The Official Eradicator Thread

[NotFadeAway]

If Eradicator was the villian instead of Braniac in Singer's sequel, or in a restart, how would you feel about that? How do you feel about Eradicator compared to others in Superman's rogue gallery, including Branaic?

Let me know.....

[gimmen64]

I think that in the sequel they should focus on Brainaic as the main villan but use the Eradicator as a villan to kill Jason. As the Eradicator is attempting to kill Jason, Superman is able to turn him against Brainiac and defeat him. They should keep the Eradictor cold with very little emotion. In future movies Superman should die and the Eradicator should take over Superman's body until Superman is re-born and keep it very close to the comics. I think that Routh would look great as the Eradicator and as the Cyborg.

[Billy Batson]

How about have Tom Welling Play the Eradicator?
A nod to the fans who wanted TW for supes.

[WormyT]

He certainly has a cool outfit.

History of Eradicator.

http://www.supermanhomepage.com/comics/comics.php?topic=special-reports/eradicator

[GreenKToo]

I wouldnt be against that...it would in fact prolly be cool.

[FlawlessVictory]

As long as the new villain's name does not rhyme with Ruthor or Dod then I'm down for it.

[Super Kal]

I would LOVE to see the eradicator in the sequel...

[DorkyFresh]

How about have Tom Welling Play the Eradicator?
A nod to the fans who wanted TW for supes.

i think someone's obsessed...

[Dope Nose]

I like the Eradicator, but just as a friend.

[DorkyFresh]

the biggest problem i have with Superman characters are their names...they have some of the goofiest sounding names.

brainiac, bizarro, metallo, myzplytyk, eradicator...they're okay for comics, but put it in a movie and it would just sound corny. the only villains i can think of that have decent names that i wouldn't laugh at are zod, parasite, and doomsday.

[Billy Batson]

i think someone's obsessed...

:cwink: :o :woot:

[dark_b]

how does the eradicator look like?

[project13]

I love the idea of the Eradicator for the next villian. I even got a title for this sequel:

SUPERMAN: ERADICATION

The plot would combine some elements of Superman III and the "Day of the Krypton Man" comic book arc.

[Zorex]

I'm reading through that Eradicator write-up on Superman Homepage, and it's got me thinking that the Eradicator could indeed be a damn cool villain for the next film. It would most certainly tie into Superman's Kryptonian heritage, as well as the Fortress...which is assumedly "dead" now, but, really, what's a Superman story without the Fortress? It'll be back somehow, and the Eradicator could definitely have a part in the story.

[NotFadeAway]

Sad thing is, Im sure Singer has never heard of Eradicator.

[DvilDog]

the biggest problem i have with Superman characters are their names...they have some of the goofiest sounding names.

brainiac, bizarro, metallo, myzplytyk, eradicator...they're okay for comics, but put it in a movie and it would just sound corny. the only villains i can think of that have decent names that i wouldn't laugh at are zod, parasite, and doomsday.

Dont forget Darkseid. I think thats a cool name:)

[DvilDog]

this is a good version

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eradicator_%28comics%29

[Lighthouse]

Question? What exactly is the difference between the Eradicator and the more modern version of Brainiac? To me it seems like they are both pretty much the same character.

[DarkSuperman]

the biggest problem i have with Superman characters are their names...they have some of the goofiest sounding names.

brainiac, bizarro, metallo, myzplytyk, eradicator...they're okay for comics, but put it in a movie and it would just sound corny. the only villains i can think of that have decent names that i wouldn't laugh at are zod, parasite, and doomsday.

Goofy names never seemed to hurt Spiderman much did it? Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus...now Sandman. Its not about the name, its all about Execution and writing. Which singer and his Yes-Men obviously cant do right.

[The Question]

Question? What exactly is the difference between the Eradicator and the more modern version of Brainiac? To me it seems like they are both pretty much the same character.

The difference is that the more modern version of Brainiac is nothing like The Eradicator. The S:TAS version of Brainiac is basically a composite of Brainiac and The Eradicator, with The Eradicator's personality and origin and a Brainac-like MO.

[Motown Marvel]

if done well, i'd be cool with the eradicator.

[Captain Villa]

I think that in the sequel they should focus on Brainaic as the main villan but use the Eradicator as a villan to kill Jason. As the Eradicator is attempting to kill Jason

Why advocate killing a 5-6 year old ?

That is sick.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Reading his history on the Supeshome page i really dont think he would be an interesting villain personally

[WormyT]

I like the Eradicator, but just as a friend.
LOL!:woot:

[That-Guy]

Well, if you're looking at my avatar right now, then you can probably deduce that I'm a big fan of the Eradicator. He's one of my favorite characters in the Superman mythos and was, IMO, by far the coolest of the "Four Superman." However, upon a recent re-viewing of Superman Returns, I began to think that involving the Eradicator in a sequel may be problematic, and here's why.

My biggest complaint about Superman Returns wasn't the costume, the Donner influence, or the kid. It was the fact that Superman simply wasn't given enough to do. I felt like we, at best, only got to know him as much as the other characters, when we should have gotten to know him MORE than any other character, in particular the other heroes of the story (Lois, Richard, Jason, etc). Now, if the Eradicator shows up and the story follows a similar pattern to the one in the comics, he'll redeem himself somewhere along the way and become something of a hero. If this happens, he will no doubt steal the show from Superman. And even if Routh himself plays both roles, that still doesn't change the fact that a movie about Superman should actually be ABOUT Superman.

If the Eradicator is used strictly as a villain, I see some problems there as well. I think one of the things that makes the character interesting is that it began as a weapon whose purpose was to preserve Kryptonian culture and obliterate anything that would comprimise that, yet once Kal-El died, its motivations changed and it attempted to carry on his legacy as a hero. This sets the Eradicator apart from your typical Terminator-type killing machine. But if he's made out to be a flat-out villain, chances are we'll get the E-1000. Just food for thought.

[project13]

Like I said, I like the Eradicator for the villian. It fact, I just started a thread on how he would appear in an SR sequel. Possible title:


SUPERMAN: ERADICATION

[project13]

Since no one would respond to the thread I made three days ago:cmad: I thought I made a fresh new one. In Superman III, Supes turns evil by that "tar" kryptonite. Clark Kent fights his evil twin and won. Would it happen again, only this time, the good Clark Kent fights the Eradicator.


Please PLEASE!!!!!!!!!! respond:csad:

[The Question]

The Eradicator isn't a clone/evil twin of Superman. He's a Kryptonian artificial inteligence that wants to remake Krypton on Earth.

[Showtime]

I like the idea of the Eradicator coming to earth chasing down Jason, but think about how they could have used The Eradicator in Returns in regards to creating Krypton on Earth. I guess you could consider the "advanced Kryptonian technology" that Lex uses The Eradicator.

[Lightning54SC]

I like the idea of the Eradicator coming to earth chasing down Jason, but think about how they could have used The Eradicator in Returns in regards to creating Krypton on Earth. I guess you could consider the "advanced Kryptonian technology" that Lex uses The Eradicator.

the eradicator could be made on NK... and be setup up to be the villain in the movie and then at the end he can turn out to be a good guy cuz brainiac find his signal cuz hes been searching for the eradicator and his powers to use for himself and then you have a third movie setup

[Showtime]

I could see Brainiac forming on NK due to advanced alien technology and then the Eradicator locates the signal of Brainiac and follows it from a distant planet to earth. There he discovers that Superman has a child that is not pure kryptonian and wants to destroy him. Meanwhile Brainiac is concocting a scheme to take over the world with some help from Lex.

[project13]

The Eradicator isn't a clone/evil twin of Superman. He's a Kryptonian artificial inteligence that wants to remake Krypton on Earth.


That's the point. The Eradicator might fuse with Superman's Kryptonian body thus turning into the Krypton Man. The Krypton Man would plot to use the remainig crystals in the FOS to convert Earth into NK. Then, the good Clark Kent splits from the Eradicator, fights him and deactivates the Krypton Man persona (violent, aggressive and coldhearted).

It would be like Superman III.

[The Question]

That's the point. The Eradicator might fuse with Superman's Kryptonian body thus turning into the Krypton Man. The Krypton Man would plot to use the remainig crystals in the FOS to convert Earth into NK. Then, the good Clark Kent splits from the Eradicator, fights him and deactivates the Krypton Man persona (violent, aggressive and coldhearted).

