Board Thread:Supergirl discussions/@comment-31722073-20190318142027/@comment-5536445-20190321043514

Astroarnav wrote:

Now again, you are free to disagree, because this is my opinion, and if you still hate Lex, that's fine. I'm not even denying the HUGE writing problems in BvS anyway. I wasn't actively comparing Cryer and Eisenberg. Both portrayals stand on their own merits.

Neither am I denying the fact that Eisenberg was a bad Luthor...for EVERYONE ELSE. Remember, opinions are subjective, so even though I like Eisenberg's portrayal, I will always make sure to acknowledge the fact that he wasn't good in your eyes, and I understand why. I actually liked the Last Jedi, but that's not gonna blind me from the fact that the execution of Luke Skywalker's character (initially, anyway) was poor.

The other thing about my analyses is that I'm not going to look at a franchise and say "they tried to cover their tracks last minute, so I can't enjoy them". I am a devotee to narrative analysis over production analysis, and I'm always going to analyze and speculate on what I see happening rather than what others are deciding to interpret it as. Every movie, even the terrible ones like Suicide Squad, deserve some form of analysis. I know that it shouldn't distract me from "reality", but I'm an optimist in this regard. Why waste away talking about why a bad movie is bad? Why not talk about why a bad movie might be good? Why not talk about the things that make those good moments stand out?

I have already admitted, time and time again, that the DCEU movies are bad in the way they made that Superman arc. But I'm not here professing my love for the DCEU to talk about how the jars of piss foreshadows some random bs. The sum of its stories, outweighed as it may be by the problems in scripting, are still fascinating things for me to analyze and speculat on. Whenever I see a story I find interesting, the story comes  first. Problems come later, because there is more value to a good story that can be the foundation for better things to come. After all, Aquaman was a huge success in the way it handled it's character, so there is hope and potential.

This is where I have to reiterate the fact that opinions are subjective, because what we interpret is subjective. Maybe I do choose to believe that "Superman learned more from being dead", because that is what the movie is showing us. I'm not a sychophant in this manner either; not everything in these movies are perfect. I do wish we could see more scenes with the Glasses disguise (Clark Kent is NOT the glasses disguise...). I don't condone the jars of Peach Tea, in fact, I f***ing HATE THEM. But where you may have seen zero human elements in the DCEU Superman, I saw many, (his reunion with his mother, trying to push for his idealistic story, debating his place on Earth in light of his controversial status, or (this is my favorite) sacrificing himself against Doomsday). I get what you mean in regards to the Clark Kent side of things, but for me, Clark Kent WAS the same man in all of those moments.

Maybe I do choose to believe that "Superman learned more from being dead", but if there's a story that can satisfy the idea of that, then I'm willing to give it a shot. Whatever my opinion is now, it's my opinion, and I can't adjust mine to satisfy what others think.

Now can we please just stop talking about the DCEU? I feel like I've been attacking you guys for something so petty as character portrayals...and I'm getting tired of all this hate for my status as a DCEU supporter, and that I should "accept that they just tried and failed to fix a broken situation they put themselves in from the beginning".

And who implied that Eisenberg was #2 on my list anyway? He's more like...#4 for me.