Warner Bros. Bosses Say James Gunn "Understood The Assignment" With SUPERMAN; Talk Involvement With DC Studios

Warner Bros. Bosses Say James Gunn "Understood The Assignment" With SUPERMAN; Talk Involvement With DC Studios

Warner Bros. Pictures co-chiefs Pam Abdy and Mike De Luca have praised James Gunn's Superman, claiming that the filmmaker "understood the assignment" when it came to rebooting DC's Man of Tomorrow...

By JoshWilding - May 06, 2025 05:05 AM EST
Filed Under: Superman
Source: The Wrap

There's a lot of excitement and intrigue surrounding James Gunn's Superman, the movie that will launch DC Studios' DCU. Fans remain eager for a new trailer (despite recently getting a 5-minute sneak peek and featurette), and it's rumoured to drop later this month. 

DC Studios is separate from Warner Bros. in the same way that Marvel Studios largely stands apart from Disney.  However, studio heads Pam Abdy and Mike De Luca still have their finger on the pulse, and told SmartLess hosts Jason Bateman, Will Arnett, and Sean Hayes that they've seen an early cut of the reboot. 

"I used to chase James as a producer when he did 'Slither' and started with his low-budget movies," Mike De Luca explained. "He’s really unique and I think DC is in great hands with the two of them."

"We’ve seen an early cut of 'Superman,' and I don’t want to bury the lead, there’s a lot of marketing about to roll out ahead of its release, but he really understood the assignment," the executive continued. "His heart’s in the right place, his aim is true, and we’re really excited about their new version of DC."

His fellow co-Warner Bros. Pictures Chairman, Pam Abdy, added, "Yeah, James is great."

De Luca went on to explain that DC Studios does indeed bypass them, reporting directly to Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav. He and Abdy have been criticised for their handling of the DC brand, specifically Joker: Folie à Deux, an overpriced box office flop. 

"We actually have to stipulate: DC reports directly to David Zaslav, we don’t oversee it, but we were big supporters of Peter and James taking the job," he confirmed. "Our advice when we were asked was it doesn’t need another career executive, it needs a storyteller in charge."

"We were really impressed with Pixar — they brought Pete Docter, who’s a filmmaker in from the field, to be chief content officer and preside over their slate of movies," De Luca concluded. 

How much stock should we put into this praise? Hands-off with Superman or not, they also report to Zaslav, so they're bound to say the right things on behalf of Warner Bros. Even so, it's hard to imagine them being this positive about the movie unless they truly believe it's something special.

You can hear more from De Luca and Abdy in the player below. 

Superman, DC Studios' first feature film to hit the big screen, is set to soar into theaters worldwide this summer from Warner Bros. Pictures.

In his signature style, James Gunn takes on the original superhero in the newly imagined DC universe with a singular blend of epic action, humor and heart, delivering a Superman who’s driven by compassion and an inherent belief in the goodness of humankind.  

The movie stars David Corenswet in the dual role of Superman/Clark Kent, Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane and Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor.

Also appearing are Edi Gathegi, Anthony Carrigan, Nathan Fillion, Isabela Merced, Skyler Gisondo, Sara Sampaio, María Gabriela de Faría, Wendell Pierce, Alan Tudyk, Pruitt Taylor Vince, Neva Howell, and Milly Alcock.

Superman arrives in theaters on July 11, 2025.

SUPERMAN Trailer Includes A CREATURE COMMANDOS Cameo...And A Hint THE BATMAN Is Set In The DCU?!
Related:

SUPERMAN Trailer Includes A CREATURE COMMANDOS Cameo...And A Hint THE BATMAN Is Set In The DCU?!

SUPERMAN: New Snippets Of Footage Revealed As Clois Takes The Spotlight In More DCU Promo Art
Recommended For You:

SUPERMAN: New Snippets Of Footage Revealed As "Clois" Takes The Spotlight In More DCU Promo Art

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
vectorsigma
vectorsigma - 5/6/2025, 5:14 AM
"it doesn’t need another career executive, it needs a storyteller in charge"

Marvel, take note. Your desperation ends with this advice
vectorsigma
vectorsigma - 5/6/2025, 5:16 AM
#InGunnWeTrust

#DesperateMarvel
Blergh
Blergh - 5/6/2025, 5:42 AM
@vectorsigma - while I agree with the sentiment that it needs a storyteller and not a career executive but don’t get you turning this into us vs. them.

Marvel hired Gunn in the first place, gave him creative control to tell the story of Rocket and then got him back after he got cancelled from righties for making of Trump. Disney fired him because of the political pressure but Gunn happily came back to finish his story.

Feige isn’t a career executive either, the guy breathes these stories. Not saying he’s not spread to thin these days but I would say WB took Marvels blueprint here.

Besides, it’s not like you can’t clearly tell that other filmmakers like Ryan Coogler, Destin Daniel Cretton and now Jake Schreier got to do what they wanted. There might be mandates for certain plot beats and character appearances but these movies are through and through by these directors
vectorsigma
vectorsigma - 5/6/2025, 6:07 AM
@Blergh - it is not an "us vs them", more on "bring back your quality, marvel"

Imo, WB only took the shared universe blueprint, Gunn's process right now is an upgrade based on his lessons from Marvel. He makes sure a good script is there first before greenlighting a project.

Him and the other filmakers you mentioned werent able to make the movie they fully wanted. Feige has been an intrusion on these filmakers that most of them will not want to go back. As early as Phase 1 with Edgar Wright there have been issues.

He struck gold with the concept id agree, but never did he let the filmakers ceeate what they wanted.

Feige should step back a bit and be a Peter Safran and get a full creative on the storytelling part like Gunn is.
HulkisHoly
HulkisHoly - 5/6/2025, 7:45 AM
@Blergh -

This is really well said and I wholeheartedly agree (minus one point below). I would also add that the Bruce Timm Superman is also a perfect rendition as well. Even though Clark isn’t played for laughs, the show highlights the detective side of journalism AND Superman is not indestructible just strong, which makes fights a lot more fun.

Superman isn’t a Greek god in disguises. He’s a regular human in every way minus the super powers. He didn’t know he was an alien until many years later in life and that was AFTER he donned the tights and Superman moniker.

He’s an old fashion farm guy who just wants to help people. That’s it.

Yes, Reeves made “Clark” - bumbling around: his disguise and Superman was who he really was. But I think even the Reeves movies got this a little wrong…
Clark is the real man. He grew up genuinely as Clark from age 1 as a farm boy and son of the Kent’s. Superman was the character he created so he could help people and still have a personal life. But since he’s didn’t want a mask, he had to create a mask via glasses and acting dorkish (in some versions).

So ultimately, both Superman and “Clark in metropolis” are both disguises for the real Clark underneath it all.
dragon316
dragon316 - 5/6/2025, 8:06 AM
@vectorsigma - story teller what story can you tell with comics goodd vs bad goodd wins all time bad try kill hero or rule world goood wins same story with comic related stuff entertainment and books different characters all time ?si=Y2rotx3KXmrGAZTS
TDKRnry88
TDKRnry88 - 5/6/2025, 8:33 AM
@dragon316 - Yeah, let's listen to a guy who hates any fantasy franchise! He's shown us the way!
Blergh
Blergh - 5/6/2025, 9:18 AM
@dragon316 - good vs. bad is a the basis of many conflicts in stories. Starting from the earliest recorded story it was often the struggle of good vs. evil.
Two hyperbolic sides to more nuanced realities. Those who are right to the author are the good guys and those not in their good graces the bad ones.

Whether it’s religion (the Bible), modern literature (1984) to parables (The Scorpion & The Frog) the concept is a valid tool to tell a tale.

I’m not a fan of Matt Walsh and his take on media in general is subjective and never taken in good faith. It’s always what caters to his likings, which is a fair take for you as a consumer but a pretty selfish one to share as a though-leader (I didn’t coin the term, it’s what influencer are called in the marketing bubble).
His movie also very much falls victim to him believing that HIS views are the only valid ones. He disregards everyone around him as an NPC, which is a very good sign that there might be narcissistic tendencies.
Goldboink
Goldboink - 5/6/2025, 9:54 AM
@vectorsigma -
I'm going to have to disagree on Fiege. He's a storyteller first and foremost and that is what made the MCU great up until Endgame. It's when people who weren't storytellers first got their hands on the money when things got squiffy. It also got so big and busy that he was not able to give full attention to the creative.

As for Wright, they disagreed with a few creative decisions, which is thier right, and he refused to make anything other than an Edgar Wright movie.
vectorsigma
vectorsigma - 5/6/2025, 10:10 AM
@Goldboink - id disagree in considering him a storyteller. He had a vision of an interconnected cinematic comicbook universe. It was great when it started with a focus on telling a coherent saga interspersed into small films and capping it up with a team up event.

But he lost his way now and the focus is not there anymore.

It was good management id agree, that is his strength that he honed during his early days as producer. But i havent seen a script from him being made into a film to consider him a storyteller.
Goldboink
Goldboink - 5/6/2025, 10:25 AM
@vectorsigma -
You don't have to write the script to be a storyteller. His involvement was as much based on the stories told during the first phases as anything else. He was involved intimately. The problems post Endgame were a result of Victoria Alonso and others pushing a slew of crazy shit that nobody wanted to see. There was too much going on for him to focus on. I think Thunderbolts is the first one since Iger took over again where he had a higher degree of involvement. Iger got his job back in 2022, which is when Thunderbolts went into production. It has all the hallmarks of early MCU films, being character driven and more self contained.

Feige was recently quoted as saying that the MCU has felt more like homework than entertainment for the last few years and this is a change to that.
vectorsigma
vectorsigma - 5/6/2025, 10:34 AM
@Goldboink - im using the Gunn comparison when I said storytelling so im not counting Feige as one.

And all of the stories done were loosely based on what's in the comics, it wasnt his grand and novel idea.

And imo, it is a bit convenient to blame all on those who left and say that Thunderbolts was good because of Iger getting back and Feige getting more focused. We need a string of good movies to see that is true. They are even in desperate marketing mode now with those "new avengers" stuff.

Goldboink
Goldboink - 5/6/2025, 10:44 AM
@vectorsigma -
Feige is different from Gunn, no doubt, but still focused on story. We have FF coming up, which was a passion project for Feige and then the whole Doom/Secret wars thingie. We will soon see what's up but blaming people who were involved with a big pile of shite isn't too off base, especially when things improve after they are gone.
TheJok3r
TheJok3r - 5/6/2025, 5:18 AM
I really hope this does well at the box office. DC and the genre as a whole need a win.
dragon316
dragon316 - 5/6/2025, 8:08 AM
@TheJok3r - depends on people who want to see it thunderbolts and transformers one have goodd reviews fighting stay alive transformers lost thunderbolts still fighting
bkmeijer1
bkmeijer1 - 5/6/2025, 5:21 AM
Honestly, it's not really reassuring that studio execs say a filmmaker understands the assignment, considering it often feels like they want the opposite of something creative.
MrRossBot
MrRossBot - 5/6/2025, 6:58 AM
@bkmeijer1 - I’ll say this in response to your assessment: these two aren’t the typical executives. They’re film nerds and lovers of the medium. They get it. They’ve somehow, in their respective careers, found a solid balance between corporate and creative. You should listen to the episode! Very good!
bkmeijer1
bkmeijer1 - 5/6/2025, 7:31 AM
@MrRossBot - alright, thanks for the clarification. I might give it a listen. Bateman and Arnett are already pretty funny too
MrRossBot
MrRossBot - 5/8/2025, 12:36 AM
@bkmeijer1 - Nice! Hope you dig it!
Blergh
Blergh - 5/6/2025, 5:38 AM
I’m a big fan of DeLuca for his involvement in New Line post-Freddy. The man greenlit the LotR trilogy and deserves more credit than many other WB execs, New Line was the production arm back then. He also championed slasher flicks throughout the 90s till Jason X.

So when he says he chased him since Slither I absolutely believe him that he saw something in Gunn that many others hadn’t.

I also believe that Gunn gets Superman a lot more than many other directors before him did. Snyder and Singer treated Superman as the god of a man, who carried himself like a god in the mantle of a human. Pretending to be human but still obviously “a god in disguise”. Cavill and Routh played Kal-El pretending to be Clark Kent, not the other way around.

The way he was portrayed on Smallville, the new Supeman animation with Jack Quaid and in the Chris Reeves version is THE way (for me at least).
He’s just Clark, a good guy with bigger powers and due to his nativitee he helps others without questioning why. He’s just a good guy, not a Greek god hiding among us. Being awkward, derpy and funny while PRETENDING to be cool as Superman is how it should be.

Gunn writes outsiders really well and this is exactly what I think he’ll do here. Clark is the derpy country himbo with a good heart.

Even the Captain America movies are bad templates for Superman because Steve Rogers was always better than every other human, even before the serum. Supes isn’t necessarily “better”, he just loves our ideals fully
Highflyer
Highflyer - 5/6/2025, 6:07 AM
@Blergh - Curious, how did Snyder's and Routh's come across as a "god in disguise"? Also, I never got tht impression that Reeve was PRETENDING to be cool as Superman. I mainly remember Superman 1978 portraying Superman as who he really is.

You mention Clark just being a good guy, but Snyder's Clark is never told to save people prior to doing so. Especially since he'd been doing it since he was a child despite his father's warnings.
vectorsigma
vectorsigma - 5/6/2025, 6:16 AM
@Blergh - i like this analysis on how Superman was handled by different creatives and the trailer perfectly shows how Gunn portrays him as you prefer him to be. From the dorky way he walks as Clark, to saying thank you to robots who just mentioned they dont have emotions.
MrRossBot
MrRossBot - 5/6/2025, 7:00 AM
@Blergh - Yeah, these guys seem like they get it. It was so refreshing hearing studio execs speak like just normal everyday fans. You can they love cinema and respect the medium. Not to mention their filmography which is quite impressive.
MrRossBot
MrRossBot - 5/6/2025, 7:01 AM
@MrRossBot - *You can tell they love…
SpiderParker
SpiderParker - 5/6/2025, 9:50 AM
@Highflyer - "doing it since he was a child despite his father's warnings"

So, he disobeyed his father and saved people a couple of times but listened to his father that one time when his father was about to die? What a great guy. Seems to me like the guy had a grudge on his father.
Highflyer
Highflyer - 5/6/2025, 10:31 AM
@SpiderParker - How you came to that conclusion that he had a grudge despite his reaction to his death is beyond me.
SpiderParker
SpiderParker - 5/6/2025, 11:06 AM
@Highflyer - Maybe this will help you understand.



The one time he chose not to help. Similar beats. Except Parker doesn't know what that leads to while Clark knows exactly what it leads to. "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Highflyer
Highflyer - 5/6/2025, 11:11 AM
@SpiderParker - This is the biggest apples and oranges comparison I've seen. Again, based on Clark's reaction and explaination he gave Lois, he did not hold a grudge. Be for real.
SpiderParker
SpiderParker - 5/6/2025, 2:50 PM
@Highflyer - "You're not my dad. You are just some guy who found me in the fields."

Failure of a dad, failure of a son. Imagine being a dad and telling his son to let people die and being the son who never listens to his dad unless its his dad who is dying. Great storytelling. Great characters. In the real world, this is called criminal negligence.

S stands for hope, yeah right, he didn't even have hope to save his dad or the fact that even if people found out, they would understand. Some hero.



Imagine being Superman, who should have greater morals than Spider-Man, end up with lower morals than the very ideal he supposedly represents. Snydermen won't understand how much the character was butchered. I'm out.
Highflyer
Highflyer - 5/6/2025, 6:14 PM
@SpiderParker

You sound like J Jonah Jameson looking at things in the worst way possible.

Unle Ben: "And I know I'm not your father."

Peter: Then stop pretending to be!

A kid lashing out and having an attitude isn't "Holding a grudge"

The train comparison is a horrible comparison since in Man Of Steel, the world finding out about someone like Clark is anticipated to be an earth changing event. In Spider-Man 2, it's just a revelation of his identity, not reality of superpowers which they accept like it's nothing in the first film. Neither did he have hope an expose himself willingly.

It sounds like you're picking out lines and ignoring the context and the rest of the film.

If you paid attention, there's a time jump between Clark saving the kids on the bus (he was 13) and when his dad dies (around 17). There's no indication that Clark needed to save anyone after his conversation with father. It's not Snyderman. It's SUPERMAN. Just say you don't like this version instead of gatekeeping.

He had hope when he surrendered himself, he had hope when he showed up at the capitol, he had hope when he gave his life for the planet. I'm out too.
SpiderParker
SpiderParker - 5/6/2025, 7:09 PM
@Highflyer - When I said Snydermen, I was referring to people like you who love his desecration of the character. And according to you, in those 4years, he was indifferent to people who could have been saved and you are saying he doesn't resent his father for it? Looks to me he was waiting for it. You know for the greater good? Its all hypothetical but in the real world, everyone would be making the same assumptions.

Earth changing event anticipated by who? The guy who is asking people to die for his son who can't die by then any apparent human means? Have you ever seen or read any media regarding Superman before Man of Steel?

And who in Spider-Man accepted it like nothing? JJJ? MJ? Harry? Who did? It's a fitting comparison. Peter knew the risk and he still wanted to save the people. Clark gave up on his dad as his dad asked him to. There's a reason it is widely hated scene and divisive movie. Just cause you are unable to see or accept doesn't make it any better no matter how much you want it to be.

The writing was on the wall when MOS came out, the only reason the whole Snyderverse sucked is the weak foundation laid by Superman's weak portrayal. Which is why they are starting fresh exactly where they F***ED up last time.

And he didn't have hope when he surrendered, he knew he can't be held. No one stays good in this world. Very hopeful indeed.
Highflyer
Highflyer - 5/6/2025, 7:30 PM
@SpiderParker - There's no indication that anyone around him was in danger in those 4 years

You seem to be forgetting that the world of Man Of Steel is it's own thing. Which includes how the world reacts to him. It varies from comic to comic. The character has been around for more than 80 years. What does people not being able to harm Clark have to do with anything?

In Spider-Man 1, what was the public reaction when a man with superpowers showed up for the first time? It was brushed over with a few civilian interviews (including someone thirsting over his butt).

It isn't fitting, because again what is being risked? The context is VERY different. There is no consequence on the world of people finding out the Peter Parker was Spider-Man (even though Peter Parker isn't even a public figure so I don't know how they'd tell anyone).

Pointing to public opion doesn't do anything for me as I'm sure you've disagreed with the majority regarding a film once in your life.

Knowing he can't be held isn't what negates hope. It's about trusting mankind with your fate. Hence why he doesn't resist and doesn't even argue about being handed over to Zod.

Again, you're taking one line and then running with it. Who inspired Bruce to still believe "Men are still good?" Who saved Lex's life despite him kidnapping and threatening to kill her? Who sacrificed his life for a world that rejected, doubted and hated him? Yes. Very hopeful. Hope isn't about things being okay, but rather when we do the right thing when everything else seems wrong. Superman can feel lost and scared and his words can reflect that.
SpiderParker
SpiderParker - 5/6/2025, 8:39 PM
@Highflyer - "I'm sure you've disagreed with the majority regarding a film"

Surely I have, but disagreeing with a movie is a different thing than disagreeing with the core of a character. That's what fans of Snyder fail to understand. I can watch MOS right now and enjoy the movie for what it is, a dumb popcorn flick like Transformers but I will still hate the movie for what it did to Superman. I enjoyed BvS more than MOS and that's saying something but I still hate the movie for what it did to Batman, Superman, Lex while also forcing Wonder Woman into a flick where she wasn't even needed.

I loved Affleck in the role and I hate that I never got a proper flick with him. I liked Cavill in the role and I hate how he has been a laughing stock thanks to Snyder or that he didn't even get to be Superman until Josstice League. Now imagine how good BvS would have been with the same cast as a sequel to a better and different Man of Steel.

The same story could have been told so much better if someone else was at the helm who actually loved Superman. And I can bet that the only reason Snyder made Batman into a killer with branding issues was to justify MOS. So, not only did he ruin a character that he never really liked but he also ruined another character that he did like to justify his previous failure.

MOS is the source of what went wrong with DCEU. Everything that went right with MOS has nothing to do with Snyder but everything that went wrong with MOS is all Snyder. Shaky camera work, no importance given to characters, motive, morals and relations. The cast pulled the whole weight of the movie and epic music was wasted on a trashy flick.
Highflyer
Highflyer - 5/7/2025, 7:09 AM
@SpiderParker - I'm going to address certain things in your statement.

The the opinion of the majority
Whether it's the film or a character, it's still the same because even if people collectively pile on Snyder's version. Same with Batman. Some will just say "Batman doesn't kill", but when you point to other live action versions that killed, they'll move the goal post and point to the usage of guns. Ask them what their ideal Superman is and apart from the generic "hope" (Which I'd say the nuances change depending on who you ask) and you'd see their ideal Superman don't even match with others.

Josstice League's Superman - This is the part that kind of frustrates me about how we see Superman as a character. The only difference between Joss's version and ZSJL's version (which was filmed before) is that Joss's version quipped more and used the use of the slogan. Both were more confident and lighthearted. I also think Superman's brightness in battle typically works when he's on top of a situation. Prior to that he fought people just as strong if not more (Zod and Doomsday) neither situation would be appropriate for Superman to be taking it with confident stride. I think Superman is so much more than a character that's confident or the hero you know is going to save the day. I know Superman is known for his charm, however I don't think he's above feeling what humans do either. Put the "ideal" comic book Superman in the same situations like failing to save the bombing victims or public hate driven protests, I don't think even he would be super joyful given the circumstances. What people actually mean is "Don't put Superman in situations where he's sad or lost."

Snyder not loving Superman
I don't subscribe to the idea of if a director loves a character they'd do A,B and C. I think that's a very narrow minded way to view storytelling. It's the same way I think it's flawed to think if a fan loves a character they have to hate a certain film or incarnation of the character. I believe it's perfectly possible to love a chracter and want to put him or her through a specific lense or even deviate in more ways than one.

Batman killing
There's nothing to suggest the reason he had Batman kill was to justify Man Of Steel. Do you also have a theory as to why Nolan and Burton had Batman kill?

Who is to blame for MOS?
Why do directors typically get praise for the performances they bring out of the actors, but the same can't be said with Snyder?
The things "wrong" with MOS are subjective.
SpiderParker
SpiderParker - 5/7/2025, 5:15 PM
@Highflyer - Did you see me point out Zod's death at Superman's hands? It is an issue that could have been avoided but I still didn't bring it up, you know why? Because in the list of things that were wrong, that was the least of it. Pointless destruction, pointless somber dialogues and pointless forced moments to get a rise out of people in a disguise of auteurism rank way high up.

In case you didn't get my point, I'll say it in a simpler terms. Batman killed before but in BvS, like many things that has happened in Snyder flicks, he killed people pointlessly.

Imagine loving the character of Batman so much that you give him Superpowers to make him relevant in the superhero filled world. Imagine loving the character of Iron Man so much that you remove his initial irresponsibility that brought so much responsibility and accountability to his life. Destroying the core of a character and still arguing that Snyder loved Superman? Well, he didn't show it.

Changing the external and the edges is a fine thing but changing the core of the character and saying its flawed thinking to hate a film or incarnation for it is asking way too much. As I have come to see, the only people who love that incarnation is the people who were introduced to the character with that incarnation. So, they love that incarnation not the original character.

In a drastic situation, Spider-Man could lose hope but he wouldn't give up. Batman would look for the best possible alternative and be a realist. Superman would never lose hope. (1/2)
SpiderParker
SpiderParker - 5/7/2025, 5:18 PM
@Highflyer - What performances are you talking about? Superman? The only performance worth it by Cavill was in Josstice League. I liked Cavill in the role but I couldn't love it because he never gave a good performance under that hack. He had potential that was wasted. Shannon was great so great that the protagonist looked like a fool in his own movie even more. Affleck was great, he was so great that the protagonist looked like a fool in his own sequel. But were they bullet proof?

Batman's whole logic in BvS is flawed, so much that no one can say he is the world's greatest detective. His methods are stupid as it makes him no better than the ones he is fighting, infact, it makes him worse.

Zod's primary motivation was the survival of Krypton, then he went into a rage mode and turned towards the destruction of Earth. He has no backstory for why he acts the way he does. Pointlessly went from survival of his species at the cost of another and ended up risking his species due to a grudge against another. What could have been a ruthless, desperate and tragic leader turned into vengeful villain with no regard to his mission out of spite.

So yes, the fault is with Snyder. He was too busy making Jesus imagery to care about the characters and their motivations. He was too busy shaking his camera to care about logic and reason. He was too busy picking dark grading to care about relations and morals. (2/2)
Highflyer
Highflyer - 5/7/2025, 6:28 PM
@SpiderParker -

I'm going to skip some of what you said, not as an attempt to dissmiss, but as a result of it being subjective. If you feel like a scene is pointless, then that's that. I can't force you to feel a scene to be organic.

1)Batman killing
I understood what you said. However, you just pointed out that the previous incarnation had a point to the killing. So I'll ask this as I'm genuinely curious. What point was the killing in the Burton films?

2) The core of the character.
Your Batman having Superpowers and Iron Man not feeling responsible are good examples (the batman example could have been better) but you've failed to show how the core was changed in these films.

3) Why do people love Snyder's Superman?
While there are certainly people who were introduced to Superman through these films, to suggest those are the ONLY people who love it is a stretch. I was introduced to Superman through the 1978 Donner film. Enjoyed the Dean Cain series, Justice League animated show, Smallville (still haven't finished it) and believe it or not, when I watched MOS for the first time, I initially didn't like it.

4) Josstice League
What was wrong with his performance in ZSJL?

5) Batman's logic in BvS
I'm not sure if you mean his motives for fighting Superman but you need give more than just calling something "stupid". How?

6)This is where I disagree big time. The film makes it clear that he's born to be who he is and do what he does. It's in his DNA pretty much. The same goes for the people under him. They're born to protect Krypton. Even Faora is brought to tears at the sight the ruins of Krypton and Zod empathises with her because he feels it too.

Look at what he says when Superman takes away any chance at saving Krypton.
"I exist only to protect Krypton. That is the sole purpose for which I was born. And every action I take, no matter how violent or how cruel, is for the greater good of my people. And now... I have no people. "
You even see him get emotional as he says this. Not only is his people gone, but so is his purpose for living and he's bitter about it. You make it sound like a vengeful villain can't be a desperate and ruthless villain at the same time.
Look at some of the villains we've seen. Thanos, Scarecrow, Joker, Donner's Zod. We don't have to see the backstory of a villain to see how exactly they became the person we meet in the film. How exactly did he risk his species? Krypton was gone. He said it himself.
MrRossBot
MrRossBot - 5/8/2025, 12:38 AM
@MrRossBot - Yes! Hollywood needs more execs like them.
SpiderParker
SpiderParker - 5/11/2025, 10:37 PM
@Highflyer - 1) Batman either killed unintentionally or tried to save, although there are instances that were arguably closer to murder, such as in the Burton films and Batman Begins when he left Ra’s al Ghul to die. I won't defend those choices as I was pretty much pissed about that as well. But in the end the good outweighs the bad, whereas, the bad outweighs the good in every case related to Snyder movies. But since you brought this up, even though Burton movies are cartoonish and yet seems more lethal than Nolan’s, it is much closer to Batman than Nolan’s in certain aspects.

And while it does seem that like Burton movies had Batman kill more people, most onscreen kills are in fact attributed to Affleck while if you consider off-screen kills then Bale leads with no competition. But again, they were good movies and each had a side of portrayal down including Affleck but Affleck backstory, no thanks to Snyder, is more f’ed up than others which shows with his Branding issues. And even then Affleck was the best Batman which is worse considering how royally he was f’ed by Snyder.

2) It is pretty self explanatory, so I don’t see the need to elaborate further into it. But if you read or watch Red Son, you will understand my point.

3) Well, your initial reaction was the correct one. Most times, a first reaction is pretty accurate and if you changed your mind, either you were coerced or learned to accept it. In any case, the art didn’t change, you did.

4) What was good about it? The movie is inferior to Josstice League in every way with possible exception of Batman. Why only a possible exception? Cause the movie is so bad it is forgettable as hell. I vaguely remember ZSJL having better portrayal of Batman, but that’s questionable, and I’m not checking out that terrible movie again just to be certain.



5) After almost 10 years since the movie came out, you really need people to remind you of what went wrong? I’m certain you remember all of them by heart by now. The greatest detective jumped to conclusions as fast as he jumped out of them. How about that?



6) Wrong. He is not born to be Superman, and that's one of the core themes of every Superman story. Again, refer to Red Son. He was intended to be like a normal 'human being' who was forced to leave his planet to survive and landed on our planet, which provided him with superhuman abilities. What he does with those abilities is directly linked to the nurturing he received from the Kents.

FYI: Jor-El didn't even know the extent of the powers granted by a yellow sun, so he would never say anything like 'He will be a god to them.' This further proves how both of his parents are better portrayed in the Donner movies.



7) Zod killed his own people, he tried to take over Krypton, and he led a coup against the Kryptonian Council. The last thing on a dictator's mind is the greater good of their people. His words and actions are contradictory, and his motives are unclear and counterintuitive. He doomed Krypton one way or another. His persistence in terraforming Earth ensured that Kal-El had to stop him. He could have worked it out with Kal-El and looked for an alternative, such as a different planet. It was never truly about Krypton and its people. He was a vengeful dictator pretending to be a tragic, duty-bound leader. Had they executed it better, he could have been interesting.



Thanos had a backstory, as did Donner's Zod. And believe it or not, so did Joker and Scarecrow. It doesn’t need to detail a character's life from Age 1, but it should be enough to show us their motivations and how they lead to their actions without contradiction. The amount generally depends on the type of story being told. For some characters, even a little is enough, while for others it is not. As is the case with different iterations of the same character. It all depends on the execution.



Donner’s Zod was a trusted general turned criminal who wanted to be a dictator and rule Krypton. This is simple enough and doesn't require further exploration of his one-dimensional methods. Snyder wanted a three-dimensional character but made it worse by having contradicting story-elements and not enough backstory for his flawed behavior. In such a case, having a well-executed one-dimensional villain is much better than a flawed and contradictory supposedly tragic hero turned villain who was, in fact, a villain from the start.

#) I'm taking a time out from this as someone who has made up his mind is unlikely to change their mind even if the logic and reason are sound. I'll attribute it to the fact that either you hated the character or weren't all that excited about it until the Snyder revamp. You were probably fooled by the aesthetically pleasing elements in that movie into thinking that the story and characterizations were all that great as well. Which is just sad considering you have checked out the other portrayals.
JurassicClunge
JurassicClunge - 5/6/2025, 6:01 AM
WB need to stop prasing directors before the movies are released 😮‍💨

People still laugh at the standing ovation comments 🤣😅

1 2

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

View Recorder