It would be like Superman III.

Why not just have The Eradicator create a body for itself?

[Superfreak]

That's the point. The Eradicator might fuse with Superman's Kryptonian body thus turning into the Krypton Man. The Krypton Man would plot to use the remainig crystals in the FOS to convert Earth into NK. Then, the good Clark Kent splits from the Eradicator, fights him and deactivates the Krypton Man persona (violent, aggressive and coldhearted).

It would be like Superman III.


I hope you realize that the battle between Clark Kent, and evil Superman didn't really happen.

It was nothing more than a visual representation of a mental battle that was going on in Superman's mind. It didn't physically happen. In the reality of the movie, there was no battle, it was just Superman rolling around in the garbage dump until his dominant personality asserted itself

[Dope Nose]

It would be like Superman III.

that's sort of the problem. why show a scene that's already been done?

[Dope Nose]

I hope you realize that the battle between Clark Kent, and evil Superman didn't really happen.

It was nothing more than a visual representation of a mental battle that was going on in Superman's mind. It didn't physically happen. In the reality of the movie, there was no battle, it was just Superman rolling around in the garbage dump until his dominant personality asserted itself

what's that based on?

[Superfreak]

what's that based on?

it's based upon having a brain. Superman DOES NOT have the ability to split into two people. Nor is this an effect of kryptonite.

Superman goes bipolar after being exposed to the Tar Kryptonite. His evil personality takes over for a while. Then he hits rock bottom in the bar. And then freaks out in the junkyard.

You'll notice that everyone who can see Superman from a third person point of view, flee the scene when they see Superman screaming all crazy in the Junk Yard. There are no witnesses after that.

It's a total mental battle, within his psyche. It doesn't have to be based on anything. But if you want proof. When Superman and Clark Kent 'divide', why does Clark Kent have all his clothes, and his glasses? Where do they come from? Do they just appear out of no where? NO NO NO. Moreover, if Clark and Superman really divided, how the hell would Clark Kent survive the trash compactor (twice), the giant magnet, the acid spray? He couldn't, because Clark Kent and Superman would be seperate at that momment in the movie. It is an internal mental battle.

The whole battle b/w Clark Kent and Superman in SIII is an internal battle over Superman's bipolarized personality thanks to the TarKryptonite. It is not an actual physical battle that happens in the physical reality of the movie.




And please, if you guys didn't already get this, watch the bloody movie again, with your brains switched on

[Dope Nose]

first of all, it was synthetic Kryptonite so you have no idea what effects it's capable of causing so maybe you should stop making assumptions. second of all, Superman has been split into two a dozen times in the comics so why you feel it wouldn't happen in the movie is beyond me. re: Clark's clothes and glasses, did it ever occur to you that perhaps those were what were all in his head?

here's an idea - try and think things through before you post.

[kamaldhamal2007]

hello guys

new to the forum.

I think SR was fine but i was dissapointed by the lack of action scenes.

Not super enough. Too much romance stuff and emotional stuff.

Nonetheless i give it a solid 6/10.

[Superfreak]

first of all, it was synthetic Kryptonite so you have no idea what effects it's capable of causing so maybe you should stop making assumptions. second of all, Superman has been split into two a dozen times in the comics so why you feel it wouldn't happen in the movie is beyond me. re: Clark's clothes and glasses, did it ever occur to you that perhaps those were what were all in his head?

here's an idea - try and think things through before you post.

Dude did it ever occur to you, that the whole thing was in his head. Watch the whole scene again, with an open mind. You'll see

also, if they had 'really' split in two, why did evil Superman disappear while being chocked? Why was there no body left?

[project13]

I hope you realize that the battle between Clark Kent, and evil Superman didn't really happen.

It was nothing more than a visual representation of a mental battle that was going on in Superman's mind. It didn't physically happen. In the reality of the movie, there was no battle, it was just Superman rolling around in the garbage dump until his dominant personality asserted itself


I get your point. There might be a mental battle between Clark Kent and the Eradicator.

P.S. I got the phrase "Krypton Man" from that story arc called "Day of the Krypton Man".

[Dope Nose]

Dude did it ever occur to you, that the whole thing was in his head. Watch the whole scene again, with an open mind. You'll see

you're missing the point. just because you think it was all in his head doesn't mean it was. if you're going to claim that a scene was meant to be interpreted in a particular way at least have some evidence to back it up as opposed to "just watch it, you'll see". otherwise comments about how you have a brain and we need to switch ours on just make you seem like an ass.

also, if they had 'really' split in two, why did evil Superman disappear while being chocked? Why was there no body left?

because his essence was absorbed back into Superman? because he was a physical manifestation of the effects of the Kryptonite whose material essence was based on Clark being susceptible to said effects? there could be hundreds of reasons.

[Superfreak]

you're missing the point. just because you think it was all in his head doesn't mean it was. if you're going to claim that a scene was meant to be interpreted in a particular way at least have some evidence to back it up as opposed to "just watch it, you'll see". otherwise comments about how you have a brain and we need to switch ours on just make you seem like an ass.



because his essence was absorbed back into Superman? because he was a physical manifestation of the effects of the Kryptonite whose material essence was based on Clark being susceptible to said effects? there could be hundreds of reasons.

So, tell me, what makes your perspective right? Why don't you give me proof that Superman got split in two, Clark Kent, and Evil Superman. Show me proof that says it's not mental battle for the control over his body. Moreover, why don't you tell me, how a bunch of people telling superman he's not cool anymore, and little Ricky telling him he's in a slump, cause Superman to split in two? Tell me why TarKryptonite caused him to split at that point in the narrative of the movie? Tell me why it didn't cause him to split earlier?

And brilliant answer for the second(note my sarcasm)edit: "just like to add, that atleast my perspective relies on the source material, not some (non existant) supplimentary amendment to make all the peices fit"

my perspective is a far more plausible, and realistic way to look at it, that's for sure.

[GreenKToo]

A mental battle does make more sense to me....only problem I have with it is the fact that after the "fight" is over,its clark standing there,not superman.before the ''fight'',it was superman in the dump.Did he just change back to clark when we didnt see??i'm not taking sides,just trying to figure it out.So, tell me, what makes your perspective right? Why don't you give me proof that Superman got split in two, Clark Kent, and Evil Superman. Show me proof that says it's not mental battle for the control over his body. Moreover, why don't you tell me, how a bunch of people telling superman he's not cool anymore, and little Ricky telling him he's in a slump, cause Superman to split in two? Tell me why TarKryptonite caused him to split at that point in the narrative of the movie? Tell me why it didn't cause him to split earlier?

And brilliant answer for the second(note my sarcasm)

my perspective is a far more plausible, and realistic way to look at it, that's for sure.

[Superfreak]

A mental battle does make more sense to me....only problem I have with it is the fact that after the "fight" is over,its clark standing there,not superman.before the ''fight'',it was superman in the dump.Did he just change back to clark when we didnt see??i'm not taking sides,just trying to figure it out.

see Clark wins, and then the mother of all shirt rips happens (signifying the re-assertion of the dominant 'good' personality). then, cut back to reality, Good Superman flies away from the dump.

It makes way more sense than interpreting the scene literally. The only thing it will never explain, is how the 'evil superman' dark costume (made so by the attack on the oil tanker) got clean again.

[GreenKToo]

I see.that is a good point you have..

[Dope Nose]

So, tell me, what makes your perspective right? Why don't you give me proof that Superman got split in two, Clark Kent, and Evil Superman. Show me proof that says it's not mental battle for the control over his body. Moreover, why don't you tell me, how a bunch of people telling superman he's not cool anymore, and little Ricky telling him he's in a slump, cause Superman to split in two? Tell me why TarKryptonite caused him to split at that point in the narrative of the movie? Tell me why it didn't cause him to split earlier?

so let me get this straight - you claim that it's a mental battle, that you have a brain and that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid. when I ask you what that claim is based on (which is apparently nothing except your own assumptions), your response is that the onus is on me to disprove YOUR opinions? sorry, it doesn't work like that. not once have I claimed that my perspective is correct. I've simply pointed out that the scene is open to interpretation so again, making posts telling us to "switch on" our brains just makes you seem like an ass.

here's an idea - why don't you explain to everyone here exactly how synthetic Kryptonite works. surely you must know given you're so certain that it wouldn't divide Superman in two. seriously, lay it out for everyone - what effects do synthetic Kryptonite cause? regarding why Ricky's opinion would cause the split, it's a pretty well known fact that psychological issues can manifest as physical symptoms, at least with regards to human physiology. going to argue now that a Kryptonian wouldn't be susceptible as well?

my perspective is a far more plausible, and realistic way to look at it, that's for sure.

you're arguing plausibility while discussing a flying alien in a red cape who shoots heat from his eyes? right.

