I hate it. Superman doesn’t need to be swole, in fact it would break immersion for me.

I just can't see him playing Clark Kent. Superman isn't just a buff guy who wins fights, and if that's all your casting is based on, I feel like you may have missed the point of the character. Because to me, the real point of any Superman story should be Clark.

I’m a casual fan when it comes to Superman. Johnson is too one-note imo. I can’t see him conveying the genuine kindness of Clark Kent or Superman without trying to put a vapid cheeky, edgy, or ironic spin on it. The stakes of Superman often don’t come from what can defeat him in combat, but what can destroy what he cares about and his ability to defend it. Also, I don’t think the iconic hairstyles would look right on Johnson’s head since he’s known for a bald or short-haired look. Another commenter mentioned how Johnson has more of a bodybuilder form, which seems too exaggerated for the character to me as well. I thought his portrayal of Black Adam was fine, but it’d be weird seeing him switch to a foil character in the same general franchise (but different universe) so soon, not that other actors haven’t successfully made that switch themselves.

I won’t watch the rock in any movie. He’s boring as shit.

Nah, he just doesn't have the right mindset.

There's a bit of necessity that a superman actor have a degree of the boy Scout in them already. I'm not saying they have to fit some arbitrary moral standard, just that there's a way of looking at the world that comes through any performance, and supes needs someone that can look at the world and not be self serving or cynical.

None of the past or current actors were perfect people, but the ones that we remember best and like the best (we being the geeks that care enough to debate the merits of the actors) are the ones that have that sense of seeing the world as it is, while still believing it can be better.

It isn't obvious, you have to watch enough interviews about other roles as well as the role, but it shows up.

It's one of the reasons I like Cavill in the role, despite the movies he's been in being poorly written in terms of superman being at his best. His built in, for lack of a better phrase, trust in the world shows through in his performance. He doesn't have to act that part of supes, so it works.

It's also why both Reeves made it work so well, though Christopher is the gold standard. I mean, dude was paralyzed, and never gave up hope entirely. That's the kind of thing that I'm talking about.

Welling had a similar way of taking on the world, if you watch his interviews.

Cain didn't.

Routh did, but he got slammed by the horrible script. He was still amazing in the role, but you can only do so much. He's played another super hero, and brought that same optimistic side of it to that role.

But it isn't necessarily optimism that's needed, that's just one expression of it.

And the rock, sadly, doesn't have it. He's too wrapped up in being "the rock" to let that go and be himself. Most of his roles have been the rock playing the role rather than Johnson playing the role. It's why Black Adam fell a little flat. It wasn't a total failure, but there were too many scenes where it was about looking good or looking tough rather than playing the role.

And that's a sure fire recipe for a sucky supes

No

No, not because I dislike dwayne, but his charecter trope is obvious super swole "badass". Superman is more tough built like a tank, country guy/nerd. Put him in some civies and he blends, put him in the suit and you recognize oh, he's gonna beat somebody up.

Put Dwayne in normal clothes, and he wont blend, he will just look like a rock with glasses.

iirc clark kent had like the same physique but such a personality you wouldn't think much about it.

Also the whole, "I must always be a clear winning badass" clause with dwayne might constrain writers or pressure them. Never showing any weakness or "loss".

Nowadays, we like Superheroes thay have a backstory, some weakness, makes them "human" (even if superman, isnt) might be as simple as not great at cooking or shopping.

He’s iconic but I don’t think he's a very good actor. Specifically, he lets his ego get in the way of the craft.

No

There is a new Superman movie, it's coming out next July.

https://youtu.be/6UXGo5PFUA0

The problem is the dual role. Johnson has the build for Superman, but nobody would buy him as Clark Kent.

They should cast Michael Cera

Larry the cable guy is actually from Kansas, and looks like an average guy from Kansas. It's time we got male body positivity in cinema.

I mean, I kinda liked him in Black Adam. (Though, full disclosure, I'm not familiar with the comics at all. So I don't have any opinion as to whether the movie is faithful to the comics.) But from what I've heard he was kinda such an asshole while filming that WB (which owns DC comics) has sworn off of having anything to do with him again. So I doubt Johson will appear in any DCCU film (or any DCCU 2.0 reboot film). Let alone as so high-profile a DC character as Superman.

But even if I liked him as Black Adam, I don't think he'd make a good Superman.

I wouldn't watch it. Not because of Johnson, but because it's rare I can sit through movies these days.

I'd like to see the character though! Is Superman now bald? Does Johnson now have hair? Either way, a compelling visual.

I like The Rock, but I think we need a new fresh talent to play him. I'm all for a black or hispanic or asian superman, bring it all on.

not supes exactly. he could be man of steel though (john henry irons)

An easy way to remember etc vs ect is that it stands for et cetera.

Et=and Cetera = other things