Latest news with #LoisLane
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
The One Thing ‘Superman' and ‘Fantastic Four' Can Agree on? Origin Stories Are Over
[Editor's note: The following article contains some spoilers for both 'Superman' and 'The Fantastic Four: First Steps.'] It long ago became a familiar refrain for both this writer and plenty of other critics, journalists, film fans, and superhero stans: We're done with origin stories. And while the ever-expanding nature of both the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the spruced-up DC version requires the seemingly constant addition of new heroes and new stories, which, in turn, mean more movies and TV shows that chronicle how these super-beings came to be, it's time to call time on those heavy-hitter origin tales. More from IndieWire Is 'Fantastic Four' a Marvel Reset or Another Step Backward? Screen Talk Reviews the Film and Previews Fall Festivals 'Monk in Pieces' Review: Billy Shebar's Vital Documentary Makes Sense of an Artist Who's Always Defied Basic Understanding We know why Batman is Batman, how Spider-Man became Spider-Man, and that Superman is an extraterrestrial. That's a lesson that both of this summer's big superheroic releases — James Gunn's delightful DC franchise reset 'Superman' and Matt Shakman's less successful MCU entry 'The Fantastic Four: First Steps' — both intrinsically understand and honor. Both films open after our titular heroes have become, well, heroes. Gunn's film not only opens after his Clark Kent (David Corenswet) has crash-landed on Earth from his native Krypton, but also after he's come to terms with his powers, grappled with growing up in Smallville, become Superman as we know him, moved to Metropolis, gotten a job at the Daily Planet, met Lois Lane, told Lois Lane who he is, and set about saving the world one squirrel at a time. That's a tremendous amount of ground to cover and more than enough for its own film — or, as we've seen over the past 87 years the hero has been in the zeitgeist, more than enough for multiple films, TV series, shorts, radio plays, even a musical, and a little thing called comic books — and is simply not required anymore. Jumping into the Superman story in medias res doesn't mean that we're robbed of enjoying the building blocks of how something came to be, but that we get to enjoy the story from a different starting point. Seeing how Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan in Gunn's film) reacts to discovering that Clark and Supes are the same person? That's not nearly as interesting or fresh as watching her grapple with that dichotomy, over and over, and in different situations. Similarly, Gunn's film doesn't push any superhero-to-superhero meetings on the audience; instead, when Superman joins a fight alongside the so-called Justice Gang, we get to observe relationships that are already in place. What a relatively small touch — hey, these people know each other — that pays off big time. Gunn and company are in the midst of something of a DC reset, which affords them the opportunity to take on seemingly risky things like 'not having to remind us that Superman is literally from space and also Clark Kent,' but even before this new iteration of DC screen lore, Warner Bros. was starting to dip its rubberized wings into less origin-centric superhero stories. Matt Reeves' 'The Batman' (which is, and we're getting deep here, not actually part of the overall DC superhero franchise, but is its own thing, called the quite-chewy 'Batman Epic Crime Saga') similarly works off a baseline understanding of the Caped Crusader (Robert Pattinson). And while, yes, Bruce Wayne's beloved dead parents and their horrific deaths are included in the film, it doesn't play out as a traditional origin story. Consider it a happy side effect of the film's earliest incarnations, when Ben Affleck was going to direct and star in his own Batman movie, after his Bruce had already been 'introduced' in other DCEU films. For once, development hell has rewards. Much like 'Superman,' Shakman's 'Fantastic Four' opens four years (you get it, right?) after the titular superhero family was turned into cosmically powered individuals after a spaceflight gone bad. Because of the alternate Earth the fab four inhabit, the energetic opening of Shakman's MCU film not only gets to show off the superhero clan, but the retrofuturistic world they protect. It's the highlight of the film, a zippy and genuinely fun way to introduce the group (including Pedro Pascal, Vanessa Kirby, Ebon Moss-Bachrach, and Joseph Quinn) within the confines of their kitschy planet (which is also, incidentally, filled to bursting with citizens who adore them). Cleverly packaged as a TV chat show introduction to the famous group, Shakman finds the space to introduce the heroes, their world, and even show off some of their exploits (from befriending Mole Man to vanquishing, as best we can tell, a bunch of super-smart apes). For fans of the comic book heroes, it's an opening full of classic storylines and some 'hey, I get that reference!' nods. For newbies, it's a whiz-bang trip through lore that sets up the story to come. Mostly, it's refreshing. Consider this year's other MCU entries, including 'Captain America: Brave New World' and 'Thunderbolts,' both of which require a high level of franchise knowledge to really stick, including the consumption of multiple movies and TV shows (and, and this is essential, a solid memory when it applies to all of them). If you're an MCU fan, that's a lot of time spent to 'get' a film or two. If you're just a casual watcher of the movies, it's nearly insurmountable. Let's stop that now. 