The Awesome Comics crew discuss Henry Cavill and his version of Superman. Does he suck or is the material he has been given bad? Find out now!
I think that Henry Cavill is doing the best that he can do. He’s a better Clark Kent than Superman though. However, I like the moral center Superman more than what the current DCEU is doing. Right now, the show Supergirl had a better Superman in just two episodes. I don’t have much else to say though since Man of Steel is the first Superman movie that I’ve ever seen so I have no one to compare Henry Cavill to. Lastly, I still don’t know how to feel about the neck-cracking scene.
I don’t have a problem with it as a concept but more and more I am starting to hate the no killing rule for superheroes. sure, they shouldn’t kill small time thugs but there are plenty of supervillains who are pure evil and deserve to die. Darksied, Mongual, Braniac, Joker, certain versions of Zod
and him killing before but not going on a quest to kill all criminals proves that the slippery slope is false and they can kill the truly monstrous villains and just them.
There’s a massive problem with that illogical argument.
Superman, like most superheroes, is a character with zero legal authority. He’s not a law enforcement officer, he’s a man who was given gifts and tries to make the world better. That is all he is. Despite the idiocy of MoS/BvS “I AM JESUS” symbolism, he isn’t and never was, that’s just stupid, so he only operates by his moral code, his own sense of responsibility. He operates mostly within the law, not some higher power.
The responsibility for what should happen to supervillains is NOT his to make! He only exists to stop the threat, it should be up to the courts, the legitimate authorities, to make the decision of what to do about villains like Luthor and the like. Otherwise, Superman isn’t a hero, he’d just be a murderous jackass with no authority going around deciding to be judge, jury and executioner.
So no, Superman shouldn’t be a killer. Because it’s not HIS job to decide what should happen to those he fights. That’s a job for the courts–and subsequently democracy–to decide. If he made unilateral decisions like that, took lives without authority like that, then he wouldn’t BE Superman anymore. The one and only occasion it’s acceptable is in a situation like the one with Zod, where there simply wasn’t another out. Every other time? No.
This, plus the obvious fact that such a move would also be counterproductive from a business standpoint as well. If Superman just killed off all of his major antagonists, then they couldn’t be used again in any further books, TV shows or films, unless writers resorted to convoluted strategies such as time travel, clones, angry relatives seeking revenge, having them come back as g-g-g-ghosts, etc. So no, turning Superman into a serial murderer who decides for himself who lives and who dies wouldn’t work.
To answer the main question: Henry Cavill is fine, it’s the writing and direction of them movies he’s been in that sucks. This is what happens when you hire people who neither like nor understand Superman to write and direct your Superman movies.
but certain supervillains like the Joker and Carnage are monsters, so human rights don’t apply to them.
Regardless, whether these monsters should live or die or not isn’t Superman’s call to make. Even Batman once said “I don’t pass sentence; that’s for the courts to decide.” You’re basically suggesting that Superman become a serial killer, which would make Supes just as much a villain as them. Regardless of what these super villains may be capable of, two wrongs don’t make a right. Part of what makes Superman an admirable character is that he and we know that he could easily “clean house” on the DCU, but he doesn’t, because he knows that would give mankind a reason to fear him. Supes chooses *not* to rule humanity with an iron fist, even though he most certainly could.
Also, Carnage is a character from the Marvel universe.
well, my issues are with the marvel universe too.
and Superman would still be the good guy compared to the worst villains, like the Punisher or Dexter. the idea that if you kill them, you will be no better than them is bs, it’s part of the slippery slope witch is a logical fallacy.
also in that moment, Batman said he really wanted to kill that guy personally.
Enough already. Zack Snyder has already shown us why tacking a Messiah/God complex onto Superman is a bad idea; if Big Blue just went around deciding for himself who should live or die, then he really would be a murderous a-hole with a God complex who think he’s above the law. He wouldn’t be a hero anymore and he sure wouldn’t be Superman. How many times does something have to be explained to you before it finally sinks in? Also, you declaring something a “logical fallacy” doesn’t automatically make it so; kindly stop trying to pass your personal opinions off as facts.
