations too high for this movie, but if ever there was a movie that "saves the day" it feels like all the pieces are there for this one.
Me being old enough to remember when WB let Christopher Nolan essentially hand pick who would develop what would be known as the DCCU, and James Gunn being on the shortlist, just makes me believe sometimes, in some instances, its never too late to correct an error.
Bob, thank you. for the hopeful message. I hope it also reflects some good self-reflection. Merry Christmas!
Dude, I’ve been watching you since I was in high school (I’m in my 30s now; I’m so sorry) and this is kind of video that reminds me of when I would procrastinate on homework watching escape to the movies or game overthinker. GREAT video, great trilogy, please don’t stop :)
Bob just made me tear up at the end... "James Gunn might save the day... he might do"
I said once that no Superman property was going to ever beat out STAS and then i saw My Adventures with Superman and man is that a good show. This looks like they're taking some of that MAwS energy for plain ol fun and putting it on the big screen.
Nice to know Bob still believes in heros.
Happy holidays, old chum!
Movie bob has some fucking excellent geopolitical media insights. Extremely well put. There's a reason this guy has been doing this as long as he has
Happy holidays, Bob! And thanks for the great insight. Great expectations with this Superman movie
I think this is a fair enough shot from what seems to be on show. Superman is clearly the focus of controversy in a world with already established hero types, so it makes sense he would be the moral foil of those other heroes. There's something he's doing that causes strong opinions. He's unique.
It's been awhile since a teaser trailer made me cry. I so want this to be good, a movie I can take my granddaughter to and have her be inspired.
The problem with the Snyderverse was that it was trying WAY too hard to mimic the style of Nolan’s Dark Knoght trilogy. Because that was the last big superhero success they’d had.
Ironically, the more successful a company is, the more-risk adverse it becomes. Whereas, now that WB is in much more precarious situation, they’re more willing to roll the dice and bet big.
I want this for you so bad. I've loved what you've been doing for years, and it's great to hear you speak with this much optimism! I've always though Superman needs a good Hurrah Moment y'know? A Glorious return to Hope! Can't wait to see how this turns out.
10:34 - once more for those in the cheap seats: the political philosophy of the core concept of superheroism is small-L libertarianism, specifically the part about individual rights and agency, because any superhero who is not in some way deputised to act by the state is essentially a vigilante taking the law into their own hands, usually because they believe that the state is not equipped or not willing to confront the problem; even as a concept in opposition or juxtaposition to the politics of the day, superheroes as an institution and memetic concept are inherently political. How they go about it and what their bonds, flaws and ideals happen to be are the thing that makes them distinct from one another.
There's a great Brennan Lee Mulligan quote stating that most people are not motivated by idealogical codes like politics, religion etc - they're motivated by impulse and build their idealogical codes around the person they already are like a scaffold. On a scale of individuals and civilisations, personality predates ideology - meaning, before you were a fascist, you were a bully and an asshole. We see this writ large in the superhero genre through the concept of noblesse oblige, ie "with great power comes great responsibility" and in the words of Dr Erskine to Steve Rogers: a strong man, who has known power all his life, may lose respect for that power, but a weak man knows the true value of strength and compassion.
Don’t ideological codes influence a person’s impulses?
@@mabusestestament - that's one way to look at it. Another would be that we are attracted to ideological codes that reinforce our existing biases.
@
And another would be that it goes both ways and it’s just a chicken and egg situation🍻
THIS ^
@mabusestestament - fine, but if you think about it, it's not that crazy a proposition. Most people wanna believe their opinions and beliefs are justified and backed up by evidence or experience, but at the end of the day, all of that is at the mercy of bias and prejudice - the core of our personality is based on those experiences that stick with us, the traumas that we experience in infancy and youth.
QED, Bruce Wayne doesn't become Batman because he has some high minded idea that he can save Gotham from an endless cycle of crime and corruption by becoming a symbol of vigilante justice; he may say or even think he does, but the thing that canonically sets him on that path is the trauma of witnessing his parents get murdered and the loss of his childhood innocence that goes with that. Without that twist of fate, he'd be just another spoiled rich kid. His personality predates his ideology.
Boy, it sure would be nice to have something to be hopeful and optimistic about.
Hey Bob? That bit at the end reminded me: where's your "Really That Good" for the Lord of the Rings trilogy, huh?
15:57 love the Snyderverse roast
21:00 - Remember, Bob, Superman's saying was improved a few years ago to better fit his heart.
Truth, justice, and a better tomorrow.
(Edited out typos.)
- because while I do love America, I sure as hell don’t like it.
