I actually liked all the superman actors so far in the movies. But they really have been given poor material at times.
The Rock really be rejuvenating franchises. He is never going to fight Shazam now, just like he planned.
Henry Cavill is the right guy for the job. They just need to give him something better to work with. But honestly, as disappointed as I've been in DC movies over the years, I will still go see Superman in theaters. I'll just cross my fingers that they figure out how to do the character well.
Yeah - at no point in time have I ever felt like Cavill was doing a bad job as Superman, and, honestly, if they get a different actor, it will be difficult for me to NOT have Cavill in my mind and comparing the new actor to Cavill. I look forward to seeing more movies with Cavill as Superman - but they gotta have good story, good dialogue, good characters, and realistic CGI.
I'd love to see what he can do with a more proper interpretation of the character. That means needing Zack Snyder to be nowhere near this next incarnation.
My main issue is that Snyder prioritized the cinematic spectacle and action over the humanity at the core of the character, IMO. In the climactic fight against Zod in Metropolis, at times it felt as though Superman was a willing participant in the city's destruction, making little to no effort to move the battle elsewhere or to save anyone caught in the crossfire (other than the final family in the train station). That more than anything felt false to the character (and Superman II, while very dated, got this aspect more right). While I'll grant that MOS was kinetic and thrilling in terms of portraying that spectacle, it felt like questions like, "Is Superman troubled by all this? Does he want to achieve anything beyond punching Zod really hard?" were not really deemed of much importance in the writing and directing. And that really is what I objected to.
Superman was never meant to be dark and serious, that's Batman's thing. Brooding and excessive destruction is all I got from Snyder superman.
Thats not what super hero movies where about at that time and I don't remember comic books touching on a lot of that stuff either. Its like people wanted a deep dive into the psych of Superman and you can't get that in a 2 hour movie. And the crazy part is none of this stuff was talked about in the MCU until civil war which came way after. Why do we want to know he wanted to achieve anything other punching ZOD real hard he was literally fighting for his life and the planet but we need to know if he wanted something else? Really? I can use these same questions about most Marvel Movies as well. Do you object to these same things in the MCU?
Superman has been dark and brooding in many storylines and how was the destruction excessive? That type of destruction happens in most comics all the time and in most comic book movies was it worse than the destruction in the Avengers? This is a comic book movie, comics are built on excessive destruction.