Also, you’re burying the lead. None of your tirade has anything to do with Henry Cavill’s performance as Superman, which is the subject of this video, so none of this is relevant.
Furthermore, you just keep reiterating the same thing over and over, and straying further and further from the point. These are comments and complaints you’ve already made before. So if you don’t have anything NEW to say and are just posting your annoyance about this, especially since you’ve already done so before, then honestly you’re just wasting everyone’s time. A new comment stream is supposed to be about exchanging *new* thoughts and ideas, not about rehashing old thoughts you already have, especially when you have nothing new to go with it. Sorry, but if all you have to say is the same thing that you’ve uttered before, and you’re not willing or able to comprehend other points of view, then that to me is a worthless comment and you need to stop. I get so tired of your circular arguments, and you using the comments section of these videos to rant about random things in fiction that you take personal issue with.
It’s called the Fallacy Fallacy: dismissing a point that might very well be true on the basis that it looks like a logical fallacy. Look it up; it’s a real thing.
The trouble with the Slippery Slope Fallacy is that the first step doesn’t always lead inevitably to the next, but there are times when it actually does happen.
And actually, I would contend that the very reason Superman does hold to his No Kill policy is BECAUSE he respects the law. He does what he can to help, and people appreciate him for it, but that in and of itself does not make him judge, jury, or executioner. Far from it, he realizes that his great power means that he must act with all due humility or he De Facto becomes the villain. It’s not merely about whether he’ll become EVIL, but whether he will become a CRIMINAL; and if you break the law, you are the latter regardless of whether you are the former. And Superman respects the law.
And yet, the JL and JLU episodes I cited above basically demonstrate why it’s a problem.
The real issue comes down to control. Superman himself is far more dangerous that any of the villains he fights, so his first order of business must always be to control himself. In the Justice Lords episodes, we see what happens when Superman decides that he knows better than everyone else what is good for them, and we see what kind of monster that eventually turns him into. His quick-fix path-of-least-resistance attitude almost led him to kill the real Justice League.
Way too much is made of the “no killing” rule by fans, far more so than the comics ever do. If they have to kill, they will. Look at The Death of Superman for instance. Superman is trying to kill Doomsday, theres no two ways about it. And he does and is certainly unconcerned that he did so. Sure, Doomsday later comes back to life like everyone in comics, but the fact is Superman tried to kill him, thought he did so and wasnt upset over it.
Haven’t seen BvS yet. Didn’t really care to. So I can’t comment on anything BvS.
I’m of mixed feelings about Man of Steel. On one hand, I can kind of see why they felt the need to try to give us something of a new portrayal of the character. We’ve already seen the bright, positive, always-does-the-right-thing version from Christopher Reeve and Superfriends. Trying to make him more “human” might very well have been the way to go here.
For one thing, this is a Superman who doesn’t really understand his place in the world. And because of that, he doesn’t really have a working moral code other than what John and Martha Kent taught him. And even there, he’s still unsure, because his conscience tells him one thing, but the protectiveness of his parents leads him a different way. In a lot of ways, this character is a god-like being who doesn’t know his purpose in the world, so he’s constantly seeking it.
Second, this is a Superman who has only slightly dabbled in superherodom. So when he’s confronted with a group of beings, any one of which is a match for him, and he has to take them all on himself, it’s overwhelming. It’s like learning to swim by being tossed into the middle of a shark-infested ocean 200 miles from land.
So from a narrative perspective, I can’t really fault how his character turned out. And frankly, I kind of like the idea that he becomes a more positive character BECAUSE he has finally found his place in the world. You know what it reminds me of? The Incredibles. Remember how much of a jerkass Bob was at the beginning of the movie, neglecting his kids, lying to his wife, participating in illegal (albeit heroic) activities, punching his pipsqueak boss in the face through several cubicle walls. But by the end, he is a happy man again, partly because he learned to appreciate the good things he did have in life, but largely because he rediscovered his identity as a hero. And so did the rest of the family.