'Superman' and 'The Fantastic Four: First Steps,' lead the way. That's heroics we can get behind. Both 'Superman' and 'The Fantastic Four: First Steps' are now in theaters. Best of IndieWire The 16 Best Slasher Movies Ever Made, from 'Candyman' to 'Psycho' Martin Scorsese's Favorite Movies Include 'Eddington': 87 Films the Director Wants You to See The Best Thrillers Streaming on Netflix in July, from 'Vertigo' and 'Rear Window' to 'Emily the Criminal'
Gizmodo
21-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Gizmodo
I Love That ‘Superman' Loves Journalism
James Gunn's Superman operates on a litany of fantasies: a world where superpowered individuals have existed for centuries and roam among us, a world where the public almost universally loves a singular alien who has come to planet Earth to uplift and protect humanity's greatest ideals in the name of a better tomorrow. Those are key suspensions of disbelief for practically every superhero movie. But in stark contrast to that, its other key pillar in that suspension is much more down to earth: that modern journalism can be universally accepted to save the day as much as any superhero between all the pocket universe destruction, Kryptonian drama, and superhuman scrapping, Superman is perhaps one of the most surprisingly effective pop culture movies about journalism in a very long time. Comic book characters have long had a history with working in the news industry, from alter egos like Clark himself to Peter Parker, or human allies like Vicki Vale, Lois Lane, Ben Urich, Robbie Robertson, and many more, but more often than not their journalistic backgrounds have to take a backstep to the necessity of a superhero story (especially for heroes themselves, when ethical concerns come into play). Superman does play with the tension of this conflict briefly, although largely to similarly ignore it as the comics do—both Clark and Lois touch upon the conflicts of interest they have in both dating each other and their knowledge of Superman's secret identity; Jimmy Olsen's huge report on Lex Luthor's connection to the Boravian invasion of Jarhanpur is predicated on damning evidence from a source he was previously romantically involved with, information he exchanges on the promise of a weekend-length date with said source. We never know if the latter's report discloses that fact, and it seems Lois never runs anything from her bombshell interview with Clark in the opening act of the film—presumably because in an ideal world she would have to disclose or recuse herself from reporting on it given her personal relationship with the subject. But the fact that Superman even remotely cares about that speaks to its broader interest in journalism, and in particular journalism as a tool of public good. Clark and Lois' first major scene together in the film takes place over an interview at the latter's apartment, after Lois chides Clark that laundering his reputation as the Daily Planet's premiere Superman reporter means just giving himself easy, uninteresting questions to answer. It's a delightful scene to watch from a journalism perspective, even putting aside the hypocrisy of Lois knocking Clark for reporting on himself before proceeding to interview her own romantic partner. Both Clark and Lois take on personas here: the former stops being Clark and 'becomes' Superman, both talking about himself in the third person and adopting the body language and tone he has when he is in costume. But just as importantly, Lois separates herself from being a flirtatious girlfriend (as much as she can outside of, again, removing herself from the interview entirely as a conflict of interest) and becomes 'Ms. Lane,' investigative reporter at the Daily Planet. Aside from including the most concise explanation of how being 'on the record' works with a reporter to ever hit a superhero movie (whenever Superman hits home release, I yearn to clip and send that soundbite to half the contacts in my inbox), the back-and-forth between Lois and Clark frames their interview as, rightfully, Lois speaking truth to Superman's power as a superhuman, godlike entity on the level of nation states like Boravia or corporations like LutherCorp. And that is what