[Superfreak]

so let me get this straight - you claim that it's a mental battle, that you have a brain and that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid. when I ask you what that claim is based on (which is apparently nothing except your own assumptions), your response is that the onus is on me to disprove YOUR opinions? sorry, it doesn't work like that. not once have I claimed that my perspective is correct. I've simply pointed out that the scene is open to interpretation so again, making posts telling us to "switch on" our brains just makes you seem like an ass.

here's an idea - why don't you explain to everyone here exactly how synthetic Kryptonite works. surely you must know given you're so certain that it wouldn't divide Superman in two. seriously, lay it out for everyone - what effects do synthetic Kryptonite cause? regarding why Ricky's opinion would cause the split, it's a pretty well known fact that psychological issues can manifest as physical symptoms, at least with regards to human physiology. going to argue now that a Kryptonian wouldn't be susceptible as well?



you're arguing plausibility while discussing a flying alien in a red cape who shoots heat from his eyes? right.

you know, it's funny when people selectively quote: atleast my perspective doesn't need a magical explanation (that wasn't in the movie) explaining why artificial kryptonite makes him split in two. You ask me to prove what affects the synthetic Kryptonite has? Why? I don't have to make up something to explain my view. It's totally clear that it is an internal mental battle. Too bad you can't accept it.

[Dope Nose]

you know, it's funny when people selectively quote: atleast my perspective doesn't need a magical explanation (that wasn't in the movie) explaining why artificial kryptonite makes him split in two. You ask me to prove what affects the synthetic Kryptonite has? Why? I don't have to make up something to explain my view. It's totally clear that it is an internal mental battle. Too bad you can't accept it.

fine, here's the one part of your message that I didn't quote -

And brilliant answer for the second(note my sarcasm)edit: "just like to add, that atleast my perspective relies on the source material, not some (non existant) supplimentary amendment to make all the peices fit"

so your perspective relies on the source material even though, as I stated previously, Superman has been split in two dozens of times in the comics (i.e. the source material)? do you see the contradiction?

I'm not asking you to "make up something" to explain your view, I'm asking you to prove that your view is accurate given you've accused anyone who disagrees with it of stupidity. if it were "totally clear" that it's a mental battle then it wouldn't be open to interpretation and we wouldn't be having this argument. and the reason I asked you to explain what the effects of artificial Kryptonite are is because you stated earlier that splitting Superman in two is NOT one of the effects, which implies that you know what they are.

look, you can't have it both ways - you've stated what the effects of artificial K aren't, but can't explain what they are. you've stated that it's clear that it's a mental battle, but can't explain why it's clear.

[cryptic name]

i've never seen someone who thought the battle in Superman III was a literal one.

[Motown Marvel]

i cant believe anyone here thinks its worthwhile to argue over superman III....its SUPERMAN III!!!! who gives a f**k?!

[dude love]

you're arguing plausibility while discussing a flying alien in a red cape who shoots heat from his eyes? right.

What was that term again? Versititlitude?

[Dope Nose]

verisimilitude

[Superfreak]

so your perspective relies on the source material even though, as I stated previously, Superman has been split in two dozens of times in the comics (i.e. the source material)? do you see the contradiction?



you're an idiot. SIII is the source material. Not the comics. The comics may be the original source material which was used to generate the movie. But the movie itself is the source material, not that stuff it was based on. Why is this so? Because we are discussing SIII, not the other stuff. What happens in the movies, don't affect the comics. They are seperate universes.

I keep saying that you are making stuff up, because you keep asking the question 'but you don't know what synthetic kryptonite can do?" Well guess what, NO ONE does. It was an explanation omitted from the film. Conveniently tossing out there that synthetic kryptonite can split him in two is an assumption.

When I say my perspective deals with the source material (ie. SIII and only SIII) I mean it. It doesn't rely on, AGAIN, on some little amendment to the movie, that helps explain why he splits in two.

I'm done with the arguement here, it's sad that an 'educated' Superman fan can't, or won't accept the truth about a blatantly obvious scene.

[Dope Nose]

god, I can hear you stomping your feet and pounding your little fists from here. the reason I keep asking you to explain what synthetic Kryptonite does is that you've stated vehemently that it would not split Superman in two. so which is it? "NO ONE" knows what it can do, or you know for certain what it can do. once again you're contradicting yourself.

as for the term 'source material', I'm not even sure you have a remote understanding of what that refers to. seriously, before you go calling people idiots perhaps you should actually have an inkling of what you're talking about.

I find it laughable that you consider the idea of a physical battle preposterous yet we're supposed to believe that elements of the scene such as the remaining Superman wearing Clark's clothes, his uniform returning to its original colours, and the fact that his stubble disappears somehow reinforce the notion that it was purely psychological.

[Superfreak]

god, I can hear you stomping your feet and pounding your little fists from here. the reason I keep asking you to explain what synthetic Kryptonite does is that you've stated vehemently that it would not split Superman in two. so which is it? "NO ONE" knows what it can do, or you know for certain what it can do. once again you're contradicting yourself.

right, no one knows what it can do, other than what is stated in the movie, that it makes him evil (according to the villains in the movie). That's what we know it can do. Assuming that it can do other things, is just that, an assumption, with no proof whatsoever behind.

as for the term 'source material', I'm not even sure you have a remote understanding of what that refers to. seriously, before you go calling people idiots perhaps you should actually have an inkling of what you're talking about.

The source material of this argument, is SIII, not the comics. Why? Because it is an elseworlds tale (ie. the superman movies are narritively seperate from the comics. The movies may be based on the comics, but they exist in a seperate universe, one does not affect the other) The source material in this case is limited to the Superman movies and SIII in particular (the comics would come into play, if the events of SIII were directly influenced by what happened in the comics, and visa versa. But that never happened, and so, they are not directly linked.)

and lastly, this is a game of he said (me) she said (you). You can believe what ever you want. Regardless, from my perspective, you're still stupid IMO for clinging to an infantile literal view of the scene.

if you can't deal with it, I'll meet up with you at the Silver Snail, we can go ask the comic/comic movie gurus, and if you still can't deal with it, we can thump each other in the parking lot across the street

[Dope Nose]

yes, yes, I'm stupid, I'm an idiot. :whatever: how old are you? 12? 13?

I can't believe you of all people are arguing the logic (or lack thereof) behind making assumptions when that's all you've done throughout this entire thread. it was your statement that synthetic Kryptonite would not seperate Superman in two that started this entire argument.

and seriously, go look up the term 'source material' because you're using it incorrectly. as for your comment about this being a he said/she said situation, that's been my point the entire time - that the scene is open to interpretation. again, not once have I stated that my opinion is definitive.

regardless of what you may believe I do understand your viewpoint, but there are just as many arguments (i.e. the costume changing colour, the disappearing stubble) that support the opposite.

[Superfreak]

yes, yes, I'm stupid, I'm an idiot. :whatever: how old are you? 12? 13?

I can't believe you of all people are arguing the logic (or lack thereof) behind making assumptions when that's all you've done throughout this entire thread. it was your statement that synthetic Kryptonite would not seperate Superman in two that started this entire argument.

There is no proof that synthetic kryptonite can split superman, not in SIII (the source material for this argument)

and seriously, go look up the term 'source material' because you're using it incorrectly. as for your comment about this being a he said/she said situation, that's been my point the entire time - that the scene is open to interpretation. again, not once have I stated that my opinion is definitive.

source material, is any material that pertains directly to the question. In this case, the comics do not apply, because the superman movies are independent of the comics. Using the comics as an explanation of what synthetic kryptonite can do, is like explaining why Romeo kills himself, with a quotation from Hamlet.

regardless of what you may believe I do understand your viewpoint, but there are just as many arguments (i.e. the costume changing colour, the disappearing stubble) that support the opposite.

Synthetic Kryptonite does not explain those either pal. How does synthetic kryptonite clean his costume, and shave his beard?