That said, I do feel that MoS was too quick and too much at one time. This is the kind of threat that should have been a second film, with the first dealing mainly about getting him to earth, and maybe giving him one decent villain to fight. Then have Zod and Crew show up as a sequel teaser. But that also seems par for the course for this series. It just feels that DC is rushing too fast trying to catch up with Marvel, and the result is that their films are now coming across as inferior imitations.
All in all, I feel that Man of Steel is a mixed bag. It doesn’t suck, but it’s not great either.
His Superman is not the problem or it wouldn’t be IF he was directed by someone somewhat competent.
Zack Snyder removed all joy and charm of the character (come on the scene in which Pa Kent dies is just ridiculous in every way) in a pathetic way to make it more gritty and realistic.
All and all, I’d like to give the guy a shot with a good director at least once before saying his Superman sucks.
Henry Cavil’s portrayal of Superman is fine. It’s the direction of Zak Snyder and David S. Goyer and those last two DCEU films that suck. Under the direction of someone who actually understands Superman and has an appreciation for the Superman mythos and isn’t just out to make some arty symbolism piece, Henry Cavil’s Superman could work.
And seriously, it’s a movie about comic book super heroes. Have some FUN with it, for cryin’ out loud! The MCU works because those films have light hearted moments along with the kick-ass action-y moments. They’re not dark, joyless angst fests.
I’m fine with doing different things with established characters, that being said I was not a fan of Snyder’s super serious, grim dark interpretation. Could Cavill have done better as a more lighthearted version of the character? Maybe, I’m not sure. I think part of the reason Snyder cast him is, he’s just kind of mean looking. His brow seems to be perpetually furrowed.
No, Zack Snyder’s Superman sucks. Henry Cavill really is a good actor and I hope one day he gets to portray Superman as he should be. I think he could pull it off.
I don’t think it was the fact that Superman’s boyscout character took away from the dramatic tension, so much that we always saw him at his very best, which is just grossly overpowered and able to figure out virtually any difficult situation he’s been put into. Even against a whole platoon of Kryptonians that are quite a bit more experienced at combat than he is, they still end up losing, and it wasn’t even cause he outsmarted them, either.
What I’m getting at is that you don’t have to make Supes grim or emo or embittered to be interesting or have dramatic tension. I think the only platform that really works in is Injustice. But as for a fledgling hero just getting used to the tights….I honestly think they would have benefited more from a lighter, more enjoyable tone. I recently watched Legion of Superheros, and I think it best captured a rookie Superman as he ought to be – big hearted, a team player, but kinda stupid. I found that Superman genuinely charming and easy to root for, and during the moments where he actually stepped up and acted like the wise, patient and powerful Superman the world knows, you actually got a sense for it because you watched how far he had progressed in his story. Making him like a turbo-genius just makes Batman a pointless decoration – infact most of the Justice League should just have desk jobs when he’s at his absolute best. But for a beginning super hero, Hollywood would have really benefited from watching more cartoons to get a fix on his character.
The argument about Superman killing Zod doesn’t make much sense to me. in ‘Superman 2’ he killed Zod there as well! He did the thing that turned Zod human then literally threw him down a bottomless cavern in the middle of the Fortress of Solitude. That man is dead!
No one seems to have a problem with him killing Zod then, so why is it such a big moral issue now?
Cavill could be a fantastic Superman. I was stoked when he was announced, having known him from The Tudors. And he has a great look for Superman. The problem is purely down to the writers and directors who dont seem to understand Superman at all.
Cavill is a great actor, but like any other actor if you give him something not well done then you’re not going to get a good interpretation. I was hoping they would expand on what happened in Man of Steel in the sequel, but they totally failed with that.