Superman is, she argues much to Clark's frustration, if he is going to make unilateral decisions to intervene in international conflicts: a power that a good reporter will question and hold to account. The scene even subtly has Lois navigate the thorny compromise of conducting this interview from a detached perspective, even if the framing of her questions doesn't necessarily align with her own personal beliefs. As she says to Clark at one point, she can't trust Boravia's claims of wanting to liberate Jarhanpur from an authoritarian regime, but as a reporter, she has to allow for that claim to be as valid as Superman's claim that his intervention was the only alternative to save lives. It's a fascinating acknowledgement of public criticism of media impartiality in our own world, an especially delicate act to balance given readings of Superman's Boravia-Jarhanpur conflict as a parallel to the likes of the Russian invasion of Ukraine or Israel's occupation of Gaza (and in particular for that latter reading, criticism of the media's failure to report on Israel's campaign as a genocide). And this is in a superhero movie where a questionably-haircutted Nathan Fillion fights a giant kaiju and summons emerald constructs of pure will in the shape of one-finger salutes! But the reality of journalism on display in that scene between Lois and Clark isn't really the fantasy that sits along the comic book fantasy of superheroes in Superman. Amidst the chaos of the movie's third act of Metropolis being torn apart by Lex Luthor's pocket universe rift, the real stakes of the movie coalesce around Lois and Jimmy's report on Luthor's relationship with the Boravian president, Vasil Ghurkos. Literally filing directly into the Daily Planet's CMS (that's a Content Management System, for those not in the know—from one CMS writer to another, kudos to Mr. Olsen for living the risk of not drafting in the DC equivalent of Google Docs!), from Mr. Terrific's ship, the Planet team launches their article with immediate impact. The report is all over the news and has as much, if not more, sway in turning public opinion back in Superman's favor as Clark literally whizzing around saving lives and trying to stop Metropolis from splitting in half does. The report has direct consequences leading to Lex Luthor's arrest: the Daily Planet is arguably as crucial to saving the day in Superman's finale as the titular hero himself is. In a modern journalism environment where outlets across the industry are shuttering every day, battling the rise of generative AI, or simply trying to navigate a sociopolitical environment that has become increasingly siloed in the echo chambers of a 'post-truth' world, the fact that the Daily Planet survives and thrives in the importance of its mission perhaps requires as much suspension of disbelief as a man who's faster than a speeding bullet and can leap buildings in a single bound. (And that any reporter at what appears to be a primarily print media news organization can afford either Lois Lane's or Clark Kent's apartments, but that's beside the point). Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what's next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.
Yahoo
21-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Watch: Rachel Brosnahan's 'travel curse' nearly cost her 'Superman' audition
July 17 (UPI) -- Superman actress Rachel Brosnahan says she had a "travel curse" that nearly caused her to miss the audition to portray the iconic Lois Lane. The former Marvelous Mrs. Maisel star, 35, discussed the curse, and how she broke it, when she stopped by The Tonight Show starring Jimmy Fallon Wednesday. "This is a good example of the curse," she said, referring to her Superman audition. Brosnahan was in New York City doing a show on Broadway and was attempting to make it to Los Angeles for the audition. "We got offstage at like 11:00 p.m. The only flight that would get me there in time was at 6 a.m. So, I got to the airport. I got there early, and the flight starts getting delayed and I just had a bad feeling about it, because curse," she explained. The flight was ultimately canceled and she ran back and forth across the airport trying to book another flight. "I got there and honestly I feel like the chaos that came with me after what I'd been through that morning must have felt so Lois Lane-coded or something because it worked out just fine," she said. She added that her curse is so bad she hired a witch to break it ahead of the Superman promotional tour. "I got really desperate and I started asking people if anyone knew like an energy healer or like a past-life reader... And so I called a witch and brought her to my house," she said. "...She brought a wishing well and a wand and she signed an NDA." Brosnahan reports her travel curse has since been lifted. Superman raked in some $122 million at the box office over the weekend. The film stars David Corenswet as the titular hero.
