Fire & Water #218 – The People vs DC Films

Shag wishes to FIND HIS JOY with the DC Comics films and Daniel Cynical Adams stops by to help! Shag and Daniel discuss each of DC’s expanded universe films, with Daniel defending these movies from the attacks of the faceless internet — with special attention to BATMAN V SUPERMAN!

Join the conversation and find more great content:

This episode brought to you by InStockTrades. This week’s selections:

This podcast is a proud member of the FIRE AND WATER PODCAST NETWORK:

Thanks for listening! Fan the Flame and Ride the Wave! 

35 responses to “Fire & Water #218 – The People vs DC Films

  1. Great episode, Daniel was dead on with the DCEU movies.
    Bottom line the comics are comics, the movies are one thing, and tv shows are another. Building on this idea, DC Is developing different versions within the print, besides the mainline there is now DC Black for “mature readers”, DC Ink and Zoom “young adult” “youth”, and now DC Wonder Comics “teens”.
    All these versions are DC characters and you can pick and choose what you want. The whole point is that more people can find a version they like, and maybe learn to respect other versions for the new audiences they attract.

  2. Good work guys I enjoyed this episode. My joy for DC encompasses the years between 1981 to 1985 when I actively bought and collected comics. I don’t understand all the hate the DC movies stir up. Personally I’ve enjoyed all of the movies and I’m looking forward to Aquaman in December. What’s not to like about seeing some of the most popular and enduring pop culture characters in live action? Once again great show and looking forward to your review of Aquaman (hint …).

  3. The Marvel films are roller coasters: fun and thrilling, but not very deep. The DCEU films, like the DC comics are all over the place, lacking the singular creative vision that the Marvel films have. This is not bad per se, but not only is there no unifying vision between the films, there is no one with creative vision supervising and guiding the directors — saying the running time cannot be more than two hours is not creative — and thus directors are either meandering all over the place within their films or they are hamstrung by the whims of the studio suits.

    I agree with Daniel that there is a lot to like in all of the DCEU films, but the basic problem is that those good elements rarely add up to a satisfying whole. If the non-extended versions aren’t worth watching, and Daniel concedes this, then those films are failures.

  4. This was a really fantastic listen. Wow. *applauds wildly*

    While I think the DCEU films are a lot less consistent than Marvel, there’s still a lot to enjoy in there – I looooove Wonder Woman, third act and all. And blasphemous though it may be among geeks of my vintage, Man of Steel is my favourite Superman film. Justice League was frothy fun but more than a tad shambolic in its execution (I’m with you though Shag – never really noticed the moustache issue that bothered so many other people!).

    As might have been anticipated, BVS was the most contentious and interesting part of the podcast. Daniel had some really fascinating insights to share and truly did enhance my appreciation of the level of symbolism and allegory in that film. Ultimately though, I feel this emphasis on symbolism comes at the expense of strong storytelling and a compelling cinematic experience. While I can recognise the ambition, the craft and the ideas involved, I found the end result incoherent, poorly paced, dismal, ugly and fundamentally unengaging. The extended version is indeed better, and solves some of the cinematic cut’s glaring story problems, but it’s still a tedious endurance test.

    One of the big problems for me is that Superman’s sacrifice carries little dramatic weight because there is virtually no Superman to lose. At the end of Man of Steel, he’s just starting to become Superman, he spends most of BVS conflicted about his role, and then he dies. Had there been one or two more Man of Steel movies in the middle, we might have cared more about his absence. As is, he goes from birth to death with nothing in between, and killing him off just comes across as, well… cynical. It feels like business more than art, like being pandered to by executives who had thrown the best-selling Superman trades into a blender. We should feel something when Superman dies saving the world. I just felt tired.

    As it stands, BVS (after three viewings) is my least favourite comic-book movie. Not just DCEU, but ever. However, I will steel myself to revisit it again at some point with Daniel’s analysis in mind.

    Finally, there’s just no defending Suicide Squad. Valiant attempt though!

