Batman vs Superman writer's inteview tells us all thats wrong with DCEU

greengr · Apr 9, 2021

I know theres a thread about that interview but that answer is just insane

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2021/04/chris-terrio-justice-league-batman-v-superman

That sequence takes place in a fictional African country called Nairomi, and there's manipulation happening with Lex Luthor and his American mercenaries trying to provoke conflict and frame Superman. After Superman rescues Lois, the film shows the people of that region truly suffering in the crossfire.

Without sounding too political, it's not lost on me that much like a drone, Superman sort of comes from out of nowhere from the sky and vanquishes his enemies and then flies off with no consequences. That may not have been an angle on Superman that people wanted to see and wanted to think about

The writer wanted to write Superman as a parallel to drone strikes.Like,i cant begin to think the thought process that went there.

headfallsoff · Apr 9, 2021

Superman is literally an american icon who intervenes from the sky it's a really simple metaphor and one that comics have made multiple times? Even putting the specifics drones aside, superheroes as a metaphor for american state power is entrenched in the genre and has been for decades. This isn't a ridiculous thing to say.

Double 0 · Apr 9, 2021

Sounds like the guy wanted to write Supreme Power, the 2010s reboot of Squadron Supreme.

Supreme Power went over this in detail.

Superman is meant to talk about other stuff.

808s & Villainy · Apr 9, 2021

greengr said:
I know theres a thread about that interview but that answer is just insane

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2021/04/chris-terrio-justice-league-batman-v-superman

The writer wanted to write Superman as a parallel to drone strikes.Like,i cant begin to think the thought process that went there.

I mean, if you look at this

headfallsoff said:
Superman is literally an american icon who intervenes from the sky it's a really simple metaphor and one that comics have made multiple times? Even putting the specifics drones aside, superheroes as a metaphor for american state power is entrenched in the genre and has been for decades. This isn't a ridiculous thing to say.

And then consider Snyder was obsessed with Watchmen, Dr. Manhattan was somewhat of a Superman criticism, then it makes sense how he got that idea

greengr · Apr 9, 2021

808s & Villainy said:
I mean, if you look at this

And then consider Snyder was obsessed with Watchmen, Dr. Manhattan was somewhat of a Superman criticism, then it makes sense how he got that idea

i mean i get that,but why anyone would have thought people wanted to watch that shit in a movie?

Sho_Nuff82 · Apr 9, 2021

This was literally a scene in the latest season of The Boys, you don't need to deconstruct Superman in a Superman movie.

Sesha · Apr 9, 2021

In order words, he turned Supes into IM1 Iron Man.

deimosmasque · Apr 9, 2021

808s & Villainy said:
I mean, if you look at this

And then consider Snyder was obsessed with Watchmen, Dr. Manhattan was somewhat of a Superman criticism, then it makes sense how he got that idea

?

krazen · Apr 9, 2021

Sho_Nuff82 said:
This was literally a scene in the latest season of The Boys, you don't need to deconstruct Superman in a Superman movie.

I disagree. I don't know about making a Superman movie that is solely a critique of Superman, but to say it's out of bounds as the post hints at...I mean it's a fucking motivation for a shitload of his rogue gallery in the comics themselves. We can argue that it's badly done in this movie/script, but a large amount of Superman content are about 'what is a Superman'.

Bundy · Apr 9, 2021

Sesha said:
In order words, he turned Supes into IM1 Iron Man.

More like Supes into Homelander.

Doggg · Apr 9, 2021

That may not have been an angle on Superman that people wanted to see and wanted to think about

Indeed

cakely · Apr 9, 2021

Let's not forget they took a little extra time in that sequence to execute Superman's Pal, Jimmy Olsen.

Slayven · Apr 9, 2021

Mofos be coming at Superman like the character is college level Trig.

Do folks secretly hate superman?

FantasticMrFoxdie · Apr 9, 2021

"The Superman is real and he is American"

Double 0 · Apr 9, 2021

Slayven said:
Mofos be coming at Superman like the character is college level Trig.

Do folks secretly hate superman?

Not a secret at all.

Spring-Loaded · Apr 9, 2021

Just like all of the other edgier themes introduced in these movies, the parallel of Superman as an U.S. weapon is featured and then nothing interesting is done with it—they ask these hard questions, and then give no answers of any sort. It just exists as edgy set dressing, just like with batman killing people. They present these characters as heroes by the end when they don't actually overcome, reconcile, or work through any of these flaws

Kinthey · Apr 9, 2021

Did you feel you were able to significantly change that Africa scene with Superman for the better?

I removed the punch [of Lois], for one thing. Just think about the optics of that. I was able to add material to the film and asked the movie to grapple with what that [battle] meant, so that it didn't seem like a casual scene of Superman intervening in this way without reckoning with the consequences of intervention. I placed that in context of a moral question. Superman says, "Think of what could have happened," and Lois says, "Think of what did."

Sounds like the scene was originally just about Superman doing something heroic in africa. I feel like without that critical lense people would have called that scene out.
The execution wasn't great, but I don't think it's wrong to pose this question about what political consequences Superman leaves behind

Emwitus · Apr 9, 2021

LOL Why do people talk About the Superman character or media like it's some piece of art that only be interpreted a certain way to stay true to it's source material?

Baccus · Apr 9, 2021

That is a great pertinent interpretation of the concept of Superman and his global intervention. I don't see anything wrong with it.

Khanimus · Apr 9, 2021

He wants to examine a Superman in a complicated world? That's perfectly valid.

But to do that, you still need Superman's perspective. And this movie follows it up with Clark saying "i don't care what they think."

It doesn't actually engage with the idea or the argument it presents.

MisterHero · Apr 9, 2021

Superman technically entered World War II before the United States did

So yeah, he can be seen that way

Deleted member 30544 · Apr 9, 2021

808s & Villainy said:
And then consider Snyder was obsessed with Watchmen, Dr. Manhattan was somewhat of a Superman criticism, then it makes sense how he got that idea

LOL did you even read the interview?

Also....there was a thread already for this, the bad takes are still the same.

oh i see what OP is doing, ok ok will play along

excelsiorlef · Apr 9, 2021

Kinthey said:
Sounds like the scene was originally just about Superman doing something heroic in africa. I feel like without that critical lense people would have called that scene out.
The execution wasn't great, but I don't think it's wrong to pose this question about what political consequences Superman leaves behind

Here's an idea don't do that scene at all

OSHAN · Apr 9, 2021

Terrio also talks about the "pile on" and we are seeing that in this thread, not reading he was coming in to address the screenplay (Goyer) and also acknowledging that, maybe unlike Iron Man, people don't want to see Superman be in this scenario, especially when you have a dumbass title like Batman v Superman Dawn of Justice, setting the wrong expectations from the start.

boontobias · Apr 9, 2021

I wish threads were framed as "tells me why I didn't get what I wanted with the DCEU". If this was in a graphic novel somewhere, no one would bat an eye. What's inherently wrong with the concept you're criticizing
The key thing missing from the Snyder/Cavill Superman is that the director spends too much time setting up the environment for his motivations to be questioned and not enough time actually defining his motivations. Maybe he thought the entire 2 and half long origin movie already did that, but it did not and the same problem was there too. Add in the very jumbled up BvS plot and you get a weird detached Superman played by a wooden actor

Jeremy · Apr 9, 2021

BvS is entirely an allegory about the American response to the War on Terror. If you missed that, that's on you... it's not a mistake and it's not misguided that the movie is actually about something with real-world resonance, nor is it out of step with the comics.

Parch · Apr 9, 2021

Emwitus said:
LOL Why do people talk About the Superman character or media like it's some piece of art that only be interpreted a certain way to stay true to it's source material?

Marvel has mostly stayed true to it's source material. DC has not. I think that has a lot to do with the success of the movies.

greengr · Apr 9, 2021

Another gem in this interview thats not on the writer but on WB

Another complaint was that Snyder's DC films were too grim and heavy. Did you feel blamed for that?

The studio seemed to take this position after BvS that my writing was too dark and that this was their problem. But what they didn't mention was that, for example, in the draft of the Batman/Superman script that W.B. had developed—[which was] the draft I was handed when I joined the project—Batman was not only branding criminals with a bat brand, he also ended the movie by branding Lex Luthor.

That ending was a point over which I explicitly went to the mat with the studio again and again. I argued that Batman cannot end the movie continuing this behavior, which amounted to torture, because then the movie was endorsing what he did.

WB wanted the movie to end with Batman learning nothing

Wag · Apr 9, 2021

Slayven said:
Mofos be coming at Superman like the character is college level Trig.

Do folks secretly hate superman?

He is an illegal alien after all.

We have a whole country of stupid Lex Luthors.

Khanimus · Apr 9, 2021

Jeremy said:
BvS is entirely an allegory about the American response to the War on Terror. If you missed that, that's on you... it's not a mistake and it's not misguided that the movie is actually about something with real-world resonance, nor is it out of step with the comics.

Superman in MoS is "accepted by humanity" once the military lowers their guns to say "this man is not out enemy."

Using the US military as the stand-in for humanity at-large is a gross miscalculation.

BvS tries to broaden that scope, but then still throws a black woman in front of a train, blows up congress, and that's basically the end of the conversation.

Kinthey · Apr 9, 2021

Apparently the studio cut a big chunk of the nuance from that plotline

He right away sparked to that and got excited about casting that character [with actor Wunmi Mosaku, now known for Lovecraft Country] and thought she could be a very important character for the movie. So Zack was quite open to all this stuff, and I thought the studio was too.

Why weren't they?

Later, when I realized that so much of the plot was going to be cut out, I began to think, Well, they didn't really want this kind of story. The last things to get cut out always are the stunt scenes and the special effects scenes because they cost so much. By the time they're all in there in the assembly, enormous amounts of money have been spent on every frame. So when you're looking to cut time, the things that get cut out tend not to be the big effects sequences or the fights or the stunt sequences. The things that get cut are the...

The nuance?

Yeah. The scenes that actually give meaning to those bigger action sequences. I think that's a problem not only with this film, but I suppose for all tentpole films.

BioDigital Jazzman · Apr 9, 2021

Baccus said:
That is a great pertinent interpretation of the concept of Superman and his global intervention. I don't see anything wrong with it.

It seems some people just want Superman to be the Boy Scout that does no wrong and saves the day. I mean neither way is wrong but it's crazy how some people hate the idea that he's not perfect

Ushojax · Apr 9, 2021

Sure, sure, whatever you say Chris. Now explain what happened with Star Wars.

krazen · Apr 9, 2021

Parch said:
Marvel has mostly stayed true to it's source material. DC has not. I think that has a lot to do with the success of the movies.

I would make the exact opposite comment; MCU Thanos vs comic Thanos are really different characters. What has helped though is that since Marvel was forced to focus on lesser known characters it didn't license away, there was less expectation to translating them onto film, along with a chance to re-tool and rebuild those characters.

But a Superman? Motherfuckers have a hard expectation of what they expect with that movie ticket when they walk into a theater. It's not all peaches and cream tho; Marvel is approaching a similar problem now their formula is down. But we aren't going to have posts debating how come Tony Starks wasn't a raving asshole alcoholic and that they ruined the character by not going that route, or how come a humorless cosmic power level character in the comics like Drax is a fucking MMA comedian in the MCU

BioDigital Jazzman · Apr 9, 2021

Parch said:
Marvel has mostly stayed true to it's source material. DC has not. I think that has a lot to do with the success of the movies.

That's not really true at all. Marvel made good and likable movies so people were ok with the changes. Movie Thor isn't actual Thor at all

stark may be humorous at times but he isn't the wise smart Alec that RDJ is.

then the guardians...

like I said. They are fun movies but let's not say they are comic accurate

Eoin · Apr 9, 2021

Sho_Nuff82 said:
This was literally a scene in the latest season of The Boys, you don't need to deconstruct Superman in a Superman movie.

A deconstruction of Superman could be an interesting theme in a Superman movie. Maybe not necessarily the Superman movie most people would want, but there are valid questions there that could result in a good film. In fact, a Batman V Superman movie might even be a reasonable frame for those questions, if it were set up properly to show two (or more) differing but valid moral perspectives represented by Batman and Superman, and the result of the conflict of those perspectives.

Where Batman V Superman falls down is that it begins deconstructing Superman - asking or implying questions about what right he has to intervene, how far his self-appointed jurisdiction extends, who he might answer to, and what might be done if he decides that the answer to that is "no one". However, after asking all those potentially-interesting questions, Batman V Superman decides that instead of answering them:

It's explosion time, hard questions over, the film is now about punching.

greengr · Apr 9, 2021

WB execs really thought combining Nolan Trilogy+MCU would be a surefire hit huh

Khanimus · Apr 9, 2021

Ushojax said:
Sure, sure, whatever you say Chris. Now explain what happened with Star Wars.

They had a year and a half to make a movie for Lucasfilm who was panicking and reacting to notes from nerds angry about TLJ.

Like, what do you think happened?

boontobias · Apr 9, 2021

Parch said:
Marvel has mostly stayed true to it's source material. DC has not. I think that has a lot to do with the success of the movies.

Out of 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 years of comic books, which issues, which artists, which authors, which colorers, which pencilers, which team-ups, which giant-sizes are each individual film 'staying true' to?
Saying these things are true to the source material is so meaningless. Especially when you consider how the Marvel movies or Fox or Sony or DC movies before them defined and contributed to the source material after the fact.

psionotic · Apr 9, 2021

Ushojax said:
Sure, sure, whatever you say Chris. Now explain what happened with Star Wars.

Exactly this. No studio is not going to release 3-4 hour superhero movies. They cost too much to make, and they need to fill those screening rooms, then turn them over to new audiences to make money. You know this going in. It's your job as a writer to be able to tell a coherent story in 2ish hours. If you can't do that, maybe you should be working in television.

Terrio is going to be the next Akiva Goldsman, the guy who wrote one Oscar-winning screenplay, then coasts on his name forever, shoveling schlock everywhere he turns.

greengr · Apr 9, 2021

Khanimus said:
They had a year and a half to make a movie for Lucasfilm who was panicking and reacting to notes from nerds angry about TLJ.

Like, what do you think happened?

I shit on ROTS as much as the next guy,but honestly JJ and Terrio did a big favor to Disney there,film should have been delayed at least a year

MisterHero · Apr 9, 2021

Eoin said:
A deconstruction of Superman could be an interesting theme in a Superman movie. Maybe not necessarily the Superman movie most people would want, but there are valid questions there that could result in a good film. In fact, a Batman V Superman movie might even be a reasonable frame for those questions, if it were set up properly to show two (or more) differing but valid moral perspectives represented by Batman and Superman, and the result of the conflict of those perspectives.

Where Batman V Superman falls down is that it begins deconstructing Superman - asking or implying questions about what right he has to intervene, how far his self-appointed jurisdiction extends, who he might answer to, and what might be done if he decides that the answer to that is "no one". However, after asking all those potentially-interesting questions, Batman V Superman decides that instead of answering them:

It's explosion time, hard questions over, the film is now about punching.

I thought it underlined how much of an asshole Luthor was. Never letting anyone get words in or answers. But I can see how it feels anticlimatic.

Slayven · Apr 9, 2021

Thank god for Lois and Superman

Vic_Viper · Apr 9, 2021

Going with the older Dark Knight Returns Batman was one of their biggest mistakes in BvS. I loved Ben Affleck's Batman, but if they wanted a lighter tone for the movies, then why go with one of the most grim dark Batman interpretations lol. If it was a TDKR movie, then hell yea that would have been awesome. But this was just the Batman V Superman part of TDKR.

Deleted member 10560 · Apr 9, 2021

Did no one actual understand the movie? I guess if someone has only seen the theatrical version where they did cut crucial scenes that explain this exact thing, but this was in the movie. Lex framed Superman to look like he just mindlessly attacks. I don't understand what the interview changes other than WB had already planned to do a scene like that, but had no meaning before he changed it.

Disco · Apr 9, 2021

I found that concept interesting and I got the intention of it when I saw that long 3 hour cut of the movie.

the last 2 Snyder movies have become my favorite superhero collab films tbh, they're flawed but operatic and I like his style too.

One issue I had with BvS is that it introduces concepts like this but doesn't do enough with them. Its a problem with the genre as a whole when they even attempt to go weighty or real with the conflicts, but its more egregious in this one because of how self-important the tone comes across. It feels shallow

El Bombastico · Apr 9, 2021

Five years later and everyone involved in its production is still playing the Blame Game with BvS.

Fucking amazing.

Teiresias · Apr 9, 2021

greengr said:
i mean i get that,but why anyone would have thought people wanted to watch that shit in a movie?

Fundamentally, the angle the film took was ham-fisted and preachy since it basically spat out the intervention metaphor rather than making it implicit. However, having no familiarity really with comic book Superman aside from the whole "Superman Dies" thing in the 90s, I'm one of those people that finds Superman a boring as hell character if he's just this goody-goody that does no wrong even in the presence of his absolute power. The only way he's even interesting to me is when he's having to fight inner demons or is some kind of metaphor for greater wielded power, but BvS was not the way to do it.

Then again, I also prefer Godzilla to be a metaphor for war/devastation-due-to-man rather than just Kaiju-battles-screw-a-human-story, so I'm probably not the target audience you're trying to talk about here.

Double 0 · Apr 9, 2021

Slayven said:
Thank god for Lois and Superman

Agreed. So many people are obsessed with subverting or complicating a pretty damn simple hero, they forgot how he usually functions.

Rayman not Ray · Apr 9, 2021

headfallsoff said:
Superman is literally an american icon who intervenes from the sky it's a really simple metaphor and one that comics have made multiple times? Even putting the specifics drones aside, superheroes as a metaphor for american state power is entrenched in the genre and has been for decades. This isn't a ridiculous thing to say.

But he doesn't have to be. Superman IV is not a good movie, but it is also a movie where Superman makes all the world's nations get rid of their nuclear weapons. You can tell stories like that.

Batman vs Superman writer's inteview tells us all thats wrong with DCEU

▲ Legend ▲

Ugly, Queer, Gender-Fluid, Drive-In Mutant, yes?

▲ Legend ▲

Never read a comic in his life

User Requested Account Closure

Bad Praxis

Never read a comic in his life

Thanked By SGM

Self-requested ban