Time of India
19-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
'Superman': Mikaela Hoover recalls the reactions being real for 'T-Craft' scene; reveals cast had no idea
The 'Superman' cast had an unprecedented and amusing work day when they got to experience the magic of high-tech flying T-Craft, possibly in the most authentic way. Mikaela Hoover , who plays a colleague of Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan), revealed that the entire cast didn't know anything about the T-Craft before filming the scene, making all the reactions quite genuine. 'Superman' cast members gave real reactions to T-Craft According to People, the fictional aircraft, which is played by the character Mister Terrific ( Edi Gathegi ), is used by Lois Lane at the end of the film. She invites her colleagues at the Daily Planet newspaper on board, one of whom is the gossip columnist Cat Grant (Mikaela Hoover). Revealing the behind-the-scenes drama, Hoover said that no one from the cast knew about T-Craft. 'When we got in there and we buckled our seat belts, we had no idea that [the T-Craft] was really going to lift up or go down or right or left,' she claimed, before adding, 'We didn't know what was going to happen. So all of those reactions we had in the T-Craft are real." Mikaela Hoover's high-tech roller coaster ride Furthermore, the 41-year-old compared her feelings to being on a roller coaster ride or a topsy-turvy ride. Recalling the day, she said, 'One of the cast members has a weak stomach and was like, 'I'm gonna be sick.' It was quite the experience,' adding that the specific T-Craft scene with the Daily Planet employees was shot for an entire day. 'We were in there for a long time, and there were a lot of takes, but we got the hang of what was going to happen,' Hoover said. She continued that it was the initial time when they had no idea about how bumpy it would be or what was going to happen to all of them.
India Today
18-07-2025
- General
- India Today
Flight AI171 loss aches, yet data shows air travel the safest in India
A series of escalating disasters in Metropolis. One of them is a helicopter fallen from the sky and dangling barely from the top of a skyscraper, about to fall. Also dangling in the air is one of the passengers—Lois Lane. It's chaos on the ground. A tragedy is swoops the red-caped hero. He flies up and catches Lois midair. And then, with just one hand, he also grabs the wrecked helicopter and stops it from falling on the people on the ground. 'Statistically speaking, of course, it is still the safest way to travel,' he tells a shocked Lois and flies was the first Superman movie, in 1978. That line, statistically speaking, was true then. Almost five decades later, it still 12, 2025 turned out to be an unfortunate day to be airborne. Minutes after take-off from Ahmedabad, Air India Flight AI171—a formidable Boeing Dreamliner—went down; 260 lives lost and a lone surviving passenger. Images of the wreckage, grieving relatives and search-and-rescue work splashed across the globe. It was the type of tragedy that makes a country stop and mourn. But as the dust settles, a more sobering aspect remains true. Flying is safer than it has ever been in India. It is still statistically the safest way to travel in the country—better than by road or what hard data says. Take 2023, for instance. Not a single accident per million flight departures took place in Indian civil aviation. For a country as large and disordered, as packed with people, as India, this was no mean feat. And it's been validated was ranked 48th in a recent assessment by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which audits countries for aviation safety. The country was 102 in 2018. Yet, any step-up in the rankings is more than it's cracked up to be: India's Effective Implementation (EI) Score, essentially how well it enforces aviation safety standards, is 85.65 per cent. In key areas, it's better than of the United States and China. In the sub-category of airworthiness—perhaps the most important of the lot—India got 97.06 per of this is intended to say that air travel is free of risk. Few things in life are. But the chances of things fatally going wrong on a flight are minuscule, especially when compared with the for instance, the roads. Over 460,000 road accidents are reported in India every year. Nearly 170,000 people died in 2022-23—close to 470 a day. Most of those deaths never make news. They happen on highways, in cities and in distant corners of the country. They snuff out children, students, workers, the elderly, often families in travel has had its share of tragedies. In 2023-24, the railways reported 40 major accidents, which killed over 330 people and injured over 800. Indeed, that is a small number when compared with the millions of people who take a train every day. Nevertheless, they are fatalities. And buses? They kill more than 5,600 people on Indian roads each year. That's approximately 3-4 per cent of all road traffic while no one noticed, aviation did its boring thing—quietly carrying millions of people without a single commercial aviation accident in 2023. That's not luck. It is the product of something much more profound—long-term investment in safety, training and infrastructure. For half a decade now, India's aviation stakeholders—regulators, airlines, airport operators—have been ratcheting up the pressure, keeping vigilant, even if not particularly Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has overhauled pilot training, stepped up inspections and introduced a more assertive approach to surveillance. The numbers say it all. India achieved a 25 per cent drop in high-risk 'airprox' incidents (when planes come too close to each other in the air) in 2023, a 92 per cent drop in ground-proximity (potential collisions of aircraft with terrain or obstacles) alerts, and 23 per cent fewer poorly-stabilised landings. It's not perfect. But it's what makes the AI171 crash such a jolt. According to the initial cockpit voice recordings, the fuel-control switches for both engines were somehow shut off in flight, which caused the aircraft to lose all power. Investigators are still trying to work out what occurred—whether it was a freak mechanical failure, human error or a series of events that no one could foresee. What is clear is that the fatal crash was the first for a Boeing 787, which began flying in is also, crucially, a statistical outlier. But in the public imagination, little factoids like that can be obscured by the emotional crush of a disaster. Airplane crashes, as rare as they are, have a tendency to lodge in the mind in a way road accidents do not. Maybe it is the magnitude of the tragedy or the speed of it or even the thought of how helpless passengers are when a plane goes for all sorts of reasons, one plane crash seems to incite infinitely more public outrage than thousands of deaths each year from vehicles on the road. For the past 10 years, Union road transport and highways minister Nitin Gadkari has been highlighting everywhere, even in Parliament, that road accidents take more lives than wars and terrorism. By now, the analogy barely fact, India accounts for almost 10 per cent of global road fatalities. Among the young—between the ages of 5 to 29—road accident injuries are the top cause of death, government data shows. And yet, hashtags and headlines and desperate calls for change are all too disconnect matters. When perception and reality don't remotely sync, policy follows the sound, not the demand. But if there's anything Indian aviation's safety record demonstrates, it is that the unglamorous work can pay the world is taking note. Now, several nations are looking to India's model of aviation safeguards—with its mix of state capacity, public-private partnerships and a convergence with global norms. India has adopted the ICAO's National Aviation Safety Plan template; it actively engages in worldwide safety discussions and seems to want to be up to speed with the current global conversations on air of this changes the terrible loss of Flight AI171. When people die, no amount of data can mean anything to their families and friends. But for the millions still flying every day—to work, to family, to opportunity, it may be worthwhile to know what bigger picture really still looks is why, late on July 17, the Indian government's Aircraft Accidents Investigation Bureau, uncharacteristically issued a statement criticising 'a section of the international media' and remarked: 'While the accident of this dimension has drawn public attention and shock, it needs to be appreciated that this is not the time to create public anxiety or angst towards safety of the Indian aviation industry, particularly on the basis of unfounded facts.'One terrible day does not define the skies. The real measure is how safely passengers travel on all the other days. On that count, India's skies are not just open. They are still among the safest in the to India Today Magazine- EndsMust Watch