Thank you for continuing to have good takes on some of my favorite genres of entertainment.
Civil War was American exceptionalism embodied by Cap and his statement that the safest hands "are our own" and represents the US' refusal to be bound by international law or authority. They quite specifically were being asked to be answerable to the UN and not the US government. Meanwhile Stark was convinced of the need for oversight by being brought face to face with the civilians casualties their actions in a foreign country caused.
Thats... that's a really good take. I hadn't ever quite seen it that way and I kinda love it. Interesting that both sides basically lose at the end. Cap has to drop the American exceptionalism (literally with the shield) and Stark drops his by joining them in the first place and then dropping any ideology over simple revenge. Damn yo, I'm gonna be thinking about this one a lot. Thank you and happy holidays.
@@_Hofnarr Happy holidays, my friend!
I remember during the Civil War comics coming out that was my stance. The allegory of "we need to hold America accountable" is the more fitting metaphor than whatever they were going for with personal liberty versus police state.
But then that event was a mess and best left overshadowed by the superior movie.
I can never quite get behind that viewpoint as I feel it skips a lot of details.
First that Cap's complaint is a LACK of oversight in the law. Particularly after seeing how corrupt the US is in Winter Soldier, he has concerns over any group having unilateral control of The Avengers. Carried further when told the law is coming into affect, and he has to join or leave, he leaves and throughtout the film is braced for the consequences of his actions. He does not expect a happy ending.
Second Tony is motivated by personal guilt and his own emotional instability. He's a billionaire industrialist too rich to face real consequences. Best seen in how he is the one who created Ultron, yet is given a position over power by the Accords, while impoverished immigrants like Wanda are branded weapons and locked up. Tak3n further in his efforts to kill Bucky (essentially a victim himself) for his own personal pain.
If anything, I feel Tony represents American exceptionalisim. Born rich and powerful, able to avoid reprecussiins by his wealth. Ignores laws and morality for his own want, yet takes important positions within their hierarchy and makes copius use of their resources.
@@Rocketboy1313 But somehow, it made money, prompting Marvel to publish a status-quo-shaking Crossover Event every year. Especially ones that shit on previous character development and turn heroes into villains (side-eyes AVENGERS v. X-MEN, CIVIL WAR II, SECRET EMPIRE).
It’s still blowing my mind that the guy who made Super (2010) is now doing Superman. I could tell back then that he had some really provocative perspective on super heroes and their cultural impact. I never thought I’d see the day that specific perspective would be telling the stories of the most iconic super hero.
21:15 I’m thinking they might have Clark change his motto to something like, “Truth, Justice & a Brighter Tomorrow”.
Such an interesting idea of adapting Kingdom Come. Much like Bob theorizing Lila in Spiderverse could actually be the Beyonder.
It is the one story they didn't make into an animated film because, well, how can you recreate Alex Ross' artwork in animation.
Some people "who pretend to be real comic geek fans" sometimes attack Bob as a casual, because he enjoys good things that are also digestible by new comers and kids. But then he makes a little 2 seconds side commentary that shows he knows his stuff better than anybody else (from the golden era of comics to these days), and then casually continues to talk about themes instead of obscures references.
not peter jackson.... but Sam Raimi getting signed on to work onto Spider-Man. Back in 2000, the rumors were Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich just getting the option to sign on, and then it was Chirs O'Donnel considered as Peter Parker...... And Movie News was a MESS THEN, Because they were quick with, "If James Cameron's on board, than it's Leo as Peter." No, Cameron wanted John Cusack as Peter Parker.... but that would have been 80s Cusack, Better off Dead teen comedy era. It was such a weird time and it still is.
I was not expecting to give a shit about anything DC anytime soon (even with Gunn), but that trailer genuinely got me excited!
This is yout best work in a while. Kudos.❤
This looks genuinely exciting. The second I saw how colorful the trailer looked and how Clark Kent looked different enough from Superman that, yeah, I could buy those are different guys, I knew it would be at least good. I haven't had hope for a super hero movie in a while, and I actually want to see this in a theater.
I can't wait for you to be proven right with this. Would be nice to have some superhero movies that aren't afraid to be genuine and hopeful...
Trust in the Bob
For the youngsters who have been raised on anime, Superman should have Talk no jutsu
it has been said (specifically in the movie Talladega nights) that the Beatles couldn’t have been the Beatles without the Rolling Stones. Or there would be no Diane Sawyer without Katie Couric.
Which is another way of saying that DC could help the MCU by giving them a real competitor to go up against.
By the way, the rivalry between DC and Marvel is usually in the heads of fanboys. If Gunn is able to pull off what he’s planning there is no reason there can’t be a DC/Marvel crossover.
Considering the Beatles wrote the first hit by the Rolling Stones, that doesn't really stand up to scrutiny... and creatively there was a much stronger competition with The Beach Boys
@@WaitingForTheHook
Yes, you are right. No Rolling Stones without The Beatles is more true. How else are you going to explain Their Satanic Majesties Request? 😏
Blue and Gold movie seems more likely every day
Hey bob, thanks for detailing how the MCU is a reflection of Obama era, post 9/11 politics. You laid it out very nicely
It's a bit whitewashed of Obama's own war crimes
If you’re right (and you’ve got a good track record), I think that would be a much better way to differentiate the DC movies from the MCU than just making it depressing and grimdark like the old ones did.
Also very interesting thing you brought up about the MCU being the key pop culture totem of the Obama era in an “American power but more benevolent” way I didn’t consider. I think they’re slowly evolving away from that but especially if you look back at Phase 1 especially, like I did recently, that is definitely how they started out. And I do think having Superman, Batman, Green Lantern and co. be the more direct counterargument to that would be interesting
Thank you for your take Bob, the trailer does scream optimism and goofy fun..
"Scooby. Dooby. Doo."
-James Gunn
A terrific epic take. Thanks Bob. We should talk about this MORE!!!
First time I've ever seen anyone make a 2012 reference.
Bob you’ve gotta do really that good LOTR
Super interesting! I’d never thought about the interplay between the Marvel movies and the post war on terror American fantasy.
Star Wars needs its James Gunn.
As always, love your insights into all things comic-s are weeeeird-book movies. I unchecked from DC movies after Batman v Superman and even though Gunns Suicide Squad was great it still had to prop up designs and characters i just didnt want. This movie is what i want, it's what i need, and i cant wait to see what unfolds after it's taken us all home
Yay glad Moviebob agrees with me that the MCU Post Avengers Endgame criticism is overblown
Standing on the verge of getting it on!
when it comes to corporate guys, let's not forget Michael Holt.
Okay, but ... that's not the Engineer, that's clearly one of the Fortress of Solitude robots that have been smashed up. This is like the third different briefly glimpsed background character I've seen erroneously called the Engineer by some commenter -- there must be a lot of eagerness to see that character.
I loved the elites storyline. I hope it's good too.
"Remember when superhero movies used to be fun? Pepperidge farms (and James Gunn) remembers..."
If this Superman movie does gangbusters, when James Gunn has to negotiate a contract with the upstairs people, he should force them to release Batgirl
You mention Lord of the Rings... Not tempted to do that Really That Good you teased sooo long ago, Bob?
One minute in: Brb, I gotta go see this trailer.
This really is a job for Superman!
I've actually showed the trailer to a few of my superhero fatigued nerd friends and they've all gone "Ooooooo" when Krypto shows up. It's at least piquing interest so they're doing something right!
I know I'm probably the only one worried about this, but I'm very nervous about the Authority being in the DC films. The whole point of that team, back in their Wildstorm days, could be summed up as: "This is what superheroes become without someone like Superman to light the way." If these upcoming movies paint them as the Elite from Action Comics #775, that's going to feel really unfair to me. The Authority _wanted_ to be the Justice League for their version of Earth, with no outside model of how a super-team free of government or corporate controls should work. If they're used in these new films as examples of what not to do, well, that would be a betrayal of the point of that team as originally created.
The original writer for the first year of the Authority's comic made them imperfect idealists who struggled to find the right way to use their awesome power and freedom. Later writers turned them into pretty horrible people and corrupted the concept quite badly. I have very little hope that Gunn intends to give us something new and good with them -- an Authority who get the opportunity to follow Superman's lead and become their best selves. I don't want to see them portrayed as cynical monsters again in a bid to make DC's homegrown characters look better. I don't know which way Gunn will move the Authority, but it would complete DC's waste of the team if they're used as bad examples. Maybe Gunn has a better idea, who knows? It's still early days.
That Superman issue with the Elite is IMO one of the worst, most cynical DC comics I have ever read. At best, it just does not understand its subject matter.
@@Carabas72while I mostly enjoy the premise. I kinda agree the elite despite beign proxy of the authority came of as villanous parodies and Superman while mostly correct is only so because the elite come up as straw men.
On the other hand I do think the acttually autorithy are better candidates for that kind of story. As long as they are well written. They could learn. Or beign redeem. Or even if neither they are far more simpatetic and nuance than the elite.