Really, what it all boils down to is Luke Skywalker in the Cave on Dagobah. It all happened in him mind

[Dope Nose]

uh, no, source material refers to the original material the films derive their elements from. the Superman comics are the source material for the films because that is where the characters and their personalities originated from. in other words, they're the source.

again, I'm not trying to prove anything other than that the scene is open to interpretation. I honestly have no idea what caused the stubble to disappear or the costume to self-clean, nor do you as you stated in your response to GreenKToo. but given said physical changes remain throughout the remainder of the film it certainly does raise questions, doesn't it?

look, what I took issue with from the start was your resorting to petty name calling after I questioned the certainty of your statement. now, assuming you can carry yourself with a modicum of maturity, can we at least agree that neither of us knows for certain whether the scene is meant to be taken literally or metaphorically? again, I'm not trying to disprove your opinion which you are more than welcome to, I'm merely trying to illustrate that at best our individual explanations are tantamount to guesswork.

[project13]

Why not just have The Eradicator create a body for itself?


Because the Eradicator might be a protoplasmic energy being.

[Superfreak]

uh, no, source material refers to the original material the films derive their elements from. the Superman comics are the source material for the films because that is where the characters and their personalities originated from. in other words, they're the source.



actually, source material, refers to anything relevant to the conversation. If were talking about the writing of a superman movie, the source material to generate that script, is the comics.

but lets say we are arguing a point within superman III. The source material is Superman III.

your understanding of source material is correct, in a broad context. But we are not talking about a broad context. We are into a refined question. In this case, the source material for this argument is SIII.

an analogy, back to shakespeare: If I'm writing an essay about the affects of love and death in Romeo and Juliet, the source material is Romeo and Juliet. But if I'm writing an essay about the affects of love and death in the works of Shakespeare, the source material is any number of his works.


Back to the question of the day: If I'm arguing the effects of different types of kryptonite in any and all Superman universes, then the source material for that argument will come from all Superman related media (comics, film, TV, books) that deal with different types of kryptonite. But in this specific case, we are arguing the affects of synthetic kryptonite in SIII. We are there for limited to SIII (and maybe the previous 2 Reeve's films) as source material. This is because the narrative of the Superman films run seperate from the comics. They are in essence in a self contained universe that does not interact with other universes, such as those of the books, comics and cartoons. Yes, that universe may be generated from earlier source material (such as the comics and whatnot) but it has be reorganized, and re conceptualized to fit the movie world. They are independent universes.

In the end, the source material for this argument (what are the effects of synthetic kryptonite in SIII?) is SIII and maybe the preceding 2 films.


as for the rest: you may be right, the scene is open to interpretation, but I'm still gonna think people are stupid for not seeing that the whole Clark Kent vs. Evil Superman is an internal mental battle b/w the two personas generated by the synthetic kryptonite, for dominance and control of Superman's body.

[Dope Nose]

an analogy, back to shakespeare: If I'm writing an essay about the affects of love and death in Romeo and Juliet, the source material is Romeo and Juliet. But if I'm writing an essay about the affects of love and death in the works of Shakespeare, the source material is any number of his works.

your analogy is faulty. I get what you're trying to say - that in the context of this argument your posts would be considered the essay while Superman 3 would take the place of Romeo & Juliet. the problem is that while Romeo & Juliet is the source material as that's where the characters orginated, Superman 3 is once removed. the very word 'source' refers to the place something begins. if we were discussing an aspect of the film Romeo & Juliet starring Leonardo Dicaprio and Claire Danes, the term 'source material' would still refer to Shakespeare's original work.

and yes, while the films are a self-contained universe, the basis of said universe is the comics, regardless of whether it was re-conceptualized. the characters of Clark Kent, Lois Lane, Perry White etc. weren't created for the film. nor was Kryptonite (the regular variety) or its effects. the problem is that you've put a pre-defined limit on how much information has been appropriated from the comics.

if memory serves, heat vision isn't used at all in the first film. but is it reasonable to assume that the he still possesses the ability? of course it is.

[Superfreak]

your analogy is faulty. I get what you're trying to say - that in the context of this argument your posts would be considered the essay while Superman 3 would take the place of Romeo & Juliet. the problem is that while Romeo & Juliet is the source material as that's where the characters orginated, Superman 3 is once removed. the very word 'source' refers to the place something begins. if we were discussing an aspect of the film Romeo & Juliet starring Leonardo Dicaprio and Claire Danes, the term 'source material' would still refer to Shakespeare's original work.

and yes, while the films are a self-contained universe, the basis of said universe is the comics, regardless of whether it was re-conceptualized. the characters of Clark Kent, Lois Lane, Perry White etc. weren't created for the film. nor was Kryptonite (the regular variety) or its effects. the problem is that you've put a pre-defined limit on how much information has been appropriated from the comics.

if memory serves, heat vision isn't used at all in the first film. but is it reasonable to assume that the he still possesses the ability? of course it is.

yes, but as far a discussing any of the Superman movies, just because it happened in the comics, doesn't have any effect on wether things happen in a/the movie.

I also don't think heat vision was used in STM. So, up to the point in the franchise where superman uses it for the first time, he doesn't have it. It must be defined within the relevant universe that we are operating in for it to even exist. Basically saying that he doesn't have that power, until it is given to him by the writer. (see, what if the producers of the supeman movies had never given superman heat vision, then within the universe of the movies, he wouldn't have the power, even though the comic superman may have it)

So, synthetic kryptonite, regardless of the number of different kinds of kryptonite (and their effects) touched upon in the comics, must be defined within the universe that the films are operating within. Because the movie universe is a new one, generated from older source material, all important aspects of that new universe must be redefined to fit this new universe.


Basically Comics does not = Movies. So if you are arguing a point about the movies, the argument must be limited to the available source material for that argument (namely the movies, and any literature that is directly tied to the movies through narrative). Why is this so, because the universe of the movies, and the comics, although similar, are very different.

[project13]

What I meant by "Eradicator is the new Evil Superman" is that the Eradicator could bring out Superman's dark side. It could make him violent,aggressive and coldhearted. Eventually he will break free of the Eradicator's influence.

[Superfreak]

What I meant by "Eradicator is the new Evil Superman" is that the Eradicator could bring out Superman's dark side. It could make him violent,aggressive and coldhearted. Eventually he will break free of the Eradicator's influence.

k, here is who the eradicator is (to me atleast).

The eradicator is the artificial intelligence that runs the fortress. It's purpose is to help Kal'el create new krypton on earth. Kal'el doesn't like this, they fight. The Eradicator is a glowing energy being. HE DOES NOT LOOK LIKE SUPERMAN. Eventually, Superman and the eradicator duke it out, and Superman throws him into the sun.


Later in the comic history, the eradicators energy form is stolen, and adapted to look like Kal'el by Dr. what's his name. This was done to take advantage of Superman's apperant death. The eradicator's body remained in this form until he withered away, after taking a full hit of kryptonite radiation to save Kal'el.



So, what I don't get Pro. 13, is what all your talk about the eradicator being Superman's dark half. It doesn't make any sense. The eradicator is not superman, and superman is not the eradicator. They shouldn't even look like each other (because as I said, it was a human who took the eradicator remains, and made them look like superman, in order to take advantage of his apparent death)

[Dope Nose]

actually you've got it wrong. it was the Eradicator itself that created a body which resembled Kal-El and was mistaken for a darker Superman during the Reign of the Supermen storyline. it was only until after the Eradicator had sacrificed itself and recharged Kal-El in the process that it merged with Dr. David Connor.

[Superfreak]

actually you've got it wrong. it was the Eradicator itself that created a body which resembled Kal-El and was mistaken for a darker Superman during the Reign of the Supermen storyline. it was only until after the Eradicator had sacrificed itself and recharged Kal-El in the process that it merged with Dr. David Connor.

yeah, I was trying to remember that, I hate the reign of the supermen (I'm superman, no, I'm superman, no, I'm superman, no I'm superman bla bla bla).

either way, the eradicator is not the evil half of superman a visa versa. They're seperate beings. One just takes superman's shape. So I still don't understand project 13 and all this crap about the eradicator being Kal'el's evil half

[crazycuban]

It's been a while since I've read the comics with Eradicator in them, but can anyone post a good/clear pic of him?

[GreenKToo]

http://www.answers.com/topic/eradicator It's been a while since I've read the comics with Eradicator in them, but can anyone post a good/clear pic of him?

[bosef982]

This to me makes more sense. Having a Mother of Krypton who wishes to keep the kryptonian bloodline pure seems logical and symbolically relevant, also it'd mesh nicely with the Lois/Superman love triangle and defintely produce some ironies for the Jason relatioship?

[SamuraiSon6]

interesting actually, but i doubt it will happen since it seems like the one thing we are guaranteed in this movie is superman punching something, and they probably dont want that to be a woman (in any form)

[Brainiac 2009]

Yup it wouldnt be a good idea.

Superman shouldnt beat up women.

[FlawlessVictory]

Then again, Singer did have Wolverine fight a woman two different times, so you never know. I'm against the idea though. We need to pump as much testosterone into this thing as possible.

[KrypJonian]

BLEEEEARGH!!!!!

Though I get the logic, I just don't like picturing the Eradicator as a femme

[Hunter Rider]

Personally i want some big Terminator like Badass for Eradicator

[dark_b]

i woudlnt have a problem if a women is the main villian. and i dont think everyone would have a problem if superman punches a women. after all if this women is capable of destroying the world then i dont seea problem.

[Superfreak]

Personally i want some big Terminator like Badass for Eradicator


personally, I'd go with the energy being style eradicator (he was never a robot anyways). The Silver Surfer effects really make the idea of the energy being Eradicator much more possible.

The gender of the eradicator could be vague. Kind of a blend b/w female and male, but all glowing and distorted. A gender bending villain. And i think it should have a communal voice (ie. like the borg kind of, with all the dead voices of krypton speaking in unison)

[Zigno]

i hope dont see the erradicator in the next movie, i want a phisical rival

[Super Kal]

the eradicator is a physical being...

[bosef982]

the eradicator is a physical being...

I'd like to see the Eradicator, in its real form, break from New Krypton was a smooth diamond like being -- think Emma Frost when she's diamoned-up or Iceman, but only of crystal. Then, as The Eradicator interacts or becomes aware of humanity, it alters its appearance (inherits) flesh characteristics to become a female humanoid.

You could even have her gestate crystals from her form, and in the end, recreate Jor-El's original crystals for Kal-el and his son, so that he may be raised the same way, a sort of heirlom.

[Super Kal]

that would be interesting, but I'm more of a fan of the Brainiac forming from the crystals... but maybe both can happen.

[Hunter Rider]

Sounds a bit like the Terminatrix but it's interesting,has anyone got some pics of his various looks ?

[That-Guy]

A female Eradicator could be interesting, but I don't think it's necessary. Actually, the Eradicator is sort of genderless to begin with, but takes on a male humanoid form.

[Showtime]

http://captain.custard.org/league/graphics/characters/eradicator.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/70/EradicatorSSF.jpg

[Hunter Rider]

http://captain.custard.org/league/graphics/characters/eradicator.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/70/EradicatorSSF.jpg

That would look badass:up:

[dark_b]

it looks badass.

[Showtime]

That would look badass:up:

That's the Eradicator I would want to see. Menacing.

[Showtime]

it looks badass.

Can you manip something using Superman Returns footage and include the Eradicator, or even use some of the Returns artwork?

[dark_b]

Can you manip something using Superman Returns footage and include the Eradicator, or even use some of the Returns artwork?if i will have time i would love to make this :up:

in case i forget please remind me :woot:

[Showtime]

I will haunt you with my glowing eyes.

[dark_b]

i have very bad memory.

[bosef982]

I saw that picture before. I like it...for a comic. I think the crystal aspects work better, especially since you could play with the whole crystals inherit the traits of the minerals that surround them in terms of how the Eradicator could look.

Plus, with Richard already there, alongside Brandon, I'm afraid of what another "superman-looking" character would do to the film. Plus, again, how does the Eradicator become human???? You know? Having it be a morphing crystal works a bit more logically, IMHO.

As to the costume, I'm hesitant to have the "S" pasted on its chest. Perhaps another symbol? The S is the crest for the House-of-El, and unless Jor-El created it (which is possible) there shouldn't be an S there. If he does, and The Eradicator functions as I said as an archive of Kryptonian knowledge, then yes, keep the S.

In terms of Brainiac, think of Brainiac more conceptually. The Eradicator gestates, a crystal beaing that evolves into a female humanoid form. She descends from NK to The Fortress, spawning a lime crystal from her side which when inserted, restructures the Fortress of Solitude, reloading all relevant information. Now, to have The Eradicator call this thing Brainiac would be ridicuously chessy since the history that yielded that name isn't there. However, you could have them call it Vrill-Dox, or what not, and have it be a Kryptonian construction program, a sentience behind the organization and arrangement of the crystals. Have Vrill-Dox rearrange the fortress, break into Earth's core...have the Fortress expand into a massive Artic structure, and the more I think of it -- and this is crazy -- have The Eradicator put Vrill to task by having him reverse the effects of Kryptonite so that it affects humans (i.e. anti-kryptonite).

The Eradicator and Brainiac thus will test if Jason should live because, should he not die when they release the black kryptonite into Earth's atmosphere causing a Earth verison of the "green plague," he'll be proven Kryptonian. Why do they want to clean Earth? Because humans are unworthy and Superman has failed to inspire them to a greater good...

Something like this, again, just writing this all out fairly fast. This all may seem very overt, but it could all be played and executed on some really cool, subtle thematic levels.

[Showtime]

I like your overall ideas in regards to the Eradicator, but I don't like "it" as a woman if he is going to provide a physical conflict to Superman. If the Eradicator acted as a guide to Superman to replace Jorel then I am all for using a woman character.

[bosef982]

I like your overall ideas in regards to the Eradicator, but I don't like "it" as a woman if he is going to provide a physical conflict to Superman. If the Eradicator acted as a guide to Superman to replace Jorel then I am all for using a woman character.

Yep, we're talking about it being a mothering figure at first to replace Jor-El. However, towards the end, becoming more agressive and violent. Having a woman be this just resonates on so many levels whether it be for providing a romantic rival for Lois Lane (not overly, but just enough), a Kryptonian mother figure for Jason, and also to contrast what I'd also have in my treatment: Luthor, Donovan, and Metallo.

Also, while I'd leave the fist-fighting to Metallo and Superman, I would probably have a singular confrontation, final confrontation, between The Eradicator and Superman, probably more of a chase, with Superman holding back his blows because he sees her as a woman, but ultimatly taking care of her by driving into her, pushing out through the atmosphere, driving through space, through asteroids towards the blazing sun which he barrels into while dragging her with him.

The Eradicator could play on the whole idea of what is the role of Superman, to what extent is too much? What are the lines of his power, when is he interfering? You could also play with the tension of Superman being a father now and being more intimately connected with Earth than ever before...so does Jor-El's warning still ring true? Doesn't a parent have an obligation to do all in their parent to create a better world for their children? With Jason, Superman has found a new moral imperative? Is he justified now in intervening in wars, defusing nucler annihilation, solving terrorism, world hunger, etc.? The Eradicator could come as an individaul to say that he's failed...countering this with Luthor and Donnovan trying to recreate a Superman, bastardizing the Gods, false idols, using the kryptonite shard with Superman's DNA on it.

Donnovan could work for a government agency that was trying to buffer the affects of Superman's absence. He can be a well-refined, yet fanatical believer -- and phobe -- of aliens, feeling that Superman is more dangerous than heroic. His first development is Metallo, a cyborg in the strictest sense of the word -- no liquid metal, no nanobots, we're talking a cyborg that by the film's end with find Kryptonite as his inexhaustible life source (metallo would be struggling with his own mechanical survival.) John Corbin, i.e. Metallo, was a family man whose family died wile they were on vacation, their train derailing. Corbin was near death but was rescued by Donnovan, who rebuilt him.

Donnovan's team is closely watching New Krypton, and also, he travels to Morroco and unearths Lex Luthor, offering amensty for his crimes, a huge sum of money, and a large plot of land outside Metropolis should he help him (he works for the gov't afterall) -- Luthor has the only remaining shard of kryptonite that is also laced with Superman's DNA. Luthor could manipulate Donnovan and gain the access he needs, stealing Metallo away from Donovan by playing on Metallo's hatred for Superman since he blames Superman for his family's death. Luthor plays on Metallo replacing Superman, something that Donovan stops short of doing. In the end, Luthor could also reveal to Donovan that his genetic experients in recreating a Superman for the gov't can be solved if he examines Jason, Superman's son. This can lead Donovan to Jason, a sort of X2, mansion scene where Richard had to protect Jason from being abducted and fails -- (think of a great moment that, Richard is already aware that Jason is not his, he and Superman have discussed it and superman has said that Jason must never know and must grow up as a child of Earth before becoming a man of Krypton. So, Richard is distraught but nevertheless, fights to his near-death to protect Jason and in the process, as Jason is yanked from the car or what not, he screams, "Daddy!" -- just a moment there) -- anyway...