  5. I appreciate Daniel’s enthusiasm for these films, and the level to which he’s examined them. I think he brought up some valid points…and some points I didn’t consider so valid from a personal perspective. I don’t hate these films (well, I do strongly dislike BvS, honestly), and I do think there’s something to like in each of them to varying degrees.

    My brief takes: I love Wonder Woman, but agree the end falls apart a bit. The CGI blue beam Rob speaks of being the bigger offender for me. MoS was a well-conceptualized alternative take on Superman that doesn’t register well with me. Suicide Squad is a brainless 80s action movie with DC characters and a horrible interpretation of its best villain, but is somewhat watchable. Justice League is a course correction that wouldn’t have ever been needed had they been on the right course to begin with. It has great moments that made me cheer and feel like a 10 year old kid, but it’s undercooked and put together with very visible glops of Elmer’s glue oozing out the sides. BvS is a gross misinterpretation of my two favorite heroes in one film together, and a nice cameo spotlight for Wonder Woman, and gives us a Luthor so bad I appreciate Leto’s Joker. Its stylish and moody, and brooding but its about as fun as a root canal.

    I personally want to enjoy a movie experience on the surface. If there is more to dig into later, then that’s great. But you have to hook me first. I have to want to go back and rewatch and look for hidden messages and connections and allegories. If the movie, in this case BvS, puts me off so much I won’t go back to it again, then on a personal level, it has failed for me as a piece of entertainment. A Superman hoping for suicide by monster isn’t one I can get behind. If the characters’ knee-jerk changes in motivation don’t feel natural and are dictated by being used as an allegory to some pre-existing philosophy or piece of literature, then the writer and director have failed to make those connections work, at least for me.

    Daniel explained his position very well, and I applaud his bravery in wading into the field with this. He’s obviously put a lot of thought into these movies and some of the points he made will no longer make me dismiss the parts I loathe outright now. I still don’t like them, but I can’t just dismiss them as bad. If and when I do watch these films, this discussion will no doubt come to mind. So bravo guys.

    The only thing I can’t give him a pass on is comparing Doomsday to Thanos. That’s like putting Mr. Bill up against a Ray Harryhausen creature. But if that’s the way he feels about it, hey, more power to him.

    Great discussion fellas.


    1. Totally with you on Thanos/Doomsday. Worlds apart. One is a nondescript PlayStation behemoth, the other is an actual character who I fully accepted as real.

  6. Still processing the opinions, but I am inspired to watch the Suicide Squad extended cut which my son gave me for Christmas last year and I never watched at the time!

    Also Shag, were you adopting DCOCD terminology when you called Johns’ Hawkman a ‘fixer’?

  7. First let me start by saying I am one that really enjoyed most of the DC movies. I thought they were all entertaining and some were just downright good. The one movie that I found was the most challenging was BvS. I thought it was the tale of two movies smashed together. I like the Batman movie did not like the Superman movie. I respect your projected depth on to this movie but the problem is that depth was never explained or projected by the movie itself. The internal logic of the movie just does not hold together. Like another poster has already said the movie was more symbolism then it was storytelling. The director maybe a good artist but the movie medium itself is about conveying a story. You can have a lot of clever things in your tale but if you don’t let other people in on the joke it just ain’t funny. I just really wanted to see Superman doing super things instead of just posing all the time. And there are just small fixes for each of those scenes that I think would have the same overall impact on the movie while showing Superman to be more of a heroic figure. I feel like BvS was more of an exercise to Be Clever then to write a story that was clever. Prime example is the spear. If you’re not sure that you can use a spear well give it to the Amazon who I’m sure can use a spear. It’s just one of the many internal inconsistencies in the storytelling logic. Now that being said I still watch it whenever it’s on. And I would like to see the Extended Cut. All in all I think the DC movies did entertain.

    PS: now on another note The Last Jedi is the worst movie ever made. I exaggerate of course but I really dislike that movie. So if there’s ever a discussion on that topic I have a lot to say.

    PSS: I could be wrong

  8. Wow. That was really interesting. Especially all the symbolism in BvS. I give Snyder a lot of credit for the thought that must have gone into it. While the superhero genre is perfect for allegory and symbolism, it seems to be very tricky to do that well on film. When the audience is “starved” for content of their favorite hero, they’re probably less likely to be receptive to something like BvS. Those types of movies might be more effective after the movie goers have gotten their fill of popcorn flick versions of these characters.

    Justice League has actually been added to my list of favorite movies. It’s not good, but I’ve enjoyed it as just a fun movie. The sad thing is that there were a lot of good threads in that movie that never really went anywhere. There was a half-attempt at Diana growing out of her shell (post-dead Trevor). There was a fantastic bit about Barry learning to “just save one.” The problem was the movie felt like lots of unconnected scenes. Lots of the scenes were good, but the emotional through line was weak so you didn’t feel the growth for the characters. I loved the concept of how despairing the world was at the point the movie starts. There was plenty of reason to be. Discovery of aliens, alien invasion, Earth’s “champion” is dead. But there wasn’t time to really feel the impact of these crisis moments. So many of the major themes in the movie make such short appearances that the audience has a hard time absorbing them. I realize why the movie faltered, but it’s still sad to see such good material not get the treatment it could have had.

  9. Thank you, gentlemen. I now have a much better appreciation for what Mr. Snyder was trying to achieve in these films. It’s a shame that studio interference kept us from being able to fully see and properly judge the complete realization of what he had envisioned.

  10. Wow, that Daniel Adams’ certainly can make a persuasive argument.

    However, I cannot agree with 90% of his findings. Maybe 95%.

    My main problem is – and this is a general critique of critiques (meta!) – is when I’m pointed to a director’s cut or uncut version of a film to get the “real” story. The problem is that we can only go off the film with which we’re presented. And cuts are made, in theory, judiciously and for the good of the overall film. I get there are mercenary reasons (ie Bonuses, more screenings per day, etc), but realistically a filmmaker knows they have 90 minutes to 2 hours for a full story. Anything outside of that is gravy. I shouldn’t have to watch an additional 1-30 minutes of something because something might be too bloated to begin with.

    1. I was going to just leave my own comment, but DAG nails the point about having to be pointed to a director’s or extended cut of a film as a defense of the originally-aired version. If the non-extended version is bad, it’s bad. Saying “it’s in the extended version” is simply not even an argument.

      The only other point(s?) I want to make surround questions of taste and differing interpretations. Regarding taste, it is clear from some comments that many people prefer their entertainment to skew “dark.” That’s perfectly valid, but I bluntly do not. Especially not my superhero films. I watch these, if I watch them at all, for escapism, and “dark” is simply not something I’ve ever cared for.

      But that’s just me. Daniel is certainly correct when he points out that these characters are malleable, offering many different… even contradictory… possible valid interpretations. Where he and I part ways is where he seems to imply that ALL possible interpretations are equally valid. I simply cannot go there. There are core elements to each hero that, if they aren’t present, make that interpretation INvalid–or, to put another way, “simply not (insert character’s name here)”–to my mind. A Batman that has psychic powers (to use a bit of the example of the dream sequences discussed… which as was said might have had a better interpretation had other films gone differently, but as it stands, we didn’t get it) simply ISN’T Batman anymore. It’s somebody else stealing his name and costume motif.