@@Carabas72 It's weird, but I actually liked that issue because the Elite weren't the original Authority. By the time Joe Kelly wrote that issue, the Authority had already been derailed by a change in authors, going from flawed heroes trying their best to careless egomaniacs built to kill. AC #775 was essentially a response to fans arguing online that super-heroes should be killers to solve their problems. Joe Kelly's response: Superman wouldn't want that, so why would the fans want it?
The Authority's world was a mess because that Earth's supers were all either terrorists or on kill teams (or so it appeared to the public). That was the point of the Wildstorm setting: things were worse without heroes. It's ironic that the original point of the Authority in its first year was that they were going to try to be an unironic "big good" and prove that non-cynical heroes could work.
@@SingularityOrbit
My main gripe (other than not understanding The Authority) is that the only reason in the story that Superman can be nicer is that he's so ridiculously powerful that he has the luxury of being able to go non-lethal. He can preach about truth and justice and the American way all he wants, but if he were less powerful The elite would have just turned him inside-out and have a good laigh about it.
Great video Bob. I am looking forward to this one. I have a feeling they’re taking a page out of My Adventures with Superman and let Lois figure out the secret identity by act 2.
If we get The Authority, I feel like Planetary would make an AMAZING HBO series. Run it for 2-3 seasons and that's it.
I appreciate your commentary on James Gunn, because it makes me appreciate works I might have otherwise dismissed as not for me. I am not a fan of Gunn's superhero works because I think he has a problem establishing stakes - whether it's Squad or Creature Commandos or Guardians, there's rarely a premium placed on the lives of the people in the film, whether the characters or people they come up against. That makes it hard for me to feel any kind of investment. It's hard to not get a bit of a Tarantino vibe, where the characters are frequently unlikeable and their motives rather base and the whole thing is so drenched in crimson that it just doesn't resonate emotionally. The characters don't feel like people and their world doesn't feel like one where I can understand the meaning of anything.
But you sharing your perspective lets me see things I might've missed or dismissed, and that's what makes for a great critic; someone who has strong insights and a passion for the works. Thank you for sharing it with the world. I might've otherwise let this pass me by.
Actually, the new logo might not be a Kingdom Come reference. The new suit seems to be modelled on the one from My Adventures With Superman (different shaded areas and all). And that's the logo from that.
The problem with releasing a movie like this with a character driven by "inherent belief in human goodness" as Gunn put it is that 2024 has proven definitively to me there really is no such thing as inherent human goodness.
Great analysis Bob - you brought up some very interesting things that I hadn't thought about all of this, at all. Cheers mate. :)
I wonder... will Superman potentially be a generally anti-establishment hero this time around? Sort of how he was in Grant Morrison's New-52 Superman. All the big corpo's you mention is an interesting note, since a big reason why Lex Luthor gets involved in the New-52, is because Superman is getting in the way of plans the establishment (mega-corps, governments) had made.
I'm starting to think "Ulysses" is actually Apollo. The suit would make sense, considering his "halo."
I wonder if the Guy Gardner/Hawkgirl/Mr. Terrific team will actually be the Justice League (Int'l), or if it's a rework of The Conglomerate with the matching jackets? That feels like it fits more with your theory and it saves a Justice League reboot for later.
There isn't really a difference there. The Justice League was a corporate-sponsored superteam at the time. It was Maxwell Lord who had bought him a superhero team because someone had let the trademark lapse in-universe or something like that.
hmmmmm I would go that far... A LOT of 80s comics were anti authority comics while still trying to remain hopeful. Dark Knight Returns was a HUGE INFLUENCE on the genre.... but so war Teen Titans and Uncanny X-men were the best selling comics at the time. Just reminded Rob Liefeld tried to do his EDGY BLOOD COMICS in the 90s, he did let Alan Moore use Supreme to write golden age Superman story because the industry wasn't making them.
Hopeful. Bob. Is. WEIRD. I jest, but let's hope they do this well.
I love Krypto's cape ❤🐕🦺
What are the odds I would see the same Jay and Silent Bob Strikes Back clip 2 days in a row from 2 different YT channels?
Here's hoping Gunn knocks it out of the park.
To put it on comic book terms; in the DCU there was already a Civil War, and Team Iron Man won.
I can only imagine how many times Kevin Smith jizzed himself watching the trailer for Superman.
Myself, I'm not really digging Corenswet in the role. I won't say I was underwhelmed by the trailer, but I'm leaning more that way than overwhelmed, for sure.
Maybe a longer trailer, closer to the release, will sell it better. I sure hope so.
Superdog was in there, that’s a first red flag 🚩
You will believe a grown man can cry.
I wish Cavill had this chance. Nothing against the new cast but man of steel should have had a better script and vision instead of the Snyderverse crap