This could be tied in with the Eradicator being disgusted with humanity, and now that she sees the bastardized blood being reproducesd, sets to taking out Donovan and crew. Superman is of cousre all caught up in the middle of this -- how? haven't htought of it...I tend to pin down what the actual villianous situation is first before figuring out what and how the hero will fit into it properly.

You could have the finale take place in the Fortress of Solitude, where as i said, Vrill Dox under the guidance of The Eradicator, is reversing Kryptonite to eradicate the entire Earth and prepare it for repopulation by Kryptonian survivors, should they find any or something.

[SentinelMind]

Not a bad idea, I can see how those conflicts would fit nicely (what is Superman's identity, loyalty, purpose), even for Singer. However, I agree with those who want to see Eradicator fight Superman. There might be some tired of more Kryptonite exploration in the sequels, but we'll see.

However, I think you could get that angle for Braniac as well. Make him a physical force who understood Superman's ancestry, etc. Then you really wouldn't need an Eradicator.

[project13]

toatl

[Superfreak]

that would be interesting, but I'm more of a fan of the Brainiac forming from the crystals... but maybe both can happen.


Brainiac didn't have anything to do with krypton until TAS if I remember correctly. I believe the TAS Brainiac, is infact a combination of the two characters into one. Infact, I've been seeing more and more over the years, that Brainiac has been adapted to be more like the eradicator in things like Smallville aswell. The eradicator would be a much more appropriate character to use, if it finds its genesis on NK. Brainiac, Eradicator, whatever you want to call it these days, a computer program that wants to do bad things (ie. TAS:collect all information and destroy the world, ala comix: change Earth into a new Krypton). It's the same thing now i guess.


Anyhow, why can't I find any pics of the original eradicator? All I can find are these crappy new black eradicator pics that have already been posted. Nevermind.


http://www.supermanhomepage.com/images/comic-covers/Post-Crisis-Covers/Superman-1991/adv480s-tb.html

thers my favorite eradicator cover, and one of my all time favorite covers on its own, I'd cross him with this pic, and the next.

http://www.supermanhomepage.com/images/comic-covers/Post-Crisis-Covers/Superman-1993/act693s-tb.html

This is how I like the eradicator the best, just energy with a physical form


I like the idea of the Eradicator being crystal, especially, if they tie it to the ice/crystal mask that Jor'el always turns into.

[project13]

Hey, it could happen. I mean, Terence has the voice and his hair resembles to David Connor. Maybe he could play the Eradicator. Do you think so?:huh:

[Eros]

Have you seen Terrance stamp, hes an old man.And that would only make things worse for singar.

[FlawlessVictory]

The objective here(hopefully) is to start distancing ourselves from the Donner movies.

[Brainiac 2009]

Smallville already killed this possibility

[Brainiac 2009]

I'd rather Eradicator be played by Routh and appear in the white glowing crystal \S/ suit Jor-El wore.

His eyes would be glowing blue like in Dune 1986.


Brainiac should be the machine one.

[Rorschach2012]

nah

[project13]

Oh I mean he doesn't have to play the Eradicator but he might provide the voice and the Eradicator would be CGI.

[NotFadeAway]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eradicator_%28comics%29

THE ERADICATOR

One of my favorite villians in Superman history, the Eradicator I feel has always taken a backseat to Braniac in many folks eyes. Now most of you know me as the creator of the official Metallo casting thread and dedicated hater of Singer's vision and a hater of Browns football. But, that shouldn't stop us from discussing future villians in future Superman films, MOS or otherwise, hopefully otherwise. I would be happy as hell to have Eradicator as the villian in an established Superman film or an origin flick. Feel free to discuss the Eradicator in this thread.

[Vaibow]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eradicator_%28comics%29

THE ERADICATOR

One of my favorite villians in Superman history, the Eradicator I feel has always taken a backseat to Braniac in many folks eyes. Now most of you know me as the creator of the official Metallo casting thread and dedicated hater of Singer's vision and a hater of Browns football. But, that shouldn't stop us from discussing future villians in future Superman films, MOS or otherwise, hopefully otherwise. I would be happy as hell to have Eradicator as the villian in an established Superman film or an origin flick. Feel free to discuss the Eradicator in this thread.

Interesting - it could be used in M.O.S - Movie could start off on Krypton, years before it exploded, this would be a great way to incorporate two diferent takes/ideas of how Krypton looks. It could be explained that similar to our planet, Krypton has "North and South poles" made of ice and harsh cold conditions, but in the middle of Krypton, there is flowing water, land etc - maybe the eradicator story could start there.
An alien life form, along with the eradicator machine is 'picked up' by someone evil from Krypton and the machine is altered to preserve krypton heritage - Kryptonian police/guards seize it, after a few wrong doings and leave it in the hands of the scientists.
Maybe it is what Jor El uses that tells him Krypton is in danger. Or maybe the machine is just a simple looking crystal??
He places the machine in Kal El's craft and it is the eradicator which produces the crystals and is stored in that crystal 'control system' we all saw in the films, more recently, SR.

I'm stuck as where to go next... Maybe a stand alone movie is better.. using the donnerverse jsut makes it harder to continue.. i don't know, i'm not a writer!

[COMPO]

in the kevin smith script the eradicator was in it as a sort of ally of Supes against Brainiac.

[NotFadeAway]

in the kevin smith script the eradicator was in it as a sort of ally of Supes against Brainiac.

Wasn't that "K"?

[Kal-El Fan]

Wasn't that "K"?

The Kevin Smith script mentions the Eradicator by name. It is what Brainiac is after, because of the Kryptonian knowledge/technology it has. I believe the term "K" was adapted after Burton took over, but I'm not positive. I know Kevin's script said Eradicator, and I'm pretty sure it was the Burton script which used the term "K," i.e. "Superman in his K-suit." :super:

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I would be perfectly happy to have The Eradicator as a villain, with him turning good at the end, he is a great character.

[That'ssuper!]

He could be a great villain for perhaps explaining the origin of Jason, kill him in some way, restoring the Fortress and creating a great film with an adequate story. He needs to be a major ally to Superman in the end though.

[That-Guy]

I love the Eradicator (as I'm sure you can tell) but something just occurred to me here. If he were ever introduced into a film, I'd want to see him evolve the way he did in the comics, going from a destructive device hell-bent on preserving Krypton's cold culture and eventually emerging as a protector and a hero. I wouldn't want them to just use him as another Zod only with no personality.

However, the risk of making a faithful Eradicator adaptation in this established continuity is painfully obvious when you consider Superman Returns. The Eradicator will obviously outshine Superman in every aspect because he'll be a more interesting character with the arc that he has, and thus a more interesting hero. Superman's character needs a serious overhaul before we introduce any other heroes. The biggest problem I had with SR was I felt like I left the movie understanding Lex, understanding Lois, Richard, Jimmy... but Superman was almost a blank slate. And I don't blame Routh for that. I blame writers and a director who didn't know what to do with him. Superman should have a bold, commanding presence. He shouldn't just be a guy who flies around and lifts things.

[Super Kal]

I always saw the Eradicator as the essence of everything Kryptonian, so I would see him more as a tool for Kal-El to use to aid him in times of trouble

[Showtime]

I think the Eradicator would be a great addition in a sequel to Superman Returns.

[Jake Cassidy]

Me too. Played by Jonathan Rhys-Meyers. :woot:

[Nightwing1977]

I think the Eradicator would be a great addition in a sequel to Superman Returns.