  11. In regards to saying DC should have gone with the Marvel approach and done all the stand-alones first, I agree there’s more than one way to build a successful franchise. That said, it’s a fun thought experiment…how could DC have done it if they’d mirrored the Marvel model? Anyone have any thoughts? For a Marvel-esque phase 1…since Green Lantern was kinda taboo at the time and therefore off limits as a starter…

    -Flash as the starter, maybe introduce a private investigator Barry communicates with who will turn out to be J’onn J’onzz.
    -Wonder Woman (perhaps encounters a Green Lantern ring on its search for a replacement Lantern, setting up the coming GL movie)
    -Green Lantern – Could end with Lantern talking to Flash about aliens and then cut to a scene of a a farm in Kansas.
    -Justice League – introducing Batman and the reveal of J’onn as the Martian Manhunter.
    -Batman (and/or Bat-family)

  12. Interesting take. While I prefer the DC books, I think Marvel has done a lot better job than DC in the movies. I have to side with the people on this case.

    I don’t think the DC movies are bad. But I’m watching a movie for escapism. I’m not looking for art and allegory in a superhero smash-up. I’m not a fan of the dark tone – in comic or in movies. And I don’t have time to watch a movie sixteen times to look for deeper meaning or to catch every philosophical or metaphorical reference.

    I don’t get DC lately. They bloat the books with a story that can be told in one or two issues and stretch it over a year. But then they try to cram three or four stories into a two-hour film. They’re chasing the dollar so hard that the products they are producing are losing a lot of the appeal that makes people want to buy them in the first place.

  13. This was a fantastic episode that provided a lot to think over. I think one of the main reasons the first three proper DC outings aren’t well regarded is because of their insistence that they take place in the ugliness of the real world; whereas, the Marvel films don’t even pretend to do so. As more and more BS clings to our lives, we’re looking for our entertainment to be more escapist fare than symbolic rumination.

  14. Great episode guys! Very impressed with Daniel’s defense of the DC movies. He gave me a lot to think about and I clearly can see where he has drawn his conclusions. Especially when it comes to religious allegories and ties to Plato and Excalibur. Well done, I really appreciate Daniel’s defense. I also have to put out that I have a love for DC comics that goes back to childhood and find them superior to Marvel comics in every way since I made the switch from depressing Peter Parker over to Ronnie Raymond in the early 80’s. Unfortunately Marvel seems to make fun movies and DC, not so much. Okay, this is my personal view. I also have to say that I am also the biggest defender of the Green Lantern movie that I know of. I actually liked it, because I had fun watching it and the way it made me feel, was worth the time spent. I’m pretty accepting of new spins and new takes on comics characters, different Earths, different Universes. I love what the CW puts out (for some reason) I also like deep intellectual movies and like to be challenged when I see a film. However, when it comes to the case of Man of Steel, BvS, and especially Justice League (which broke my heart because it has always been my favorite comic book and I so wanted to like it, even a little bit) I cannot get behind those 3 movies. Deep meaning in them or not, those 3 movies, I do not feel are fun. I took my 5 year old son to see Justice League (which ok, maybe the rating said this movie is not for the very young and I’m a bad Dad), I gave him no clues to how I felt when we walked out of the movie, but he turned to me and said as we walked out of the theatre, “Well that was disappointing”. A 5 year old boy should not think a Justice League movie is “disappointing”. They should not be bored even a little. It should be a fun time! No wonder I’m loosing him to Pokemon (bright color and fun) DC is supposed to be fun. A justice League movie should be made for the young and be fun for the grown-us as well. A movie containing DC comic book characters should make your heart sing and your soul do back flips and help you escape the real world like the comics do. Not feel bad about yourself and sick to your stomach. I like realism and gritty too (the Nolan Batman movies were great! Batman can work that way), but the DC movies need to have bold color and most of all be fun. Snyder’s Superman and Justice League films do not do this, and I liked his Watchmen movie (which his tone worked for that as well) Did I mention these movies need to be fun? That said, Daniel made some really great points and I may go back and see BvS and Justice League for a second time, but the big loss for me is my son has zero interest in watching them again. Intellectual and religious connections are not going to pull him back. Why are these movies not for the kids as much as for adults? I also may give Suicide Squad (keeping my boy away from that one) a first try as I’ve avoided it so far and I am still looking forward to seeing Wonder Woman as I haven’t seen that one and I did think she was one of the better parts of BvS & Justice League. One final thought: What were they thinking with Flash in the Justice League movie? They took one of the most elegant and cool super hero costumes of all time and gave us the Battle-mech Speedy Quipster. Quicksilver (for Pete’s sake!) in X-Men Men Days of Future Past made him look really bad. That surely should never have been. I’m clearly living in a alternate world.

  15. No offense to Mr. Adams, but I don’t believe we’re philosophically compatible, and given that I was listening on the drive back home from Thanksgiving, I needed a warning about the road hazard I faced from all the eye-rolling the final BVS defense segment was inducing. From here I’ll largely be summarizing old Rolled Spine Podcasts, so listeners may want to skip to the next commentator from here.

    Man of Steel: A disappointment, but still the third best Superman motion picture in my estimation. I don’t think Clark Kent’s existence should be a b-plot from a Bryan Singer X-Men movie, and I don’t think we needed a grim n’ gritty “realistic” take on the perfectly fine origin from the comics and Donner movie. In fact, I think the major problem with putting Superman over with modern audiences is the inability to move past the character’s origins and prior movies to advance him in new directions. Move past Jor-El, Krypton, General Zod, Smallville and Lex Luthor FFS. The other major problem is filmmakers without aptitude or love for the character being given the reins. Zack Snyder is a Batman director doing a Superman movie, it shows, and that created an upper limit on its ability to be embraced by audiences. Hyperion of the Squadron Supreme should not be the model for a Superman adaptation, and if you believe otherwise, get your grimy paws off a revered icon. To correct Mr. Adams’ assertions, both Man of Steel and BvS under-performed and were not warmly received, which is why executives were rightly nervous about dumping a quarter of a billion dollars into a failing franchise. It’s the same reason the financially successful Tim Burton Planet of the Apes never got a sequel. Love of the concept carries a property into a later reboot, but not direct construction atop a cracked foundation. Man of Steel made less money than Dr. Strange, and a movie with both Superman and Batman in it should not be outperformed by the deeply flawed final installment of a solo Batman trilogy. I think Man of Steel is… fine. I had many of the same objections as the majority of critics, but also enjoyed elements championed by the minority of its defenders. I don’t think Superman needs a hero’s journey, but the whole deal doesn’t snap with the contrived neck-breaking. It just needed a proper sequel by a different creative team that wasn’t trying to fit The Man of Tomorrow into a Christopher Nolan Bat-box. I give it a rating of Thor on the MCUometer.

    Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice: Haters gotta watch the Extended Edition. If the studio gets cold feet and chops a 3-hour movie into a butchered theatrical cut, that’s not the director’s fault. (Shooting an unrecognizable Jimmy Olsen in the face and telling reporters his Batman could get prison raped is however totally Director Dudebro’s fault.) I never saw the theatrical cut, thank Rao, but by all accounts only the one I did see made a lick of sense. It’s a busy film, but I was able to follow it well enough to know it was doing a lot of those things very poorly (while still forgiving it more than most.) Snyder is the type of person who believes putting a lot of stuff onto a six-inch wooden pallet makes it deep, but weight is not the same thing as depth. There is nothing more obvious and numbingly pedestrian in Western culture than Biblical symbolism, and as a non-Christian I just wave my hand over my crotch when I see it. Superman was a tragic hero in the tradition of the Tanakh created by two Jews, and no matter how much the goyim try to assimilate him, Jesus is a poor (and kinda sacrilegious?) fit. Piling on religious allegory that requires a scholar to explain the parallels is a lot like a cover “homage.” At some point, you’re just stealing from one source to lend unearned gravitas to another, diminishing the power of the original and coming off at best derivative and worst incomprehensible without a guide. Just because you’re trying to make Batman into Ahab doesn’t mean the result isn’t a mere A-hole, and maybe a cartoon character created to entertain and educate pre-adolescents shouldn’t demand high school-level exegesis? Can we not give salient points to Bill Maher here by not putting our big boy pants in the same drawer as our tights? I agree that Snyder is a visual stylist and an artist, but subtext (especially dumb, common subtext) is not a replacement for text. If you can’t properly tell a story, you may be a gifted cinematographer or production designer, but not necessarily a director. Fans protesting over not getting the movie they had in their heads ahead of the actual production is a problem, but so are fans who create a movie in their head after seeing things that aren’t actually on the screen. Pretentious associations don’t matter if the art created around them don’t engage either the intellect or the emotions. It just makes for a feature length crossword puzzle. I give it a rating of Avengers: Age of Ultron on the MCUometer.

    Suicide Squad: Crap. I love Howard the Duck. It’s still crap. And Howard the Duck was funnier, had better characterization, a firmer plot, a stronger soundtrack, and less racist overtones than Suicide Squad. Hell, even with the bath house, duck-boobs, recycled condom and implied bestiality, Howard the Duck had healthier depictions of intimacy than Suicide Squad. And even if Jared Leto’s performance had been closer to Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot and further from Eddie Redmayne in Jupiter Ascending, it wouldn’t have been worth harassing and abusing his costars to get him there. “My dear boy, have you tried acting?” I give it a rating of Thor: The Dark World on the MCUometer.

    Wonder Woman: Not as good as everyone says, but neither were the Donner Superman movies. We love the character, they got the character and tone right, so it was more than enough to please. I give it a rating of Black Panther on the MCUometer.

    Justice League: A fun, flimsy wannabe Marvel Studios movie grafted onto an already compromised Zack Snyder movie. I give it a rating of Iron Man 2 on the MCUometer.

    The Joker standalone movie makes more sense than Suicide Squad or Justice League ever did. The reason why the DCEU has been condemned through comparison to the MCU is because Warners and Zack Snyder forced the comparison. They created a competing shared universe with a singular creative vision. It was Christopher Nolan’s creative vision, and that vision was conceived for a stripped-down Batman in an isolated universe, and Nolan himself wasn’t the one applying that vision elsewhere, but so it went. I don’t want two MCUs. The MCU as individual films are overhyped, excessively praised, and sometimes achingly formulaic. As a shared universe though, it is unique and divine in the history of popular entertainment. The universe is the magnificent accomplishment, not the constituent parts. The DC Universe has never and will never be more than a pale imitation of the Marvel Universe, because it was never designed with a universe in mind. DC is the Superman mythos, including The Legion of Super-Heroes. DC is the Batman Family, including the Teen Titans. DC is Wonder Woman, and Jonah Hex, and Swamp Thing. You can have a Justice League or a Super Friends, but we need Worlds of DC, not a single shared continuity with one overarching tone where all the pieces are subsumed by the needs of the whole.

  16. Objection your honor.

    The Defendant’s lawyer (if we can call him that), keeps referring to something called “An Extended Cut” in reference to Suicide Squad and BvS.

    This so-called Extended Cut is not what WB/DC presented to the public in the form of theater release, so I object to Defense using these in his rebuttal.

    Mr. Adams should keep his arguments to the facts presented to the court, as such the “theatrical release” of said movies.

    Prosecution will stipulate that while we do not agree with everything Defense has presented, they have made a compelling argument and these “Extended Cuts” should be examined in more detail, but… BUT your honor, you can not allow these to presented as evidence as these movies, while possibly better films, is not what the studios presented to the audience.

    1. That’s what happens when the “prosecution” is a bunch of online comments that can’t crossexamine anything.

      I would say the extended cuts ARE admissible, but are also evidence of film makers’ crimes. People who work on billion-dollar action movies should know their films can’t be 400 minutes long. While the Lord of the Rings extended cuts are revered by fans, the theatrical cuts still made sense. And Mr. Snyder can’t hide behind the Blade Runner or Brazil defense of studio interference, since he pretty much had the role of showrunner for the DCEU.

  17. Daniel has lots of great points about the films. I don’t agree with them for subjective reasons, so that’s perfectly fine. But like other commenters, I have thoughts about theatrical vs extended cuts.

