Inflation and they're audiences it didn't beatZack Snyder's Man of Steel?

How many times are they going to re-tell the same Batman and Superman stories?

It happened THIS way.

No, it happened THAT way.

No, it happened THIS OTHER way.

Make up your fucking minds!

Some times you just want to be entertained, especially when the world seems like it's getting shittier.

I don't need another superhero movie where it spends most of its time trying to depress me. It's OK to go 'full comic', drop the grimdark, and just have fun.

Returns have been gradually falling for decades. Sure a lot of it is studios and middle men squeezing theaters for more than the market will bear leading to half an hour of ads before the movies just so the theater can stay in business. But most of it is this re-churning of the same old slop decade after decade by big Hollywood companies and theaters not wanting to take a chance on smaller studios offerings. If you don't like risk, get out of the movie business.

I remember asking that a ways back.

Could Superman's ethics survive in this day and age?

ChatGPT said:

That's a great question—and it gets at the heart of how superheroes reflect and challenge the times they live in.

Superman's ethics, traditionally rooted in absolute moral clarity—truth, justice, and a kind of unwavering altruism—were forged during the 1930s and '40s, when the world craved idealism amid depression and war. But today's world is more cynical, fractured, and morally complex. So the tension between Superman's moral absolutism and the modern world's ambiguity is very real.

Could his ethics survive?

1. Yes, but they'd be challenged constantly.

Superman's unwavering sense of right and wrong would feel out of step in an era of moral relativism, political polarization, and public distrust of power. A Superman who says, "I won't kill under any circumstances," would likely face public backlash in situations where pragmatic, violent solutions are expected or demanded.

2. His example could be more important than ever.

Precisely because his ethics are out of sync with the times, Superman could function as a moral north star—a kind of aspirational figure who reminds people of the values we've lost or compromised. Writers like Grant Morrison and Mark Waid have portrayed him this way: not naïve, but principled in the face of darkness.

3. He'd need reinterpretation—not reinvention.

Superman's ethics could survive if they're presented not as rigid rules but as chosen commitments. For example, he doesn't kill not because it's easy, but because it's hard—and he chooses that restraint as a reflection of hope and accountability. That kind of internal moral struggle can feel deeply modern.

4. The world around him would change more than he would.

In good stories, Superman doesn't bend to the world so much as force the world to reckon with his refusal to bend. That dynamic—idealism confronting pragmatism—can still resonate today, especially when we’re saturated with anti-heroes and compromised protagonists.

TL;DR:

Superman's ethics could absolutely survive—but they’d face more resistance and scrutiny than ever. And that conflict could make his stories richer, not weaker.

A mostly uninteresting superhero. This perfect man, with perfect super powers and is all powerful gets occasionally challenged a little bit.

Give me batman or something any day. No wonder they have to keep rebooting superman, it's just not an interesting story. Sounds like this one did fine (not inflation adjusted numbers of course) cause its summer

We need some idealism back. The world got pretty uninspiring.

interesting re-framing of their failures as "super hero fatigue"

pretty sure it was a case of shit story with a focus on things that didn't add to the story/action...

We were looking for a fun, action adventure not a hammering over the head about societal issues... You can address those, but don't need to be heavy handed about it.