Same here. Maybe they can use Braniac too. This could be kinda like the abandoned script Smith worked on. :)

[boog_spin]

i hope they make the sequel...so many damn great storylines can be introduced...the possiblities are sooooooooooooo good

if you hate the kid..kill him...get supes pissed

you like the kid..supes gets pissed to protect him....

brainiac..

metallo

bazarro

corp lex....

supes dna on new krypton with "advanced alien technology" crystals

i think the sequel can kick ass continuing the current movie storyline

[ChickenScratch]

I would love to see Eradicator in the movie. The movie could start with Superman fighting an epic battle or saving a bunch of people but he's left injured and limps back to the fortress. He'll activate the Eradicator unknowingly since he's never been that injured in the fortress, it comes out and replaces him while he recovers and we get to have people see Clark and "Superman" in the same place. The Eradicator's activity will awaken Brainiac, maybe he's on New Krypton or somewhere else. The final battle will be a half powered Superman not yet recovered fighting Brainiac for Eradicator after he's fully realized what it is and what it means to his dead home world.

[Kal-El Fan]

Interesting idea.:supes:

[I Am The Knight]

Yeah, I would like to see The Eradicator...

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Hmm... I still like "Superman: Stays" ;)

[The Guard]

Superman Remains.

[dark_b]

superman: this time more action with a budget over 150 milions and a 10 milion deleted scene.

pathetic

[Body by Joker]

Superman Triumphant!

[That'ssuper!]

Superman: Stays On A Live Planet for Once.

[Spike_x1]

the biggest problem i have with Superman characters are their names...they have some of the goofiest sounding names.

brainiac, bizarro, metallo, myzplytyk, eradicator...they're okay for comics, but put it in a movie and it would just sound corny. the only villains i can think of that have decent names that i wouldn't laugh at are zod, parasite, and doomsday.Like DarkSuperman said earlier, it's definitely not the absurdity of the names that matter -- it's how well they're brought across on screen.

...Besides, Neutron has an awesome name.superman: this time more action with a budget over 150 milions and a 10 milion deleted scene.Catchy. :up:

[CLARKY]

I think one should choose between Brainiac OR Eradicator but certainly not put the 2 of them together, I think they are too much alike, especially if they choose the A.I. kind of Brainiac.
I think both of them are good. they put in Jeopardy the heritage of Superman as a kryptonian, and I think it's a good thing.
PS : I'm talking about Kryptonian-robot-cartoon kind of Brainiac.

[Cagefighterkip]

Brainiac should be the main villan, as a creation of General Zod's... like for revenge against supes... i could just imagine brainiac forcing supes on his knees to "bow before zod!"

[sharks]

chuck norris vs superman

[GuardianofOa]

Eradicator would be just fine with me.

Think about this: In SR, Supes returns and the whole world is in awe and shock. But he kind of screws up a bit. And of course, had to have help from the other "heroes" in the film. Lame. So, in this sequel, The Eradicator comes to Earth, obviously seeking Supes. But at the same time, claims that he is truly Superman, and that this man (The real Supes)is an impostor. Of course, a fight ensues. And over time, The Eradicator starts to portray himself as the bad Superman that he is, and tries to oust the real Supes. The real Supes can't handle the pressure ( Quiest For Peace, lame) and takes some time off to figure out how to deal with this. And being as he can be Clark all the time now, he has plenty of opporotunities to steal Lois back (but please god not Bosworth) and try to convince the masses that the Eradicator is not the real Superman.

So, I have no idea where to go from here, being as that I am at work and haven't had too much tme to think about this.

But, in the end, a massive battle ensues, some of it has to be in space, using the asteroids and meteors or whatever as weapons (Superman can grab a comet right!!!!??? He did lift a Kryptonite island).

I also think that DC isn't very good at using cosmic being as heroes and villians, and as much as I would love to see Darkseid as a villain, it wouldn't work. Plus, I'd rather see a Fourth World / New Gods flick with Darkseid as the villian before he is in anything else.

I also like the idea of Brainiac being in thr sequel. But I can't think of too many stories that I liked with him in it.

[VenomsMom]

Eradicator may actually fit into the current story that SR introduced. Maybe that was his intention.

[Venom'sDad]

NO to Eradicator :dry:

[The War Machine]

The combination of Eradictor and a physical threat like Doomsday is the way to go.

[VenomsMom]

NO to Eradicator :dry:
Eradicator would complement the story fine. Open your eyes and see the possiblities of where they can go with this. Or would you rather Mxy alter this reality.:whatever:

[VenomsMom]

The combination of Eradictor and a physical threat like Doomsday is the way to go.
Don't know about Doomsday but Eradicator.....yes.:up:

[The War Machine]

Well not the Doomsday from the comics, but a giant animal-like creature for Superman to fight brutally.

[Venom'sDad]

Eradicator would complement the story fine. Open your eyes and see the possiblities of where they can go with this. Or would you rather Mxy alter this reality.:whatever:

:sleepy:


Personally, I would prefer WB cut ties with Singer and Reboot the franchise.

[VenomsMom]

:sleepy:


Personally, I would prefer WB cut ties with Singer and Reboot the franchise.
Surely that idea doesnt BORE you does it. Singer parting ways would make me happy and rebooting this thing as well as the options are limited here. Either Singer comes back and do his super sequel or they go on with plans of a JL movie or we reboot and move on to a new era in Superman movies. Now I love that last option but right now we are working under the assumption of a sequel so let us go with that one. I know some people hate Kal-El Jr and some people love the idea of Supes being a father. Now don't think for one minute they would just send him to boarding school or Smallville to spend time with Grandma....that aint happenin. He will be a major part of the story and they just can't ignore it. They won't kill him in the first 10 minutes either. Which is why given what we have Eradicator would be a great addition to the story and thier Kryptonian heritage will play a pivotal role in that. Deep down I know you can see that so wake up.

[Venom'sDad]

Surely that idea doesnt BORE you does it. Singer parting ways would make me happy and rebooting this thing as well as the options are limited here. Either Singer comes back and do his super sequel or they go on with plans of a JL movie or we reboot and move on to a new era in Superman movies. Now I love that last option but right now we are working under the assumption of a sequel so let us go with that one. I know some people hate Kal-El Jr and some people love the idea of Supes being a father. Now don't think for one minute they would just send him to boarding school or Smallville to spend time with Grandma....that aint happenin. He will be a major part of the story and they just can't ignore it. They won't kill him in the first 10 minutes either. Which is why given what we have Eradicator would be a great addition to the story and thier Kryptonian heritage will play a pivotal role in that. Deep down I know you can see that so wake up.

Yes... that idea bore me. However, since you are so sold on this Eradicator thing, than do tell. How would it be a great addition to the story and what pivotal role.... inquiring mind would like to know? :rolleyes:

[Super Kal]

the Eradicator can be a very compelling story character that can link Superman to his Kryptonian heritage and his planet's history. :up:

he could either be friend or foe

[The Guard]

Dan Marcus wrote a sequel script that features a female Eradicator. If you like the Eradicator, you should check it out on simplyscripts.com. It's not half bad.

Myself, I can see some elements of The Eradicator working in a Superman movie, but I'd prefer to see those in the context of Braniac.

[VenomsMom]

Yes... that idea bore me. However, since you are so sold on this Eradicator thing, than do tell. How would it be a great addition to the story and what pivotal role.... inquiring mind would like to know? :rolleyes:
There is an explanation about the Eradicator in the first post of this thread saving me an explanation to you about the character. This plays perfect with the events that have unfolded in SR. The world moving on and Superman being lonely were a major part of this story. He wanted to learn more of Krypton and any survivors which led him away from earth given you fell asleep during those parts due to boredom. When he returns he finds that there is indeed nothing left and therefore is all that remains of Krypton only to find that he now has a son and Lex has stolen the crystals which possessed his father's recordings. The Eradicator being an ancient artifact that possesses vast Kryptonian knowledge would be that new link. This would of course come into conflict with Superman and his newfound Kryptonian son. This sets up an entirely new story that continues the theme already established. The Eradicator of course would be this new villain and Superman would have to protect his son perhaps by sacrificing himself or his son. I could go into more detail but this is just a general direction I see the story going in based on what has been already established. If you are still bored with this then I am sure MXY and Bizarro can provide you with loads of entertainment in this wonderful world Singer has provided for all of us to enjoy. Once again I am just entertaining the notion of a direct sequel to returns that would make since based on what we got. Not to mention there is a huge Krytonian island floating around space with the crystal manuals to everything you need to know about Kal-el. I understand you may be inept with coming up with something better that is in the frame of SR. If not I understand. Or perhaps my idea bored you so much you quit reading halfway through and went to sleep. Please.....entertain us with something better. By the way.....I reinterate.....a reboot would be my first choice before ever seeing this get made but if not then Eradicator is the logical choice IMHO.


the Eradicator can be a very compelling story character that can link Superman to his Kryptonian heritage and his planet's history. :up:

he could either be friend or foe
Absolutely....way to have an open mind.:up:
Dan Marcus wrote a sequel script that features a female Eradicator. If you like the Eradicator, you should check it out on simplyscripts.com. It's not half bad.

Myself, I can see some elements of The Eradicator working in a Superman movie, but I'd prefer to see those in the context of Braniac.
Either way.....it provides an interesting conclusion to this story. Maybe not entirely how I explained it but you get the point.

Eradicator:up: :up: :up:

[Venom'sDad]

There is an explanation about the Eradicator in the first post of this thread saving me an explanation to you about the character. This plays perfect with the events that have unfolded in SR. The world moving on and Superman being lonely were a major part of this story. He wanted to learn more of Krypton and any survivors which led him away from earth given you fell asleep during those parts due to boredom. When he returns he finds that there is indeed nothing left and therefore is all that remains of Krypton only to find that he now has a son and Lex has stolen the crystals which possessed his father's recordings. The Eradicator being an ancient artifact that possesses vast Kryptonian knowledge would be that new link. This would of course come into conflict with Superman and his newfound Kryptonian son. This sets up an entirely new story that continues the theme already established. The Eradicator of course would be this new villain and Superman would have to protect his son perhaps by sacrificing himself or his son. I could go into more detail but this is just a general direction I see the story going in based on what has been already established. If you are still bored with this then I am sure MXY and Bizarro can provide you with loads of entertainment in this wonderful world Singer has provided for all of us to enjoy. Once again I am just entertaining the notion of a direct sequel to returns that would make since based on what we got. Not to mention there is a huge Krytonian island floating around space with the crystal manuals to everything you need to know about Kal-el. I understand you may be inept with coming up with something better that is in the frame of SR. If not I understand. Or perhaps my idea bored you so much you quit reading halfway through and went to sleep. Please.....entertain us with something better. By the way.....I reinterate.....a reboot would be my first choice before ever seeing this get made but if not then Eradicator is the logical choice IMHO.

WOW... that is a lot of nothing. Eradicator has a very complicated, complex story that would not translate well to the big screen, in a live action movie. A cartoon maybe, but not live action. With that said, you trust Bryan Singer to deliver such a complex, complicated villain, yet alone a story; after the fact we got a sequel to 30yr old film and a not so complicated, complex villain in Lex Luthor. Come on... and who in the hell said anything about Mxy and Bizarro. :confused:

I say NO to Eradicator. As a matter of fact, I say what I have always have said.... WB cut ties with Singer and Reboot the franchise. Period!!!

[VenomsMom]

WOW... that is a lot of nothing. Eradicator has a very complicated, complex story that would not translate well to the big screen, in a live action movie. A cartoon maybe, but not live action. With that said, you trust Bryan Singer to deliver such a complex, complicated villain, yet alone a story; after the fact we got a sequel to 30yr old film and a not so complicated, complex villain in Lex Luthor. Come on... and who in the hell said anything about Mxy and Bizarro. :confused:

I say NO to Eradicator. As a matter of fact, I say what I have always have said.... WB cut ties with Singer and Reboot the franchise. Period!!!
LOL.....if thats complicated then I can imagine Supermans character must have confused the hell out of you. What is so complicated that they could not simplify and condense the story even for the likes of those such as you. Cartoons resolves issues in less than 30 minutes so I am sure given the setup we already got then this can be resolved in 2 hours. Everything about Superman has always been complex yet people get the basics. Eradicator can definitely be done. We knew that Singer was doing an homage to Donner so why does it surprise you he would do a scheming con artist who is obsessed with land? Sound familiar. And you never said anything about Mxy and Bizarro....I did....they just seem more up your alley. :rolleyes:

One thing I do agree with you needless to say rebooting is a great option but should that decision not be made then this is a great option. Have a nice day.:yay:

[Venom'sDad]

LOL.....if thats complicated then I can imagine Supermans character must have confused the hell out of you. What is so complicated that they could not simplify and condense the story even for the likes of those such as you. Cartoons resolves issues in less than 30 minutes so I am sure given the setup we already got then this can be resolved in 2 hours. Everything about Superman has always been complex yet people get the basics. Eradicator can definitely be done. We knew that Singer was doing an homage to Donner so why does it surprise you he would do a scheming con artist who is obsessed with land? Sound familiar. And you never said anything about Mxy and Bizarro....I did....they just seem more up your alley. :rolleyes:

One thing I do agree with you needless to say rebooting is a great option but should that decision not be made then this is a great option. Have a nice day.:yay:

Up my alley... dude, let me repeat this in Bold lettering...

WB NEEDS TO CUT TIES WITH SINGER AND REBOOT THE FRANCHISE... THAT'S UP MY ALLEY! :confused:

[VenomsMom]

Up my alley... dude, let me repeat this in Bold lettering...

WB NEEDS TO CUT TIES WITH SINGER AND REBOOT THE FRANCHISE... THAT'S UP MY ALLEY! :confused:
Yes......:yay: . Eradicator....:up:

[Nightwing1977]

he could either be friend or foe



Why not both? He could be like a foe from the beginning & then be a friend after he make an ultimate sacrifice. I usually see him as some kind of a "neutral" character than just a friend or foe though.

[Venom'sDad]

Why not both? He could be like a foe from the beginning & then be a friend after he make an ultimate sacrifice. I usually see him as some kind of a "neutral" character than just a friend or foe though.

I agree, and it's that neutrality is one of the many reasons I say NOto Eradicator. Superman needs a real straight up villain, not a Sandman character that's suppose to be a villain, but who is really not a bad guy. Come on! I don't why you people is even considering him.

[VenomsMom]

I agree, and it's that neutrality is one of the many reasons I say NOto Eradicator. Superman needs a real straight up villain, not a Sandman character that's suppose to be a villain, but who is really not a bad guy. Come on! I don't why you people is even considering him.
Forget about that nuetrality or Eradicator becoming friends with Superman saving his life and talking about old times at Krypton over dinner. He should play the straight up villain angle and be a complete threat to Superman and his son. There should be nothing sympathetic about this version of Eradicator. Sandman didnt have to be some halfa$$ villain who didnt want to to be a bad person and escaped gently into the night to rob and kill once again. That was tragic the way that was written. Its Superman protecting himself and having to destroy this vicious and corrupt program plain and simple. He can be a STRAIGHT UP villain. The villains complement the story not the other way around.

[Venom'sDad]

:sleepy:

[Super Kal]

Why not both? He could be like a foe from the beginning & then be a friend after he make an ultimate sacrifice. I usually see him as some kind of a "neutral" character than just a friend or foe though.
because I don't see the Eradicator as Superman's foe... yet.
I say use him first as an ally of Superman, and then have some vilain corupt his circuitry or something, and then be the enemy, but with a chance at redemption

[VenomsMom]

:sleepy:
:super: VS Eradicator......:up:

[Nightwing1977]

because I don't see the Eradicator as Superman's foe... yet.
I say use him first as an ally of Superman, and then have some vilain corupt his circuitry or something, and then be the enemy, but with a chance at redemption

I'm down with that. Good idea. :word:

[Showtime]

I like using the Eradicator as a replacement for Jorel in the FOS as more of a mentor to Superman rather than a villian.

[Super Kal]

me too :up:

[VenomsMom]

Not me.....I like the villain angle.

[Nightwing1977]

I like using the Eradicator as a replacement for Jorel in the FOS as more of a mentor to Superman rather than a villian.

I like that idea too.

And why you don't have an avatar anymore right now, Super Kal? :p

[The War Machine]

I prefer the villian angle.

Superman doesnt need a mentor anymore. We've seen Clark mentored heavily on Smallville and Superman mentored by Jor-El in the older films.

It's time for Superman to stand on his own.

I don't mind another cameo by Jor-El via the main FOS crystal but the mentor/student thing is done.

[Showtime]

http://captain.custard.org/league/graphics/characters/eradicator.jpg

[Nightwing1977]

Interesting design. Who drew that, Showtime? I would get rid of some of the blades on his arms & the "one red toe" on both feet. The rest are pretty interesting. :word::up: