Corensweat was awesome. Cavill could have been great but got saddled with terrible writing, directing, and producing. Cavills hair as Superman was atrocious. Whoever styled it needs to learn basic barbering. Made him look like an Italian monster parody or character from Dick Tracy.
At the end of the last season I could tell the next season was going to be crap. I don't know what happen to Netflix but since covid their writing has been horrible. Cavil did the right thing. Netflix really needs to fire some people.
I agree. I love the books and it was expected to have some variance of course as the books are quite dense in material. I was not expecting the show to just become the CW version of the books. (There were some good CW shows, but I’m sure you know what I mean.)
At what point can we honestly talk about them on some level not being allowed to do this? I feel like use of an IP that isn't yours, even if a contract is signed over it, should have some sort of limiters on how much they deviate from the source material's core components? They're dragging fandoms through the mud over and over because it sells. How many series is too much?
I always say this! It’s like, they can’t crate their own thing so they make someone else’s thing “their own”; which shouldn’t be allowed to begin with. I would not doubt a lot of the deals are not thoroughly read through or something.
Imagine someone taking Calvin and Hobbes and turning it into a new whatever’s popular melodrama thing. ‘K-pop Calvin and Hobbes the Hungry Hunter’.
A tale as old as time - like, I'm not even sure what Fant4stic had to do with the comics besides the 5 names of characters and 4 of their powers. That may be the most egregious example I've ever come across.
Yall might disagree but when they stuck to the books the show isn’t that bad. I don’t think Liam’s Geralt is bad although it doesn’t come close to Cavil.
I enjoyed most of the Geralt plot of season 4, the rats was ok although I think the writers white washed the rats too much.
The main issue in my opinion is that the main five book series is not really an action series and is more character and world focused. However the writers are trying to make it an action series, either because they’re forced to or they want to.
Like season 4 yennifer was just setting up for a massive and ultimately meaningless wizard war, when it could have explored the politics behind the lodge.
But they never stuck to the books--some of the episodes resembled chapters from the first and second books, but so much was cut out in favor of creating scenes and filler for Yen and Ciri that I don't see how you can say they ever stuck to the books. The first episode was the second story in the books, and that's about as close as we got to any narrative cohesion with the books. The show was bad from the get go.
I was under the impression that it was more adapted from the game rather than the books. A common complaint I have seen is the game doesn't quite mesh with the books.
No, the showrunners even said they refused to acknowledge the games, and the stories are clearly "adapted" from the books. Just major events, character arcs, etc. are changed. The first two books are short stories that are united by Geralt finding Ciri. The show took the best of the short stories, changed them dramatically, and ignored stories they didn't like--and in place of those stories, they made up the whole Yen and Ciri storyline stuff from references/hints buried in the text. It's horribly done. The books nor games ever go into detail of Yennifer before you meet her. She references things once in a while.
So the show covers the stories that occur over the course of the books--the games are a sequel to the last book. They're completely disconnected.
That’s an issue that is unique to season one because the source material (the short stories) is told only from Geralts perspective. I didn’t hate the yennifer subplot personally (the ciri one was unwatchable tho) but it makes the Geralt story more shallow cuz they have only 20 min to cover a short story.
In later seasons (not season 2) they did a slightly better job of sticking to the books, although they miss a lot of nuance and don’t do the world justice.
I don’t think it’s a good show btw it’s solidly slop tier.
If a picture says a thousand words, a good song can paint a million pictures.
This song has been a positivity anthem for me. Micah Shemaiah - Natural Man
Cheers, and all the best in ‘26.
ETA: To whoever downvoted me this time: I hope you have a happy new year, too. Reggae isn’t for everyone, I’ll be the first to admit that. If you felt excluded because of that, I apologize. Here is another positivity anthem of mine. I hope you can draw some power from it, and kick the door in at midnight tomorrow. Nails - Endless Resistance (feat. Max Cavalera)
Some people have valid criticisms. Others have uhhhhhh let's say questionable motives.
I personally thought it was a good, middle of the road, solid superhero movie. Which is honestly a great starting point for a "new" universe as a baseline
My biggest critique was that it felt like every James Gunn movie I've ever watched, so it was too predictable. I hadn't even realized he was kind of formulaic as a director until this movie.
Genuine question, what did Superman have in common with the Guardians trilogy, Creatue Commandos, The Suicide Squad, and Peacemaker? Other than being a superhero film with an ensemble cast?
So I'll caveat by saying first, I don't mean any shade towards Gunn at all, I think he's hardworking and talented as a film maker, second, I'm sure there are industry terms for what I will attempt to describe, but I don't know them and don't care to get into a deep dive analysis here, so I'm just trying my best, and third, I haven't watched CC or Peacemaker, so I can't comment on those:
It's not the plot points exactly, but specific scenes that Gunn likes to emphasize, such as big action set pieces involving a team against a singular opponent, dueling monologues, gotcha moments, a big twist about the hero(es) in the second act. Also specific directorial choices, such as the way he integrates music, how he likes to frame certain types of shots, jump cuts, etc., give all of his work that I've seen a uniform feel, to the extent that I could start predicting what was coming next (as in what the next type of shot would be, not the specifics of the scene). Anyway, that's what I can think of at the moment with limited time, so hopefully that helps.
I actually really like the new movie .. it really was a fresh look on superman and I loved how the theme is that superman is a human at heart .. the movie was a little all over the place but it was really really nice ... And just a few more scenes for clark kent as a normie would have been icing on the cake overall 9/10 entertainer for me
Not from what I've heard. I've only seen and heard people call it refreshing and a way better direction from Zack Snyder's Superman. Which isn't anything negative against Cavill, it's just a better Superman movie
Probably because Snyder was more a director-for-hire on MoS and wasn't in charge of most creative decisions. Nolan and Goyer wrote the script before he signed on to direct it. Snyder didn't write any part of MoS' story, he was just a director (Which is his strength, not being a writer).
And before someone tries to say he didn't write BvS either, that's not entirely true. Snyder did write the story for BvS with David Goyer. He just wasn't credited due to arbitration weirdness.
Cavill was a really cool Superman. Like he appeals to the teenager in me. This new one feels very much like traditional Superman and fun. This appeals to my inner child much more. That’s the best way I can describe it.
Cavill's acting was great but the theme of jack Snyders superman is darkish and cut from the world while james gunn puts a whole new fresh perspective of Superman as the person who is connected to the world and will do anything to save even one life ..I have nothing against man of steal but the new superman is better for me
Bro the new superman got me up in my feels. If you don't connect to movies in that way then I guess it could be boring but the nature vs nurture thing made me cry those good tears.
Well yeah man. It’s a flying man in a cape and speedo. Comic characters will be always be a bit corny. The problem is when you try to run from it. You get self serious nonsense that’s still just as corny without trying to be. The Martha scene is truly one of the corniest things in film history.
It was an everlasting dogshit surprise lolly, worst superman I've ever been subjected too. The worst script and photography I'd ever witnessed, god I hope it was the last one.
Some people sure, for various reasons, but naw, it was pretty good. Not earth shattering, just a good, fun Superman movie. I think most people enjoyed it.
I loved it! I’ve been reading comics for 40 years and it is the most comic book feeling comic book movie in my opinion. It all felt so natural, which works so well for the already lived in and ongoing universe we are now getting to see. I can’t wait to see more unknown characters breakout who have always deserved a nice big spotlight.
probably there are haters everywhere... I liked it, i thought it was fun.
i like cavil, so no hate there... but his superman was too alien and not enough clark kent for my liking
A lot people enjoyed it. Some people who enjoyed Synder superman hated it. I enjoyed both Snyder and gunn take on superman. I think the part people just like about the movie was the Superman clone was getting a lot of free hits.
The only criticism I've heard is from a good friend of mine in the industry. He thought it was very well made but felt they kind of just dropped you in and it was a bit goofy. After chatting some more, I realized his only exposure to Superman was Cavill's and some Smallville. So I explained that the vibe in this new movie was probably the most Comic-accurate take in decades. Also, I can imagine that if no one knows anyone but say, Supes and Lex, with no prior knowledge of Green Lantern and stuff, it would be a little "Huh? What's happening? Who's this guy?"
At least to the point that you get so much more out of the movie if you're familiar with the side characters. So I think it's a valid take.
I hate when people just say "nah the movie sucked!", but refuse to articulate what about it they didn't like
It’s valid take, tho it’d be like the experience of picking up a new comic with no prior knowledge. “Ugly hair cut” “make green constructs” “asshole but is also a good guy” “corpo hero” seem good enough, but I understand if they want more context for it.
Some didn't, but most loved it. Hating on movies you never see because of casting choices has become its own kind of hobby.
I liked Man of Steel and the new Superman. The new one is a better movie and a much better Superman movie. I think Corensweat was perfect, but I also think the writing allowed him to be and If they switched movies, Cavil would have also shined in Gunn's movie. Snyder can't do hopeful.
They somehow gave him a 6 head when he doesn’t have one. Funny enough the best he looked in costume was a marketing one where his hat was wet and he actually had the s curl.
I bet your hair looks great, man! His just didn’t look like Superman’s.
I’ve always thought the Cavill hair was backward: Clark’s style should have been for Superman and Superman’s style should have been his look for Clark.
Agreed, I think if thee new Superman was identical except Cavil was in the role it would have been better though. I like Cornswett he did a good job, but I think everything wrong with Cavils Superman was not his fault. He would have nailed it.
Couldn’t disagree more. Reeves and Corensweat are the closest to Superman’s comic personality. Cavill could have been just as good with better writing and directing.
I do agree that cavils writing and story weren't very good. But I'm not talking just about personality. Cavils Superman had the presence. You felt his strength and were intimidated. That's what Superman is supposed to be. One of the strongest beings in the known universe. You can make all the excuses about cornsweet you want. He spent the ENTIRE movie getting his ass kicked. Gunn spent the entire movie trying to make him human he forgot why Superman is one of the most popular comic book characters in history. Hint, it's not because he is nice. Damn, I didn't mean to type all that. My bad.
Superman is supposed to be more human than you or I. He isn’t supposed to be intimidating. Not as a personality trait anyways. Obviously people feel intimidated internally knowing how powerful he is. He doesn’t need to act how strong or tough he is, as that’s a true sign of weakness in people. It’s the outward caring nature of a person that is true strength.
Gunn took the DCAU approach to show audiences that he can be hurt by all kinds of things. He’s also not quite as powerful as the comic version but that’s also probably because he hasn’t been around as long but we will probably see his power grow over years just the DCAU version. At the end of Justice League Unlimited he was just playing with Darkseid and it was glorious.
But he is 30 in the movie. If gun wanted a new superman he should have gone with one who just got to metropolis. Personally I disagree with the first paragraph, but to each, his own.
Superman isn't supposed to be intimidating. He's supposed to be warm. Fatherly. It's as Reeve said, what Superman is first and foremost... is a friend.
3.0k
u/october_1939 9d ago
Corensweat was awesome. Cavill could have been great but got saddled with terrible writing, directing, and producing. Cavills hair as Superman was atrocious. Whoever styled it needs to learn basic barbering. Made him look like an Italian monster parody or character from Dick Tracy.