    This is a HUGE problem in critiquing modern movies. How can the community of viewers even discuss likes and dislikes when they haven’t seen the “same” movie? These cuts give drastically different development of the plot, characters, mood, etc. I can’t properly appreciate Daniel’s point of view because I saw the theatrical version of these films. It’s not fair to his discussion that I haven’t. But likewise, do I have a “duty” to spend money on a movie again, when the first version didn’t really sell me? Isn’t that the purpose of the first version?

    Let’s take a computer game. The first version you buy is buggy as hell, so you stop playing it. Later, the company fixes the bugs and posts an update. If the update cost you as much as the original game, would you pay for the fixed version? Personally, I wouldn’t. But if the update was free, of course I’d try the game again. That’s how many of the statements about the extended cut movie sound to me. Bugs in the original movie. But yes, you have to pay for the fixes.

    So that takes the whole movie process beyond the director’s artistic vision and execution into the entire production. I’m hearing that WB was the problem with several of the DC movies, cutting crucial moments that would have made a much better final product. This shows a disconnect within the organization, and as usual, the end result suffers.

    I don’t think I’m alone thinking that Marvel Studios does a better job at this. (Not necessarily perfect, just better.) The execs give the creators room to work, and are motivated to make the final result a solid product. To me, that’s why they’re more enjoyable to watch, both in the theater and at home. I’ve never felt a desire for an extended cut of any of Marvel’s movies, and love reliving the experience I remember from the theater.

    Again, this was a great thought-provoking episode. Thanks, Shagg and Daniel!

      1. I only just saw your post, Siskoid. I guess I missed the reference to GL because I was listening to it at 1.5 speed. (It sure was funny listening to Shagg at that speed. It sounded like he was drinking Diet Mountain Dew MAX!)

        1. I listened at 2x speed. That’s the only way I can listen to Shagg. Fast and quickly over. 😉

          But I may have imagined it and confused it with Shagg telling me personally (at x1 speed, groan!) that it didn’t count.

          1. Ha! I bet GL might have counted if it’d been released after MoS.

            Thinking about this episode, one of the flaws the filmmakers may have made was to use decompressed storytelling to tell Superman’s story over 3 (possibly 4) films. Maybe optimism was high that a Superman series ending with the formation of the Justice League was something the public wanted? That’s in sharp contrast to the GL movie which seemed to squeeze enough material for 2 or 3 movies into one film.

  18. Loved this podcast. I wish you would’ve touched on two things. In Justice League, why was so much time spent on the family in the final act? And in BvS, the stupidity of Lois Lane in the 3rd act. Why?

    1. I assume Whedon added the family to show the passage of time and what the stakes were, but I felt it was terribly done and only distracted from the issue at hand.

      As for the stupidity of Lois in BvS, could you be more specific?

  19. I am going to keep this short because I don’t want to ramble on about issues with the DC films that others have regurgitated many times over. I will say, I am not a fan of most, other than Wonder Woman, but I did really appreciate hearing Daniel’s perspective. I have different views in these films for the most part, but I thought much of what he said was thoughtful and an interesting, particularly with respect to much of the symobolism injected into them. Frankly, sometimes podcasts expressing views you disagree with can be far more entertaining than others if they express themselves well as was the case here. I can’t say it changed my mind, but it did engage me and make me think, and that made for a really entertaining show.

  20. Great podcast! I loved BVS as well. Grant you it had flaws but you can find that in any movie if you really want too. I heard all the complaints and many valid about BVS but it is nice to hear something positive for a change. It does make me sad that we will never see Zack Snyder’s plan for the Justice League movies. But I think that the future looks bright for the DC movies and not because Zack Snyder is no loner involved. 😉 I love the Marvel movies but I also like seeing studios trying out different things like Logan, Deadpool, and the future Joker movie. Again thanks for this. A lot of the perspectives you had I never thought of.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *