The Official Reboot Thread: Showtime Approved

[Dave Kocher]

yes for sequel no for restart

[matrix_ghost]

I'd very much like a sequel.
Just less donner stuff , less plane-earthquake-man saving and more superhero action-buildings smashing things.

[GreenKToo]

ya a sequel, with a supervillian, and a huge fight.

[Venom71]

Sequel...and I know this might be a dumb question..but with SHH opening this section in the Superman forums..does that mean they already know their is going to be a sequel or is this a just in case section?

[lordofthenerds]

Do you want a sequel or a restart isn't a yes or no question...but I want a sequel.

[hippie_hunter]

Sequel...and I know this might be a dumb question..but with SHH opening this section in the Superman forums..does that mean they already know their is going to be a sequel or is this a just in case section?

Yes a sequel has been confirmed for quite a while. Singer has said that he is up for a sequel. Both Warner Bros and Legendary Pictures have said that they are up for a sequel. The cast has a 3 picture deal. A 2009 release is expected.

[Venom71]

Yes a sequel has been confirmed for quite a while. Singer has said that he is up for a sequel. Both Warner Bros and Legendary Pictures have said that they are up for a sequel. The cast has a 3 picture deal. A 2009 release is expected.
Thanks for the info...I knew Legendary had said they are up for it..but I thought before WB made their final decision they were going to see how well SR did on DVD...I am really glad we are getting a sequel with everyone including Singer on board.

[KaptainKrypton]

I voted sequel because I liked the movie and am very interested to see where the next one is going to be taken.

[The Kid]

Restart. I want Superman to be treated with the same respect as batman. The past is the past. People are ready to see superman do his superman thing, not his Donner thing.

[Kid_Kaos]

Yes a sequel has been confirmed ... There was no official confirmation. For example, there were also talks about sequels to HULK or Constantine straight after their releases and we know what's up with those projects today.
So far we have a few confirmations what could happen but nothing is definite. Hell, there are possibilities for everything right now: Sequel - Restart - Smallville the Movie - or nothing at all.

WB expected much more from this movie and if Singer is rehired he will face much more restrictions to deliver something :super: worthy.

I'd prefer a clean restart --> :super: Begins - 2010

[green]

Are you kidding?
With all the possibilities that have been set up, a sequel ofcourse.

[boywonder13]

Are you kidding?
With all the possibilities that have been set up, a sequel ofcourse.

Exactly my opinion, no Superman movie has ever ended with so much potential :super:

[Apellation]

There was no official confirmation. For example, there were also talks about sequels to HULK or Constantine straight after their releases and we know what's up with those projects today.
Yeah, Hulk is getting a sequel.

[boywonder13]

The Poll doesnt make sense:

If someone asked "Do u want a sequel or a restart"

and u reply no or yes

thats strange

poll answers dont make sense

[green]

The Poll doesnt make sense:

If someone asked "Do u want a sequel or a restart"

and u reply no or yes

thats strange

poll answers dont make sense


LOL...
you're right...I just noticed that.:confused:

[matrix_ghost]

There was no official confirmation. For example, there were also talks about sequels to HULK or Constantine straight after their releases and we know what's up with those projects today.
So far we have a few confirmations what could happen but nothing is definite. Hell, there are possibilities for everything right now: Sequel - Restart - Smallville the Movie - or nothing at all.

WB expected much more from this movie and if Singer is rehired he will face much more restrictions to deliver something :super: worthy.

I'd prefer a clean restart --> :super: Begins - 2010

Just what kind of official confirmation do you want to have ? :confused:
http://www.superherohype.com/news/supermannews.php?id=4683
If Legendary is unnerved, it isn't showing. Like Warners, Legendary insists it will turn a profit on "Superman Returns," and has given all indications that it's on deck to co-finance a sequel.

And from WB head honcho himself , ALAN HORN
http://www.latimes.com/business/custom/cotown/la-fi-warner18aug18,1,7164515,full.story?coll=la-headlines-business-enter&ctrack=1&cset=true
Horn expects "Superman Returns" to eventually gross about $400 million worldwide, more than last year's hit "Batman Begins." Nonetheless, "Superman" fell at least $100 million short of his expectations.

"I thought it was a very successful movie, but I think it should have done $500 million worldwide," Horn said. "We should have had perhaps a little more action to satisfy the young male crowd."

Still, he's betting Warner has firmly reestablished the "Superman" franchise and is planning another installment for summer 2009.

It's not literally "WE ARE GOING TO RELEASE THE SUPERMAN SEQUEL in 2009 " but it's there.
2009 , supes sequel.



I know for a fact that the talks about a sequel of Constatine didn't come from official sources , but merely sites. And when keanu , francis and producers were asked about whether a Constantine sequel would come all more less said that they very much want to do a sequel but don't know whether it will happen. The BO of Constantine was good enough for a profit but apparatnyl not good enough for a sequel.

[Dan33977]

Yes -- sequel!!:super::super::super::super::super::super: :super:

...with Zod as the main villain, Lex Luthor as sort of a third party, and Brainiac behind the scenes, in the shadows, pulling strings, and manipulating things.

[hippie_hunter]

There was no official confirmation. For example, there were also talks about sequels to HULK or Constantine straight after their releases and we know what's up with those projects today.
So far we have a few confirmations what could happen but nothing is definite. Hell, there are possibilities for everything right now: Sequel - Restart - Smallville the Movie - or nothing at all.

WB expected much more from this movie and if Singer is rehired he will face much more restrictions to deliver something :super: worthy.

I'd prefer a clean restart --> :super: Begins - 2010

Actually a sequel has been confirmed. The production companies behind it are willing to put money into another Superman film. The cast is all set up. The only thing that really needs to be done is sign another deal with Singer and everything will be put into motion. A 2009 release is expected

Also, Hulk is getting a sequel. It's called the Incredible Hulk. It is a sequel to Hulk but in a vague way (vague as in Batman Forever is to Batman Returns not Superman Returns is to Superman II). The villain will be the Abomination It's directed Louis Leterrier, the script is being written by Zak Penn, and being made by the new Marvel Studios and distributed by Universal Studios. A 2008 release is expected

[Delete]

I want Singer to have nothing to do with this movie. I want new writers and a new cast and no little kid so I go with restart.

[TripXyDE]

i think the Superman franchise is ruined...the Donner movies werent rili faithful adaptations of SUPERMAN...now Singer has continued w d same format & worsened the SUPERMAN movie continuity...how could u follow up & pick the pieces for a sequel from THE KID, THE INCONSISTENT KRYPTONITE WEAKNESS EFFECT, THE SILLY LUTHOR, & other violations the movies made?

RESTART, pls

[Isildur´s Heir]

The thing is this...

It should have been a restart from the get go.
It wasn´t.
So, unless you want to wait 6 years, and then restart...i say, make a sequel.
Let´s look at the bright side, at least, for what it was, the movie was interesting enough and let a lot of answered question in the end...it can only be better.

My take, do a sequel, end the franchise, wait 6 years and then restart the all thing.

[Isildur´s Heir]

Also, Hulk is getting a sequel. It's called the Incredible Hulk. It is a sequel to Hulk but in a vague way (vague as in Batman Forever is to Batman Returns not Superman Returns is to Superman II). The villain will be the Abomination It's directed Louis Leterrier, the script is being written by Zak Penn, and being made by the new Marvel Studios and distributed by Universal Studios. A 2008 release is expected
You forgot to mention that it will suck...badly.

The all idea behind the "vague sequel" is moronic at best.
Either you restart or you don´t, a vague sequel is made for fans alone, because they can fill in the blanks.

[narutofan236]

yes for sequel no for restart

[hippie_hunter]

You forgot to mention that it will suck...badly.

The all idea behind the "vague sequel" is moronic at best.
Either you restart or you don´t, a vague sequel is made for fans alone, because they can fill in the blanks.

I'm going to wait and see before I judge on the Incredible Hulk. There's nothing that says it's going to be bad, but there's also nothing that is saying that it is going to be good either.

[DavidTyler]

Fix your poll so that it makes sense.

Either make it:

Do you want a restart?
_Yes
_No

- OR-

Do you want a sequel
_Yes
_No

- OR -

Do you want a Sequel or a Restart?

_ Sequel
_ Restart

[Immortalfire]

Exactly my opinion, no Superman movie has ever ended with so much potential :super: What potential? Adventures of Superbaby? No thanks.

[resentment]

As much as I loved SR, I would have been twice as excited for a reboot. I'm sure the general public would have been as well. From what I hear from women about Brandon is that his looks aren't too Super, and we all know sex sells(I thought he was great btw). Fact is, they could've focused on all the wrong things for a Superman movie, and made TONS more cash as long as it was glossy and attractive to the public. But SR was so story driven and emotional, and it didn't pack that "punch" that the "average" movie-goer was wanting. I'm keeping a positive outlook on it, because in my life, I will get to see Singer wrap up his most likely 3 installments, then many years later, I will get to see a "reboot", because Singer's story will most likely take us so far into the future of Superman that there will most likely be no room for a sequel for the next director that comes along. It will most likely be well known years from now that a reboot needs to consist of a cast full of Abercrombie and Fitch models with bulging biceps and pectoral muscles and perfect playboy bodies along with too much action to handle, will sell the tickets. Death and sex; it sells. Honestly, look at the trailers for the new season of Smallville coming up....

[i-n-z-a-n-e]

I would want them to restart it, but i don't mind a sequel. Just hope Bryan Singer can show us the stuff that he is more capable of doing.

[myway]

Ok, I understand that not everyone loved SR; for the record I did, but that's beside the point. The biggest criticism that SR gets, which I can see to an extent is that it didn't show us anything new in terms of villains, action sequences, etc.. It seems to me that if you want something new, continue the series where it is right now. Singer has repeatedly said that his plans for the sequel are a more action packed movie (prob w/ Braniac). The one thing I think that we could all do without is another Superman origin story. The reason Batman Begins worked was because the old Batman movies never really showed his origin, plus they'd gone through all the villains already. With Superman, this all stems back to S:TM. We already got a great origin in that movie. Then we got SII, take or leave 3 and 4, and now w/ Returns out, we can finally get to see something new in a Superman movie. If everybody doesn't stop making all this noise on the net about wanting a reboot then we're gonna be right back at square one.

[patrickbateman]

The way I see it we superman fans got our 'batman forever' with SR and now with singer’s sequel we’re going to get our rendition of 'batman and robin' which will finally put the nail to the superman franchise. Then in the year 2020 someone from this very SHH board will rise and Nolanise Superman

[patrickbateman]

the World Needs a Superman Reboot coz its bigger than the donnerverse and singer verse combined

[X-Maniac]

Ok, I understand that not everyone loved SR; for the record I did, but that's beside the point. The biggest criticism that SR gets, which I can see to an extent is that it didn't show us anything new in terms of villains, action sequences, etc..

No new villains was one problem, the action was fine although I'd have liked to see Superman put up more of a fight against Lex's thugs, something a bit more physical that made him less of a victim.

But those aren't the biggest criticisms people have. It's the flawed vague history and the odd characterisations that make this a flawed attempt at Superman.

It seems to me that if you want something new, continue the series where it is right now.

Something new can also mean...something new! How is a continuation 'something new'?

Singer has repeatedly said that his plans for the sequel are a more action packed movie (prob w/ Braniac).

Why should we write off the first movie, costing at least $204m, as a reintroduction, a teaser, a taster? Singer had a chance for something new and dynamic to grab people's attention. SR was supposed to revive the franchise, not be a low-key scene-setter. Movies that are gentle reintroductions aren't given $200m budgets.

The one thing I think that we could all do without is another Superman origin story.

We don't need a repeat of the origin as seen in STM, but maybe a deeper origin story that ties into a Kryptonian villain. That would work. Start the story back in the earlier days of Krypton perhaps, establish a more sci-fi infrastructure that makes bigger, scarier villains more feasible.


The reason Batman Begins worked was because the old Batman movies never really showed his origin

The 1989 Batman movie showed an origin that was tied to Joker being the killer of Bruce's parents. So we did see a Batman origin.

... plus they'd gone through all the villains already.

Not true, we hadn't seen all of Batman's villains at all. Here's the wikipedia iist of Batvillains: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_villains

As you can see, we'd hardly seen any of them.

Batman Begins was great for showing us some of the villains we hadn't already seen; that was a great advantage though perhaps it made it less of a cinematic draw to the mainstream public.

With Superman, this all stems back to S:TM. We already got a great origin in that movie. Then we got SII, take or leave 3 and 4, and now w/ Returns out, we can finally get to see something new in a Superman movie. If everybody doesn't stop making all this noise on the net about wanting a reboot then we're gonna be right back at square one.

A total reboot could be troublesome and take ages. A Singer/Routh sequel could also be a risk if it didn't work before in getting widespread acclaim and commercial success. How do you move forward easily from SR? Lois is with Richard, Jason is with them, the Fortress is violated and its location known and the crystals linking Superman to Jor-El are gone. Superman may as well go back to Smallville and move back in with mommy. He can't be with Lois, he can't really start interfering in her life to raise Jason, he can't talk to Jor-El, he can't go to his fortress and find peace and answers.

[mego joe]

No new villains was one problem, the action was fine although I'd have liked to see Superman put up more of a fight against Lex's thugs, something a bit more physical that made him less of a victim.

But those aren't the biggest criticisms people have. It's the flawed vague history and the odd characterisations that make this a flawed attempt at Superman.



Something new can also mean...something new! How is a continuation 'something new'?



Why should we write off the first movie, costing at least $204m, as a reintroduction, a teaser, a taster? Singer had a chance for something new and dynamic to grab people's attention. SR was supposed to revive the franchise, not be a low-key scene-setter. Movies that are gentle reintroductions aren't given $200m budgets.



We don't need a repeat of the origin as seen in STM, but maybe a deeper origin story that ties into a Kryptonian villain. That would work. Start the story back in the earlier days of Krypton perhaps, establish a more sci-fi infrastructure that makes bigger, scarier villains more feasible.




The 1989 Batman movie showed an origin that was tied to Joker being the killer of Bruce's parents. So we did see a Batman origin.



Not true, we hadn't seen all of Batman's villains at all. Here's the wikipedia iist of Batvillains: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_villains

As you can see, we'd hardly seen any of them.

Batman Begins was great for showing us some of the villains we hadn't already seen; that was a great advantage though perhaps it made it less of a cinematic draw to the mainstream public.



A total reboot could be troublesome and take ages. A Singer/Routh sequel could also be a risk if it didn't work before in getting widespread acclaim and commercial success. How do you move forward easily from SR? Lois is with Richard, Jason is with them, the Fortress is violated and its location known and the crystals linking Superman to Jor-El are gone. Superman may as well go back to Smallville and move back in with mommy. He can't be with Lois, he can't really start interfering in her life to raise Jason, he can't talk to Jor-El, he can't go to his fortress and find peace and answers.

As usual X-man, another great post. I am definitely on board for the reboot option. Especially b/c of the bolded part above.

[Ultimate_Superman]

A total reboot could be troublesome and take ages. A Singer/Routh sequel could also be a risk if it didn't work before in getting widespread acclaim and commercial success. How do you move forward easily from SR? Lois is with Richard, Jason is with them, the Fortress is violated and its location known and the crystals linking Superman to Jor-El are gone. Superman may as well go back to Smallville and move back in with mommy. He can't be with Lois, he can't really start interfering in her life to raise Jason, he can't talk to Jor-El, he can't go to his fortress and find peace and answers.But thats the beauty with SR. I mean seriously what comic arc is SR most like? Superman: For Tomorrow!!! I mean everything I have in bold happened in For Tomorrow even down to Superman's feelings for Lois after everything happened (see the follow up issue to For Tomorrow for that). The only difference between For Tomorrow and SR is that Superman and Lois are not married and have a kid. Lois can still end up with Superman/Clark Kent thats not the problem. The story really wasn't to much of the problem. The problem is right now Superman in general is a hit or miss. Now these days people like a hero with faults and is or can be dark which is why you see the success in Batman, Spider-Man or even the X-men. Superman is to perfect for people now these days and thats just the problem.

[Super Kal]

one thing that Superman: For Tomorrow is and SR is not is that For Tomorrow vibrant and colorful...

reboot is the only way to go, because with the SR style, IMO, it will not be successful

[mego joe]

But thats the beauty with SR. I mean seriously what comic arc is SR most like? Superman: For Tomorrow!!! I mean everything I have in bold happened in For Tomorrow even down to Superman's feelings for Lois after everything happened (see the follow up issue to For Tomorrow for that).


Lois is not with Richard and there is no Jason.

There were no crystals in the Superman comics at the time For TOmorrow came out.

At the end of the arc Superman and Lois ARE together. And there is no impediment. Jason and Richard are a huge impediment to Superman and Lois being together.

The only difference between For Tomorrow and SR is that Superman and Lois are not married and have a kid. Lois can still end up with Superman/Clark Kent thats not the problem. The story really wasn't to much of the problem. The problem is right now Superman in general is a hit or miss. Now these days people like a hero with faults and is or can be dark which is why you see the success in Batman, Spider-Man or even the X-men. Superman is to perfect for people now these days and thats just the problem.

To me For Tomorrow and SR are nothing alike. In For Tomorrow he is trying to find a way to save Earth, should a cataclysm like that which destroyed Krypton strike Earth. In SR he abandons Earth without so much as a word.

In For TOmorrow, his invention is expoloited by the villain which causes the problem- in SR HE is the problem.

In For Tomorrow, he and Lois have a mature adult relationship in which she is his anchor and his emotional compass. In SR, he cares more about his own feelings than Lois's feelings.

In SR he risks everything to rescue Lois, in SR he turns his back on Lois and abandons her w/o so much as a goodbye.

SR and For Tomorrow have nothing of substance in common.

However, For Tomorrow would have made a great film I believe.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Ok, I understand that not everyone loved SR; for the record I did, but that's beside the point. The biggest criticism that SR gets, which I can see to an extent is that it didn't show us anything new in terms of villains, action sequences, etc.. It seems to me that if you want something new, continue the series where it is right now. Singer has repeatedly said that his plans for the sequel are a more action packed movie (prob w/ Braniac). The one thing I think that we could all do without is another Superman origin story. The reason Batman Begins worked was because the old Batman movies never really showed his origin, plus they'd gone through all the villains already. With Superman, this all stems back to S:TM. We already got a great origin in that movie. Then we got SII, take or leave 3 and 4, and now w/ Returns out, we can finally get to see something new in a Superman movie. If everybody doesn't stop making all this noise on the net about wanting a reboot then we're gonna be right back at square one.

Spot on, TOTALLY agree, SR was a superb movie, and i can only see a sequel being even better. If Bryan and Brandon get the chance, i know they wont dissapoint. If WB decide to re-bbot, judging by the direction they took with JL, we will get a TERRIBLE re-boot that will be an X3/FF type piece of garbage thats about 90 mins long.

Stick with Singer WB, you know it makes sense.

But thats the beauty with SR. I mean seriously what comic arc is SR most like? Superman: For Tomorrow!!! I mean everything I have in bold happened in For Tomorrow even down to Superman's feelings for Lois after everything happened (see the follow up issue to For Tomorrow for that). The only difference between For Tomorrow and SR is that Superman and Lois are not married and have a kid. Lois can still end up with Superman/Clark Kent thats not the problem. The story really wasn't to much of the problem. The problem is right now Superman in general is a hit or miss. Now these days people like a hero with faults and is or can be dark which is why you see the success in Batman, Spider-Man or even the X-men. Superman is to perfect for people now these days and thats just the problem.

Well said, i have made this observation a few times before, SR is a LOT like FT, which IMO was a great Superman story. And of course, SR is a great Superman film.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Ok

TWO POINTS


1. Half the fans don't like SR
2. Half the fans don't like SV


With that being said a reboot would fit in nicely and imo an origin story would setup the next generation of fans as well as reinvigorate us older fans of the character.

Imo the world DOES need a reboot.

However it is also my opinion that SR was good enough to garner a sequel if done correctly with better pacing, characterization, and villain for Supes (action).

I would take either one next but the reboot/origin movie needs addressed at some point.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

P.S.



I would venture to say if Brandon Routh wasn't in SR, I don't know that I would be as willing for the sequel. I may be one of the fans demanding reboot immediately :o

[VenomsMom]

Ok, I understand that not everyone loved SR; for the record I did, but that's beside the point. The biggest criticism that SR gets, which I can see to an extent is that it didn't show us anything new in terms of villains, action sequences, etc.. It seems to me that if you want something new, continue the series where it is right now. Singer has repeatedly said that his plans for the sequel are a more action packed movie (prob w/ Braniac). The one thing I think that we could all do without is another Superman origin story. The reason Batman Begins worked was because the old Batman movies never really showed his origin, plus they'd gone through all the villains already. With Superman, this all stems back to S:TM. We already got a great origin in that movie. Then we got SII, take or leave 3 and 4, and now w/ Returns out, we can finally get to see something new in a Superman movie. If everybody doesn't stop making all this noise on the net about wanting a reboot then we're gonna be right back at square one.
You are probably correct. I can some what agree with the world not needing a Superman reboot now simply because of the difficulty of doing so. The world needed a reboot a few years ago instead of a vague sequel to a movie of years past. It was time to restart a new Superman francise for a new millenium with no continuing story from the Donner films. And many of us are not hung up on a lack of exploding action and battles with a superior villain who could match Supes. It was the STORY that did not sit well with many people and the introduction of certain characters that weigh the entire plot down. These were the problems that sore above all the rest as far as I was concerned. There was really nothing fresh or new with SR that had not been seen before unless you never saw the Donner films. Some people like this movie and some people don't. Its different strokes for different folks. Therefore a continuation of this story is something of no interest to some people on these boards. Singer can go all wrath of khan on it introducing all kinds of supervillains and it would not change a damn thing. Its a story that has to be resolved and issues and characters introduced that simply can not be ignored. So...in essence the world does not need a reboot. The task of pulling that off would be immense especially for WB. So...I somewhat agree.

[mego joe]

You are probably correct. I can some what agree with the world not needing a Superman reboot now simply because of the difficulty of doing so. The world needed a reboot a few years ago instead of a vague sequel to a movie of years past. It was time to restart a new Superman francise for a new millenium with no continuing story from the Donner films. And many of us are not hung up on a lack of exploding action and battles with a superior villain who could match Supes. It was the STORY that did not sit well with many people and the introduction of certain characters that weigh the entire plot down. These were the problems that sore above all the rest as far as I was concerned. There was really nothing fresh or new with SR that had not been seen before unless you never saw the Donner films. Some people like this movie and some people don't. Its different strokes for different folks. Therefore a continuation of this story is something of no interest to some people on these boards. Singer can go all wrath of khan on it introducing all kinds of supervillains and it would not change a damn thing. Its a story that has to be resolved and issues and characters introduced that simply can not be ignored. So...in essence the world does not need a reboot. The task of pulling that off would be immense especially for WB. So...I somewhat agree.

However, If I recall correctly, you aren't going to see a sequel either though?

[DavidTyler]

Again.... I really want a reboot. I don't want Donner's Krypton. I don't want the friggin Jason subplot. I don't want Singer's dismal visuals which are more suited to his early work such as Apt Pupil and The X-men. I don't want that lousy costume. and I don't like Singer's aping Donner's take on the characters.

We need a reboot with someone strong enough to give Superman an exciting film filled with action, character interaction, depth, and serious adversaries.

I did like Spacey as Luthor but they didn't give him a lot to work with. The plot had holes you could drive a truck through.

I want to chuck the whole thing and start from scratch. Give us an interesting Science Fiction beginning like the one from Byrne and Wolfman's 'Man Of Steel'. Let us see young Clark travel the world in search of himself like in Birthright. Let's see how Clark arrived at the costume and the identity - I'd like it to be just like in 'Man Of Steel'. I'd like to see him battle Brainiac with Luthor as the Corporate Shark who appears to be Metropolis' defender but, in truth, is trying to manipulate everyone to his own ends.

So, the world DOES need a reboot.

It needs to get this franchise back on the right foot!

[Superman-Prime]

If you guys want a reboot, then we'll have to wait for another 20 years. Good luck with this.

[mego joe]

If you guys want a reboot, then we'll have to wait for another 20 years. Good luck with this.


Looks like Hulk's doing it just a few years removed from the version that didn't work.

I don't think it would be that hard.

Anyway, no Superman film would be better than a direct sequel to SR.

[VenomsMom]

Looks like Hulk's doing it just a few years removed from the version that didn't work.

I don't think it would be that hard.

Anyway, no Superman film would be better than a direct sequel to SR.
Marvel is having a much easier time adapting their characters to the big screen. They have already done many sequels and even working on spinoffs. WB seems to be having more of a difficult time with the concept of their characters which is why I say the task of a reboot may delay the Superman francise for quite sometime. They seem to be in limbo. This JL movie which I have very little optimism for seems to be the route they want to take.

[Excel]

They might not NEED one but they sure as hell WANT one oh hell yeah :up: :up: :D :D

[BenReilly19]

Looks like Hulk's doing it just a few years removed from the version that didn't work.

I don't think it would be that hard.

The new Hulk film is also being produced and self-financed by Marvel themselves, as opposed the original film which was made by a major film studio.

Somehow, I don't see DC going around WB, and producing and self-financing their own Superman movie, anytime in the near future.

[nintendo nerd]

The new Hulk film is also being produced and self-financed by Marvel themselves, as opposed the original film which was made by a major film studio.

Somehow, I don't see DC going around WB, and producing and self-financing their own Superman movie, anytime in the near future.

Even if they wanted to, they can't. WB owns DC comics.

[bunk]

A reboot doesn't have to be an origin story at all. Hopefully if they do restart the franchise they won't retell his origin. They can remind us of it in flashbacks or something though.

[BenReilly19]

Even if they wanted to, they can't. WB owns DC comics.

Exactly.

Not saying a Superman Reboot is out of the question, but people really need to stop comparing the Superman franchise to what's happened with the Hulk. It's a completely different situation. Universal eventually lost the rights to Hulk, and they reverted back to Marvel.

Something like that could never happen with Superman/WB/DC because of the reason you mentioned.

Even studios that are currently licensing the film rights to Marvel characters, have a certain amount of time to produce a film or more films, and if they don't, those rights eventually revert back to Marvel. It happened with New Line/Iron Man, as well as with Universal/Hulk. Both of those films are now being made by Marvel themselves.

WB doesn't have that type of pressure to worry about, because they own DC Comics and hold the film rights to all of their characters.

[markaudette]

Ever since Superman Returns came out it has become evident to me that there's just no magic bullet that completely resolves the whole issue of turning the franchise around.

I have very deep sympathy for the person who takes on saving the franchise.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

A reboot doesn't have to be an origin story at all. Hopefully if they do restart the franchise they won't retell his origin. They can remind us of it in flashbacks or something though.

It's been more than a long enough time to reintroduce the character.

[BMM]

Ever since Superman Returns came out it has become evident to me that there's just no magic bullet that completely resolves the whole issue of turning the franchise around.

I have very deep sympathy for the person who takes on saving the franchise.

I have a very deep sympathy for the person who takes on the franchise at all. The same can probably be said for any superhero franchise.

[StylishHokie21]

This movie does need a reboot. Whoever is willing to take over...good luck!

[mego joe]

The new Hulk film is also being produced and self-financed by Marvel themselves, as opposed the original film which was made by a major film studio.

Somehow, I don't see DC going around WB, and producing and self-financing their own Superman movie, anytime in the near future.

I think DC's characters would benefit from creative input from DC Comics or comic professionals. Or at least Hollywood creators that know and respect the COMIC BOOK material.

[DIRECTOR]

I want Brandon Routh to become Superman, NOT JUST APPEAR AS SUPERMAN AND PRETEND TO PORTRAY CHISTOPHER REEVES.

We need a Superman reboot because we want to see how Superman and Lois met for the first time, how they fall in love, why is Lex the way he is.

You can't just throw all that a way and start in the middle of the overall picture.

We need a reboot because it has been almost 30 YEARS since an origin story was told of Superman, and Superman deserves one for the new generation, not a crappy rehash.

I though SR was okay, but I knew every since they announced they aren't doing an origin story back 2005 that it will fail, no matter what. The audience needs to grow with Clark Kent.

A great example is how the audience is watching Peter Parker and Christian Bale's Batman become who they are. Brandon Routh didn't get that.

[Mostpowerful]

Ok, I understand that not everyone loved SR; for the record I did, but that's beside the point. The biggest criticism that SR gets, which I can see to an extent is that it didn't show us anything new in terms of villains, action sequences, etc.. It seems to me that if you want something new, continue the series where it is right now. Singer has repeatedly said that his plans for the sequel are a more action packed movie (prob w/ Braniac). The one thing I think that we could all do without is another Superman origin story. The reason Batman Begins worked was because the old Batman movies never really showed his origin, plus they'd gone through all the villains already. With Superman, this all stems back to S:TM. We already got a great origin in that movie. Then we got SII, take or leave 3 and 4, and now w/ Returns out, we can finally get to see something new in a Superman movie. If everybody doesn't stop making all this noise on the net about wanting a reboot then we're gonna be right back at square one.

I love SR and Brandon as Superman.

And I want a sequel, with or without Singer, but I'd prefer if he comes back. I want to see his vision.

[Mostpowerful]

But thats the beauty with SR. I mean seriously what comic arc is SR most like? Superman: For Tomorrow!!! I mean everything I have in bold happened in For Tomorrow even down to Superman's feelings for Lois after everything happened (see the follow up issue to For Tomorrow for that). The only difference between For Tomorrow and SR is that Superman and Lois are not married and have a kid. Lois can still end up with Superman/Clark Kent thats not the problem. The story really wasn't to much of the problem. The problem is right now Superman in general is a hit or miss. Now these days people like a hero with faults and is or can be dark which is why you see the success in Batman, Spider-Man or even the X-men. Superman is to perfect for people now these days and thats just the problem.

But he was not perfect in SR. He was a good guy, but he clearly was more humanized and given some flaws, which I liked. He is not Jesus, so I don't expect him to live without sin.

What the sequel needs is a good story, faster pace and lots of action (and a cool supervillain), and Superman punching some baddies, haha. But most of all, it needs Brandon Routh. He was GREAT in SR.

[Mostpowerful]

Spot on, TOTALLY agree, SR was a superb movie, and i can only see a sequel being even better. If Bryan and Brandon get the chance, i know they wont dissapoint. If WB decide to re-bbot, judging by the direction they took with JL, we will get a TERRIBLE re-boot that will be an X3/FF type piece of garbage thats about 90 mins long.

Stick with Singer WB, you know it makes sense.



Well said, i have made this observation a few times before, SR is a LOT like FT, which IMO was a great Superman story. And of course, SR is a great Superman film.

Perfectly said.

[Venom'sDad]

Ok, I understand that not everyone loved SR; for the record I did, but that's beside the point. The biggest criticism that SR gets, which I can see to an extent is that it didn't show us anything new in terms of villains, action sequences, etc.. It seems to me that if you want something new, continue the series where it is right now. Singer has repeatedly said that his plans for the sequel are a more action packed movie (prob w/ Braniac). The one thing I think that we could all do without is another Superman origin story. The reason Batman Begins worked was because the old Batman movies never really showed his origin, plus they'd gone through all the villains already. With Superman, this all stems back to S:TM. We already got a great origin in that movie. Then we got SII, take or leave 3 and 4, and now w/ Returns out, we can finally get to see something new in a Superman movie. If everybody doesn't stop making all this noise on the net about wanting a reboot then we're gonna be right back at square one.

MyWay, I respectfully disagree with your premise...here why. S:TM was done in 1978. There have been many children born since then. Most experience S:TM on HBO or Cinemax in the late 80's. There are generation of kids born in the 90's til date, that had never saw that film regardless of it being in syndication. The reason being, that generation see that, that film was made in 1978, have no desire to see such an arcade film in this era of the late 90's til date, with the advent SFX and better technologies of their era. Not to mention the fact that this continuity is a sequel to an arcade continuity of 1978.

With that said, we got an opportunity to see Batman's origin in the older films, and how it effected him on a personal level... making him the man/myth he is. We just wasn't afforded the opportunity to experience how proficient his training and skills came to be and how Wayne's Industries played a role in his technology and weaponry.

One can say the same for Superman. We experience some background details as an infant on Krypton, his livelihood as a growing child of the Kent Family on earth, and his first experience in Metropolis. Yet, we have not experience the uniqe life and similarities on Krypton that relates them to Earth, a full understanding of the situation that led to JorEl choosing to send him to Earth compared to other worlds, and the political intrigue that exist that may give a better understanding of significant correlation that ties Superman to a list of future villains(minus Zod). There is much in an origin story that we are missing that could be covered in the first moments of a Reboot, such as what happen in Batman.

Now, like most here and elsewhere, I royally like Brandon Routh as Superman and would hate to see him replace... which will most likely happen in a complete reboot. The way to get around that IMHO, is to do a Prequel. This would allow WB to give an origin story as I have discussed and maintain Routh as Superman for future installment. The Prequel could feature General Zod escape from the Phantom Zone and touch obviously on Lex Luthor. However, I would re-invent Lex as CEO of financial strap LexCorps, hence the reason for swindling the old lady's money, for his company and why Lex got off because there was no evidence or testimoney from Superman to link Lex to an invented crime in the confines of this new continuity.

WB just need to have imagination, creativity, and some profound understanding of the characters and their resources.

[VenomsMom]

MyWay, I respectfully disagree with your premise...here why. S:TM was done in 1978. There have been many children born since then. Most experience S:TM on HBO or Cinemax in the late 80's. There are generation of kids born in the 90's til date, that had never saw that film regardless of it being in syndication. The reason being, that generation see that, that film was made in 1978, have no desire to see such an arcade film in this era of the late 90's til date, with the advent SFX and better technologies of their era. Not to mention the fact that this continuity is a sequel to an arcade continuity of 1978.

With that said, we got an opportunity to see Batman's origin in the older films, and how it effected him on a personal level... making him the man/myth he is. We just wasn't afforded the opportunity to experience how proficient his training and skills came to be and how Wayne's Industries played a role in his technology and weaponry.

One can say the same for Superman. We experience some background details as an infant on Krypton, his livelihood as a growing child of the Kent Family on earth, and his first experience in Metropolis. Yet, we have not experience the uniqe life and similarities on Krypton that relates them to Earth, a full understanding of the situation that led to JorEl choosing to send him to Earth compared to other worlds, and the political intrigue that exist that may give a better understanding of significant correlation that ties Superman to a list of future villains(minus Zod). There is much in an origin story that we are missing that could be covered in the first moments of a Reboot, such as what happen in Batman.

Now, like most here and elsewhere, I royally like Brandon Routh as Superman and would hate to see him replace... which will most likely happen in a complete reboot. The way to get around that IMHO, is to do a Prequel. This would allow WB to give an origin story as I have discussed and maintain Routh as Superman for future installment. The Prequel could feature General Zod escape from the Phantom Zone and touch obviously on Lex Luthor. However, I would re-invent Lex as CEO of financial strap LexCorps, hence the reason for swindling the old lady's money, for his company and why Lex got off because there was no evidence or testimoney from Superman to link Lex to an invented crime in the confines of this new continuity.

WB just need to have imagination, creativity, and some profound understanding of the characters and their resources.
Put Eradicator in this story and you got something there.:cwink:

[DavidTyler]

Here's why you need a new origin story for a reboot......

Without it ... it just looks like a sequel to whatever the last film was.

With it, you hit the audience over the head right from the start that this is a new beginning to the franchise.

[Super Kal]

MyWay, I respectfully disagree with your premise...here why. S:TM was done in 1978. There have been many children born since then. Most experience S:TM on HBO or Cinemax in the late 80's. There are generation of kids born in the 90's til date, that had never saw that film regardless of it being in syndication. The reason being, that generation see that, that film was made in 1978, have no desire to see such an arcade film in this era of the late 90's til date, with the advent SFX and better technologies of their era. Not to mention the fact that this continuity is a sequel to an arcade continuity of 1978.

With that said, we got an opportunity to see Batman's origin in the older films, and how it effected him on a personal level... making him the man/myth he is. We just wasn't afforded the opportunity to experience how proficient his training and skills came to be and how Wayne's Industries played a role in his technology and weaponry.

One can say the same for Superman. We experience some background details as an infant on Krypton, his livelihood as a growing child of the Kent Family on earth, and his first experience in Metropolis. Yet, we have not experience the uniqe life and similarities on Krypton that relates them to Earth, a full understanding of the situation that led to JorEl choosing to send him to Earth compared to other worlds, and the political intrigue that exist that may give a better understanding of significant correlation that ties Superman to a list of future villains(minus Zod). There is much in an origin story that we are missing that could be covered in the first moments of a Reboot, such as what happen in Batman.

Now, like most here and elsewhere, I royally like Brandon Routh as Superman and would hate to see him replace... which will most likely happen in a complete reboot. The way to get around that IMHO, is to do a Prequel. This would allow WB to give an origin story as I have discussed and maintain Routh as Superman for future installment. The Prequel could feature General Zod escape from the Phantom Zone and touch obviously on Lex Luthor. However, I would re-invent Lex as CEO of financial strap LexCorps, hence the reason for swindling the old lady's money, for his company and why Lex got off because there was no evidence or testimoney from Superman to link Lex to an invented crime in the confines of this new continuity.

WB just need to have imagination, creativity, and some profound understanding of the characters and their resources.
replace General Zod with Brainaic or any other villain, and you got a good movie :up:

[NEWAGE]

This franchise needs a reboot like badly.

[Super Kal]

agreed.

[DanSupKP37]

Here's why you need a new origin story for a reboot......

Without it ... it just looks like a sequel to whatever the last film was.

With it, you hit the audience over the head right from the start that this is a new beginning to the franchise.

But the audience knows Superman's origin, it has been told so many times in different forms of media. I think it is difficult to retell the origin yet again and do it in a way that is new and fresh enough to make audiences excited about it.

[Super Kal]

only one origin has been shown on the big screen, and that was over 20 years ago... it's time to bring Superman into the new millennium and leave Donner in the past.

[nintendo nerd]

I want Brandon Routh to become Superman, NOT JUST APPEAR AS SUPERMAN AND PRETEND TO PORTRAY CHISTOPHER REEVES.

We need a Superman reboot because we want to see how Superman and Lois met for the first time, how they fall in love, why is Lex the way he is.

You can't just throw all that a way and start in the middle of the overall picture.

We need a reboot because it has been almost 30 YEARS since an origin story was told of Superman, and Superman deserves one for the new generation, not a crappy rehash.

I though SR was okay, but I knew every since they announced they aren't doing an origin story back 2005 that it will fail, no matter what. The audience needs to grow with Clark Kent.

A great example is how the audience is watching Peter Parker and Christian Bale's Batman become who they are. Brandon Routh didn't get that.

Is REEVE not REEVES. :yay:

[Rated-X]

MyWay, I respectfully disagree with your premise...here why. S:TM was done in 1978. There have been many children born since then. Most experience S:TM on HBO or Cinemax in the late 80's. There are generation of kids born in the 90's til date, that had never saw that film regardless of it being in syndication. The reason being, that generation see that, that film was made in 1978, have no desire to see such an arcade film in this era of the late 90's til date, with the advent SFX and better technologies of their era. Not to mention the fact that this continuity is a sequel to an arcade continuity of 1978.

With that said, we got an opportunity to see Batman's origin in the older films, and how it effected him on a personal level... making him the man/myth he is. We just wasn't afforded the opportunity to experience how proficient his training and skills came to be and how Wayne's Industries played a role in his technology and weaponry.

One can say the same for Superman. We experience some background details as an infant on Krypton, his livelihood as a growing child of the Kent Family on earth, and his first experience in Metropolis. Yet, we have not experience the uniqe life and similarities on Krypton that relates them to Earth, a full understanding of the situation that led to JorEl choosing to send him to Earth compared to other worlds, and the political intrigue that exist that may give a better understanding of significant correlation that ties Superman to a list of future villains(minus Zod). There is much in an origin story that we are missing that could be covered in the first moments of a Reboot, such as what happen in Batman.

Now, like most here and elsewhere, I royally like Brandon Routh as Superman and would hate to see him replace... which will most likely happen in a complete reboot. The way to get around that IMHO, is to do a Prequel. This would allow WB to give an origin story as I have discussed and maintain Routh as Superman for future installment. The Prequel could feature General Zod escape from the Phantom Zone and touch obviously on Lex Luthor. However, I would re-invent Lex as CEO of financial strap LexCorps, hence the reason for swindling the old lady's money, for his company and why Lex got off because there was no evidence or testimoney from Superman to link Lex to an invented crime in the confines of this new continuity.

WB just need to have imagination, creativity, and some profound understanding of the characters and their resources.

That's a great idea VD, I like it. I don't think it's going to happen though. :up: :up: :up:



replace General Zod with Brainaic or any other villain, and you got a good movie :up:

Agreed :up:

[Mr. Socko]

I thought the visuals of SR were brilliant all besides that mucky looking suit.
The movie looked wonderful imo.


There are many things I'll miss from the Donnerverse. But it truly is time to move on.

[Doctor Baywatch]

The movie needs a robot!

All those cool stuff that made Superman so awesome in the past!

[NEWAGE]

The film definitely needs a fresh start which is crazy considering SR just came out less than two years ago. There is a thread on SHH about a new fan written script for Superman called Superman: Apokolips. It's available for free on their site.

[VenomsMom]

only one origin has been shown on the big screen, and that was over 20 years ago... it's time to bring Superman into the new millennium and leave Donner in the past.
Super Kal is right. And I agree.

[nintendo nerd]

The movie needs a robot!

All those cool stuff that made Superman so awesome in the past!

A robot? :huh:

[Doctor Baywatch]

A robot? :huh:

SUPERMAN-robots FTW!

[dark_b]

Here's why you need a new origin story for a reboot......

Without it ... it just looks like a sequel to whatever the last film was.

With it, you hit the audience over the head right from the start that this is a new beginning to the franchise.what about BB?
it is 100% different. it looks different tehy are all different,
it has an origin that was never shows in the theater.

yet people thought it was a prequel

sorry i dont belive this.

[Captain Planet!]

Why continue to ruin a 30 year old franchise? Why continue acting like Superman 3 & 4 never happened? Why not reboot? I don't care if this movie is supposed to be more "action-packed". There hasn't been a movie exploring Superman's origin for 30 years, yet you wan't to continue and tarnish what the classic Christopher Reeve's movies stood for?

[DavidTyler]

what about BB?
it is 100% different. it looks different tehy are all different,
it has an origin that was never shows in the theater.

yet people thought it was a prequel

sorry i dont belive this.


Some people may have thought that but most of the people I've spoken with understand that it's not connected to the earlier films.

And the origin to BB not being shown in theaters??????!!!! The whole first half of BB was an origin story. How can you say that?

[Bulletproof]

Again.... I really want a reboot. I don't want Donner's Krypton. I don't want the friggin Jason subplot. I don't want Singer's dismal visuals which are more suited to his early work such as Apt Pupil and The X-men. I don't want that lousy costume. and I don't like Singer's aping Donner's take on the characters.

We need a reboot with someone strong enough to give Superman an exciting film filled with action, character interaction, depth, and serious adversaries.

I did like Spacey as Luthor but they didn't give him a lot to work with. The plot had holes you could drive a truck through.

I want to chuck the whole thing and start from scratch. Give us an interesting Science Fiction beginning like the one from Byrne and Wolfman's 'Man Of Steel'. Let us see young Clark travel the world in search of himself like in Birthright. Let's see how Clark arrived at the costume and the identity - I'd like it to be just like in 'Man Of Steel'. I'd like to see him battle Brainiac with Luthor as the Corporate Shark who appears to be Metropolis' defender but, in truth, is trying to manipulate everyone to his own ends.

So, the world DOES need a reboot.

It needs to get this franchise back on the right foot!


THIS MAN WINS THE BOARD:grin:


Seriously, I can't figure out why this hasn't been done.

In my opinion they need to go right back to the origin with the destruction of Krypton told all through flashbacks and Brainiac as the main badguy. Make him responsible for the destruction of Krypton like S:TAS and have the movie start with Clark exploring the world and trying to find a place for him in it.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Which would you prefer?

I personally thought Routh was great as did most of the fans, hell even ones who didnt' like SR that much thought Routh was a saving grace...

However it seems unlikely to me that they would use the same actor to do a complete reboot of the franchise. To have the same star play the character with a different history would be confusing to most.

Basically if Routh comes back it is the MOS sequel.

If they decide to do a reboot it means a new actor takes over.

[Excel]

PREQUEL with Routh, Bosworth, Spacey and without Jason :up: :up:

[DavidTyler]

THIS MAN WINS THE BOARD:grin:


Seriously, I can't figure out why this hasn't been done.

In my opinion they need to go right back to the origin with the destruction of Krypton told all through flashbacks and Brainiac as the main badguy. Make him responsible for the destruction of Krypton like S:TAS and have the movie start with Clark exploring the world and trying to find a place for him in it.

;)

Thanks.

And that's what a good Superman origin story SHOULD HAVE ... young Clark trying to find his place in the world. Clark wasn't born in a superhero costume and he wasn't raised to be a superhero. It was something he arrived at. I want to see that life path.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Yeah David, as you know it's pretty much what the majority has been saying for a while. Good summary of the ideas we've been seeing the last geez 5 years or so. Instead of going with something like that and giving an origin start introducing character again, they do a returns story. They've seen many of us fans suggesting these ideas over and over yet it goes ignored. I guess we are to be greatful they brought Superman back at all. :confused:

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Yeah David, as you know it's pretty much what the majority has been saying for a while. Good summary of the ideas we've been seeing the last geez 5 years or so. Instead of going with something like that and giving an origin start introducing character again, they do a returns story. They've seen many of us fans suggesting these ideas over and over yet it goes ignored. I guess we are to be greatful they brought Superman back at all. :confused:

[VenomsMom]

If it the decision to do a sequel or a prequel then by all means Routh should return. However in a reboot or total relaunch of the francise then they should distance themselves away from any storyline or cast member in SR and focus on establishing a new era in the francise from scratch.

[bgshw44]

PREQUEL with Routh, Bosworth, Spacey and without Jason :up: :up:

yes , same cast that takes place before SR. you can have flashbacks to show some origion parts that were not shown in STM

[patrickbateman]

PREQUEL with Routh, Bosworth, Spacey and without Jason :up: :up:

:oldrazz: with porno music Feat. Lex in JAIL and supes gettin it on in d FoS :oldrazz:

[NEWAGE]

Reboot!

[Doctor Baywatch]

Reboot with robots!

[dpm07]

Definitely reboot this.

[batman44]

Reboot!!

[DavidTyler]

And I've been talking about that for at least 5 years if not more.

But the WB is full of SHIRTS who think they know better. End result? A lackluster film like SR that underperforms.

Reboot the G**D***ed franchise and get us an exciting new director who won't screw up the character and his supporting cast.

[Superman-Prime]

This thread is.... wow, just wow.

People who voted for "Reboot" and doesn't want Brandon Routh to come back as Superman.

[Venom'sDad]

Maybe \S/ should have included my idea of a Prequel.

[mego joe]

Maybe \S/ should have included my idea of a Prequel.

It's a possibility, but if you're going to loose the Jason/ Richard storyline, you might as well just start over.

Besides, who ever heard of the first movie being the last in the story? That would be an admission that SR failed. If you're going to do that, you might as well reboot.

[Super Kal]

where's the "reboot with Routh" option?

[Mentok]

Reboot with Routh.

[Obi Wan Kenobi]

Ok, I understand that not everyone loved SR; for the record I did, but that's beside the point. The biggest criticism that SR gets, which I can see to an extent is that it didn't show us anything new in terms of villains, action sequences, etc.. It seems to me that if you want something new, continue the series where it is right now. Singer has repeatedly said that his plans for the sequel are a more action packed movie (prob w/ Braniac). The one thing I think that we could all do without is another Superman origin story. The reason Batman Begins worked was because the old Batman movies never really showed his origin, plus they'd gone through all the villains already. With Superman, this all stems back to S:TM. We already got a great origin in that movie. Then we got SII, take or leave 3 and 4, and now w/ Returns out, we can finally get to see something new in a Superman movie. If everybody doesn't stop making all this noise on the net about wanting a reboot then we're gonna be right back at square one.

Good post. Superman doesn't need a reboot. Superman needs a great villian to challenge him on film.

What people here don't realize is if you do a reboot its going to be Superman vs LEX LUTHOR 1 on 1.

Who really wants to see that again?

[Superman-Prime]

where's the "reboot with Routh" option?

There you go! That's exactly what I was thinking. I'm with Super Kal. Either Sequel with Routh or Reboot with Routh.

[Venom'sDad]

It's a possibility, but if you're going to loose the Jason/ Richard storyline, you might as well just start over.

I didn't mention anything concerning the Jason/Richard storyline; that would not have anything to do with a Prequel.


Besides, who ever heard of the first movie being the last in the story?

Have you ever heard of the Star Wars trilogies and the propose Hobbit from LOTR. ;)


That would be an admission that SR failed. If you're going to do that, you might as well reboot.

:confused:
I think a reboot would be more of an admission that SR was a failure.

[batman44]

Good post. Superman doesn't need a reboot. Superman needs a great villian to challenge him on film.

What people here don't realize is if you do a reboot its going to be Superman vs LEX LUTHOR 1 on 1.

Who really wants to see that again?

Others don't realize that reboot could be done with a super powered villian. Besides, throwing in a great villian isn't going to solve the problems I had with SR.

[Super Kal]

There you go! That's exactly what I was thinking. I'm with Super Kal. Either Sequel with Routh or Reboot with Routh.
well, I'm more of the just "reboot with Routh" kinda guy

[LL2K2]

And that's what a good Superman origin story SHOULD HAVE ... young Clark trying to find his place in the world. Clark wasn't born in a superhero costume and he wasn't raised to be a superhero. It was something he arrived at. I want to see that life path.

We already have one: Smallville. And even that isn't perfect.

And I've been talking about that for at least 5 years if not more.

But the WB is full of SHIRTS who think they know better. End result? A lackluster film like SR that underperforms.

77% on Rotten Tomatoes is lackluster? With top reviews from Variety (who actually ranked it higher than STM), Time, Newsweek, and People?

Don't forget, WB confirmed a sequel two months into SR's release despite the less-than-ideal BO.

[CGHulk]

Reboot with Patrick Warburton! :p

[Crook]

Like JcDc already said, if they go with a reboot, it's highly unlikely for Routh to come reprise the role. Not only is it confusing, but the reboot would be better off to severe ALL ties with SR, as to be seen as a new interpretation of the film.

Bringing Routh along, brings baggage.

[Godzilla]

Reboot with an entirely different cast. :up:

[boog_spin]

why reboot? everybody knows supermans roots..came to smallville in a spaceship...raised by the angels marth ans jonathan....learned his kryptonian roots...

i really dont think we need that again.

i think that the great thing bout SR was the fact that they didn't reboot it. they assume that we know supes origens. most do. a lot of people complain that they didnt understand the "vagueness"...when i actually think tht is a strenght....yes, i agree it wasnt pulled off the way it should be,....

but having an established NEW franchise start off with the premise that superman has been around for awhile is actually kind of cool. the only thing is, you have to SHOW how important Superman is to the world. SHOW us why the world needs a SUPERMAN.

SHOW us flashbacks as to why SUPERMAN is so damn impotant to the well being of the worls. SHOW him saving people. SHOW him inspiring people. SHOW why he is so damn important.

it's so frstrating for me because SR had a great forum to use lois' article as to "why the world doesnt need superman"..build off of that...the world is A LOT worse off since he left...and it was NEVER shown...

eh i loved SR but i understand its faults...i think they should build on its shortcomings and potential instead of killing it totally....

[boog_spin]

a reboot showing his beginning is kind of retarded....lets waste an hour showing the origin. get to the action. build off of SR. there is a half a dozen GREAT offshoots to go from there... and yes, i know that the WB suits didnt like the offerings from the screenwriters (which must mean they TOTALLYT suck), seriously...dont restart/reboot...build off of the first movie....i think we can all agree that more action is needed.

everybody complains that they want to see something "new" in a superman movie, yet these same people demand a "reboot." how is that new? to see a new vision of krypton? to see it blown up again? to see clark grow up in smallville again? there is nothing NEW there. we have smallville for that. yeah i know it aint perfecr, but that doesnt matter. it is still there. for the past 7 years. people GET it. hes an alien. from krypton. lex luthor is evil. clark loves lois. kryptonite hurts supes. nothing else can

people GET it.

EXPAND on that.

[bunk]

I would need more details about a reboot to choose that option. Too many unknowns.

[user123456789]

i wish routh had more lines

[jayskyline]

Liked Routh seems like an okay guy/superman didn't really do anything in the movie that made me go 'Wow that is Superman! right there' but that's not his fault now is it ;)

But if its a Reboot then sorry to say but Rouths gotta go.

[BareKnucklez]

:bh:

If they can reboot The Hulk they can do it to SUPERMAN!

Routh was terrible! :brucebat:

[dark_b]

this all reboot talking all started when they rebooted batman.

i wonder if fans would scream ''reboot'' for every movie if batman was never rebooted.

[bunk]

:bh:

If they can reboot The Hulk they can do it to SUPERMAN!




They haven't proven they can successfully reboot Hulk yet.

[mego joe]

this all reboot talking all started when they rebooted batman.

i wonder if fans would scream ''reboot'' for every movie if batman was never rebooted.

THere was nothing inherently wrong with the Batman franchise, just the films themselves. With SR, you have things that are inherently wrong with the characterization and a storyline (jason and Richard) that are going nowhere and absolutely NOTHING to do with the essence of SUperman's character.

Batman and Robin was just corny and bad. That's fixable with a sequel, but the problems folks have with SR are integral to the SR universe.

That's the difference.

[Showtime]

Superman Returns aside, how can you say that what happened with Batman and Robin is fixable? Obviously it wasn't, which is one of the reasons they rebooted. The characterization of Batman and storyline was surely a problem with Batman in Robin, just in a different way. How does that not affect the film universe of Batman? It killed the franchise. The only difference between Superman Returns and Batman & Robin is that the characterization and storylines are at two different ends of the spectrum.

[bunk]

THere was nothing inherently wrong with the Batman franchise, just the films themselves. With SR, you have things that are inherently wrong with the characterization and a storyline (jason and Richard) that are going nowhere and absolutely NOTHING to do with the essence of SUperman's character.

Batman and Robin was just corny and bad. That's fixable with a sequel, but the problems folks have with SR are integral to the SR universe.

That's the difference.

You think B&R is better than SR? Wow...

[Ultimate_Superman]

I voted for a reboot although I would like for Routh to star in the reboot.

[antonydelfini]

Reboot. With Routh. He was a great Superman. Did what was called for in thescript. All he needs to do for the reboot is change his hairstyle, build bigger muscles, get a better costume, be happier, warmer, more active, and more light hearted. And he'll be perfect!

[Nathan]

My choice would be a reboot with Routh as well. But that would probably confuse the audience too much. I liked Routh as Superman, but I want to get rid of the whole Donnerverse.

[antonydelfini]

My choice would be a reboot with Routh as well. But that would probably confuse the audience too much. I liked Routh as Superman, but I want to get rid of the whole Donnerverse.

Yeah Ive been thinking that too. But Routh would be just a waste if we did not get him for a restart. I'll just think that Brandon's performance in Superman Returns was the ultimate Superman audition for the reboot.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Definately a sequel with Routh and Singer returning, it will be great!

[Danny No-Shame]

Keep Routh, ditch Singer/Donniverse and camp villainy.

[GreenKToo]

reboot with routh.

[Compi716]

Routh!!!

[CrazyDavey]

I don't care what they do, as long as Routh returns.

[dark_b]

at this point i want a fight, even if the suit is pink
i want a fight on the same level like TF.

[The War Machine]

Good job JC. :whatever:

The people who voted sequel obviously want Routh in it..

And most of the people who voted reboot also want Routh in it.. :wow:


Interesting..

[M.O.Steel]

PREQUEL with Routh, Bosworth, Spacey and without Jason :up: :up:

not a bad idea. never thought of it. i like it.

[dark_b]

WB will never IMO make a prequel with the same actors.

there is a bigger chance that marvel will promote incredible hulk then WB doing a prequel with the same actors.

[bgshw44]

how about seperate superman movies, like the bond franchise, that dont contradict each other, but are not direct sequels?

keep the same cast

[Mostpowerful]

Sequel Please

Brandon Routh is the ONLY Superman I will pay to see in a movie.

[Mostpowerful]

why reboot? everybody knows supermans roots..came to smallville in a spaceship...raised by the angels marth ans jonathan....learned his kryptonian roots...

i really dont think we need that again.

i think that the great thing bout SR was the fact that they didn't reboot it. they assume that we know supes origens. most do. a lot of people complain that they didnt understand the "vagueness"...when i actually think tht is a strenght....yes, i agree it wasnt pulled off the way it should be,....

but having an established NEW franchise start off with the premise that superman has been around for awhile is actually kind of cool. the only thing is, you have to SHOW how important Superman is to the world. SHOW us why the world needs a SUPERMAN.

SHOW us flashbacks as to why SUPERMAN is so damn impotant to the well being of the worls. SHOW him saving people. SHOW him inspiring people. SHOW why he is so damn important.

it's so frstrating for me because SR had a great forum to use lois' article as to "why the world doesnt need superman"..build off of that...the world is A LOT worse off since he left...and it was NEVER shown...

eh i loved SR but i understand its faults...i think they should build on its shortcomings and potential instead of killing it totally....

Good post!

And to me Superman was VERY inspiring in SR. I LOVE THIS MOVIE and want more of it. I think as a reintroduction movie of Superman to new audiences, it was very well done and with a lot of style, class, and lots of heart.
And most importantly, they found the right guy in Routh to play this iconic character.

[Nathan]

The reason I'd prefer a reboot is because the whole Donnerverse is so extremely boring. There have been no good villains other than maybe Zod and his crew, and Lex Luther is a wig wearing, campy, pansy. Oh, and his plans suck.

[buggs0268]

If you guys want a reboot, then we'll have to wait for another 20 years. Good luck with this.
No we wont. You guys said the same crap about Justice League. I remember the quotes "wont happen for 8 years" and all of a sudden it is pretty much greenlit and was just delayed for the strike, but is on the fast track once the strike is done. What they are going to do is probably go off of the JLA superman.

[buggs0268]

We already have one: Smallville. And even that isn't perfect.



77% on Rotten Tomatoes is lackluster? With top reviews from Variety (who actually ranked it higher than STM), Time, Newsweek, and People?

Don't forget, WB confirmed a sequel two months into SR's release despite the less-than-ideal BO.
They didn't confirm anything until it crossed the 200 million mark. There was a rumor that the talent agencies when contacting the WB about SR2 was told that there would not be an SR2 unless it crossed 200 mill domestic. They kept it in theaters till it did. Then, all of a sudden it crawled to 200 mill really slow, and within the same week they signed a development deal with Singer and the film disapeared. I think it was a contractual thing they had with Singer in all honesty. And all they signed was a development deal and they obviously did not like both pitches he did. Singer would be gone if it wasn't for the fact that he has a pay or play deal. So they have to pay him unless he walks on his own.

[mego joe]

You think B&R is better than SR? Wow...

I thought everyone knew I felt that way...

B and R is watchable and entertaining for what it is...a take on the Batman of the 50's and 60's TV show.

SR is just simply not entertaining or enjoyable.

[mego joe]

Superman Returns aside, how can you say that what happened with Batman and Robin is fixable? Obviously it wasn't, which is one of the reasons they rebooted. The characterization of Batman and storyline was surely a problem with Batman in Robin, just in a different way. How does that not affect the film universe of Batman? It killed the franchise. The only difference between Superman Returns and Batman & Robin is that the characterization and storylines are at two different ends of the spectrum.

WHat happened with Batman and Robin was fixable.

Dick goes off to college...

Bruce moves into the penthouse apartment in town...

He's the Dark Knight, solo once again...

You do Scarecrow and R'as al Gul, but not as part of an origin story and there you go.

There is no plot point from B and R that needed resolving or follow through in a sequel. You can change tone and improve quality while referencing nothing from previous films.

Now this doesn't mean it would be successful, the audience may have been burnt out by that point, but time is the only healer there.

WIth SR you have plot points that are necessarily important to a sequel, but also the very problem with the storyline itself.

THere's a big difference.

[Mostpowerful]

I thought the visuals of SR were brilliant all besides that mucky looking suit.
The movie looked wonderful imo.


There are many things I'll miss from the Donnerverse. But it truly is time to move on.

Agreed!!

I'm sorry but the crystal technology is just too great to lose, IMO. The mainstream is VERY familiar with that and it'd very confusing to try to change that. You can see that influence even in the cartoons the children are watching now. I noticed that in at least two cartoons I watched recently. Whether people like it or not, STM and S2 are still fresh in peoples minds because they were highly popular in our culture. People still remember them. Bryan did well in basing his Supes universe on them IMO. I want a sequel please.:yay:

[superbaby]

either option is fine to me as long as singer is out.

[superbaby]

... Now these days people like a hero with faults and is or can be dark which is why you see the success in Batman, Spider-Man or even the X-men. Superman is to perfect for people now these days and thats just the problem.
oh pls... i totally do not agree to this statement. don't look for excuses for the failure of SR.

[Rated-X]

Now these days people like a hero with faults and is or can be dark which is why you see the success in Batman, Spider-Man or even the X-men. Superman is to perfect for people now these days and thats just the problem.

Didn't Returns make more at the BO than Begins. :cwink:

[wellsy]

Yes, but its budget was also a lot higher than Begins. Therein lies the issue with the sequel's development.

[Super Kal]

Didn't Returns make more at the BO than Begins. :cwink:

no it didn't

Superman Returns
budget: $270 million
domestic take: $200,081,192

Batman Begins
budget: $150 million
domestic take: $205,343,774

[VenomsMom]

no it didn't

Superman Returns
budget: $270 million
domestic take: $200,081,192

Batman Begins
budget: $150 million
domestic take: $205,343,774
270 million? Where did that astronomical figure come from. If thats true...no wonder they were disappointed. That just doesnt justify a sequel.

[Super Kal]

270 million? Where did that astronomical figure come from. If thats true...no wonder they were disappointed. That just doesnt justify a sequel.
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=superman06.htm

[VenomsMom]

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=superman06.htm
Thats the first I have seen that figure....I see what all the fuss was about now. Why so much on the budget? They had to be expecting atleast over 300 million to be happy domestically alone.

[I Am The Knight]

I don't get where that horrendoulsy huge budget came from. I can digest 204 million, but 270 million? that has to include marketing, right?

[Super Kal]

i think that includes all budgets from the other movies as well... could be wrong though.

nevertheless, though, SR did not make up it's money domestically.

[The Guard]

I don't get where that horrendoulsy huge budget came from. I can digest 204 million, but 270 million? that has to include marketing, right?

That budget figure takes into account the money doled out on failed SUPERMAN LIVES and JJ Abrams SUPERMAN projects. It's rumored to be between $30-70 million (They blew $25 million before CATWOMAN ever got off the ground, I don't think it's a stretch). I don't think $200 million plus is a bad number at all for a movie like this. WB was just disappointed in the overall gross. But look at how much SPIDER-MAN 3 cost ($258 million). Even BATMAN BEGINS cost $170 million. It's not like the effects/sets/costumes/locales in SUPERMAN RETURNS weren't fantastic. That stuff costs money. And Singer did shoot with a new kind of camera, too. And don't forget the "Return to Krypton" sequence. A full 20 minutes of effects-heavy film that never showed up in the final cut.

[Showtime]

And don't forget the "Return to Krypton" sequence. A full 20 minutes of effects-heavy film that never showed up in the final cut.

Which was a complete waste of time and money.

[That'ssuper!]

I don't understand how much money can be for probably the largest fiilm budget in history and produce such a crappy movie. Spider-Man 3 was better than this movie and it made 4 times as much as SR did.

[CrazyDavey]

I thought everyone knew I felt that way...

B and R is watchable and entertaining for what it is...a take on the Batman of the 50's and 60's TV show.

SR is just simply not entertaining or enjoyable.


SR is entertaining and enjoyable. It was a tribute to Superman 1 and 2 :supes:

[Showtime]

WHat happened with Batman and Robin was fixable.

Dick goes off to college...

Bruce moves into the penthouse apartment in town...

He's the Dark Knight, solo once again...

You do Scarecrow and R'as al Gul, but not as part of an origin story and there you go.

There is no plot point from B and R that needed resolving or follow through in a sequel. You can change tone and improve quality while referencing nothing from previous films.

Now this doesn't mean it would be successful, the audience may have been burnt out by that point, but time is the only healer there.

WIth SR you have plot points that are necessarily important to a sequel, but also the very problem with the storyline itself.

THere's a big difference.

That is just your version of what could be done to fix a sequel to Batman and Robin, it doesn't mean that the audience or WB would think its fixed. I believe a writer could fix Superman Returns, the only plot point that really hangs over you as a writer is Jason and Richard. Sure it's no small task, but it certainly is fixable.

There is a reason that version of Batman did not continue after Batman and Robin, and its the same reason why Superman might not continue. The movie didn't pull its weight at the box office and the fans were mixed. Whatever way you look at it, it's the same boat up the creek, just painted a different color.

[Showtime]

I thought everyone knew I felt that way...

B and R is watchable and entertaining for what it is...a take on the Batman of the 50's and 60's TV show.



I disagree completely, I think it's one of the worst comicbook movies ever made, but that is my opinion vs yours. Nothing we can really do about that.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Seems Routh is more popular on this board than certain people give him credit for.

[VenomsMom]

I don't understand how much money can be for probably the largest fiilm budget in history and produce such a crappy movie. Spider-Man 3 was better than this movie and it made 4 times as much as SR did.
Apparently many scenes got cut and are still in some room at the WB according to some. Maybe they should put them in the extended cut DVD and capitalize back on some of those profits huh......

[VenomsMom]

B and R was a kiddie film and they knew exactly what they were doing. It was a marketing approach for toys and action figures and happy meals geared toward them. We knew that when we saw that travesty. Throw a couple of Hollywood big names in and turn it into a camp fest. You would think they learned their lesson from SIII.

[Super Kal]

I really doubt there's gonna be an "extended cut"

[VenomsMom]

I really doubt there's gonna be an "extended cut"
why not? They got the footage why not use it. For the money spent there must have been some remarkable scenes.

[Super Kal]

Singer himself said that the cut that we have right now is the director's cut, and he doesn't believe in the whole "extended cut" deal

[Venom'sDad]

Superman Returns
budget: $270 million
domestic take: $200,081,192


Now this is funny, because many of Singer's supporters chastise me for saying that the film cost more than $260 million to make. Those very same people swore up & down that the film only cost $208 million. What gives here?

:confused:

[VenomsMom]

Singer himself said that the cut that we have right now is the director's cut, and he doesn't believe in the whole "extended cut" deal
Well....I guess we can scratch that idea. We are back to square one. 270 million bucks.:o

[VenomsMom]

Singer himself said that the cut that we have right now is the director's cut, and he doesn't believe in the whole "extended cut" deal
Why would Singer have the final say in that anyways. Doesnt the WB have to make a decision like that?

[Super Kal]

Now this is funny, because many of Singer's supporters chastise me for saying that the film cost more than $260 million to make. Those very same people swore up & down that the film only cost $208 million. What gives here?

:confused:
they're talking about tax rebates and stuff like that... since they filmed in Australia, it was cheaper...


obviously not cheap enough

[Super Kal]

Why would Singer have the final say in that anyways. Doesnt the WB have to make a decision like that?
my guess is that even though WB owns the character, Singer made the movie, so he has control over what happens to the releases

[Venom'sDad]

they're talking about tax rebates and stuff like that... since they filmed in Australia, it was cheaper...

I understand that, but that's not what they was referring to. As a matter of fact, that didn't come up in the discussion.

WB either paid out or cost them $208 million to do this film or $270 million, that's the bottom line.

Ehh...

[Super Kal]

270 mill is the price that includes the other projects that tried to get Superman off the ground.

but, like I said, no matter how you look at it, SR underperformed. big time.
A reboot IS needed.

[VenomsMom]

270 mill is the price that includes the other projects that tried to get Superman off the ground.

but, like I said, no matter how you look at it, SR underperformed. big time.
A reboot IS needed.
Of course it is.

[Venom'sDad]

Now, like most here and elsewhere, I royally like Brandon Routh as Superman and would hate to see him replace... which will most likely happen in a complete reboot. The way to get around that IMHO, is to do a Prequel. This would allow WB to give an origin story as I have discussed and maintain Routh as Superman for future installment. The Prequel could feature General Zod escape from the Phantom Zone and touch obviously on Lex Luthor. However, I would re-invent Lex as CEO of financial strap LexCorps, hence the reason for swindling the old lady's money, for his company and why Lex got off because there was no evidence or testimoney from Superman to link Lex to an invented crime in the confines of this new continuity.

WB just need to have imagination, creativity, and some profound understanding of the characters and their resources.


I wish I could elaborate more on what I'm trying to say here without getting long-winded and drawn-out; but no one understand the point I was trying to convey?

[Super Kal]

i wouldn't want to see a prequel because we already have the prequels in m ovie form and comic book form

[X-Maniac]

I don't think a prequel to SR is a good idea. There were comicbook prequels anyway. Better to move on, move forward and do something more fresh and dynamic.

[Showtime]

I really doubt there's gonna be an "extended cut"

I can almost guarantee there will be at some point, but that is just me.

I don't think a prequel to SR is a good idea. There were comicbook prequels anyway. Better to move on, move forward and do something more fresh and dynamic.

I agree, although if they had to do a movie with a connection to SR, I don't think a prequel is that bad of an idea.

[Showtime]

In some instances, I think Routh is more popular than Superman Returns, and to some Routh is even bigger than Superman.

[Snoo]

To me the problem with a reboot is that it would most probably exclude Routh if a new director got on board. I know this has been debated already many times. "Would a new director keep Routh? Would he like Routh? And if Singer returns to direct, would he go with a reboot?" Etc, etc.

I just don't know. At this point I'd be happy with anything as long as Routh was in it. I doubt in a new director at the helm because he represents even more uncertainty (more than already exists regarding MOS, anyway), like anything could happen, including Routh getting the boot, which would sadden and disappoint me.

What if the new director thought: "Oh, why should I keep him? I don't even like this kid! I know of another kid who could do this!" You just never know. Unless WB pushes for Routh, I don't see why a new director would need to use him again. It's true the casting would take ages again because it's such a difficult role to cast but maybe he'd be willing to go through that just to get his fave pick for Superman. "Ignore what other people thought of Routh in SR, give me my Superman!" You know?

I can but hope a new director, if there indeed would be one, sees what Routh's fans see in Routh, and lets him wear the cape again.

[Snoo]

In some instances, I think Routh is more popular than Superman Returns, and to some Routh is even bigger than Superman.

That is true. I've seen both many times.

[dark_b]

In some instances, I think Routh is more popular than Superman Returns, and to some Routh is even bigger than Superman.
i think it has a lot to do how brandon acted when promoting the movie.
he looked to me personal like a guy who cares about superman.
he is a real fan IMO.

[myway]

What about counting the money it made overseas and on DVD?

[Bruce_Wayne29]

Reboot with Tom Welling as Superman.

[The Guard]

Now this is funny, because many of Singer's supporters chastise me for saying that the film cost more than $260 million to make. Those very same people swore up & down that the film only cost $208 million. What gives here?

That budget figure takes into account the money doled out on failed SUPERMAN LIVES and JJ Abrams SUPERMAN projects. It's rumored to be between $30-70 million (They blew $25 million before CATWOMAN ever got off the ground, I don't think it's a stretch). I don't think $200 million plus is a bad number at all for a movie like this. WB was just disappointed in the overall gross. But look at how much SPIDER-MAN 3 cost ($258 million). Even BATMAN BEGINS cost $170 million. It's not like the effects/sets/costumes/locales in SUPERMAN RETURNS weren't fantastic. That stuff costs money. And Singer did shoot with a new kind of camera, too. And don't forget the "Return to Krypton" sequence. A full 20 minutes of effects-heavy film that never showed up in the final cut.

[Super Kal]

that scene alone was 10 million

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

In some instances, I think Routh is more popular than Superman Returns, and to some Routh is even bigger than Superman.

It is entirely possible that this is the case.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The official budget for SR was announced as $204 million a while ago i believe.

It was a stupid decision by WB to greenlight a movie that was to be the first in the franchise with that kind of budget.

[Super Kal]

show me the link where it was officially announced as 204 million because as far as I'm seeing, minus the previous projects, it was 250 million

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^It was announced around the time of release, dont have a link at the moment, nor the time to look for one, but the production budget wasnt $250 million as far as i am concerned.

[SymbioteKal-El]

Routh and Singer to return for a sequel for sure.

[Super Kal]

nonetheless... there's no arguemnt that it failed expectations

[Super Kal]

:down to Signer... he doesn't deserve a second chance

[Showtime]

That is true. I've seen both many times.

Got ya.

i think it has a lot to do how brandon acted when promoting the movie. he looked to me personal like a guy who cares about superman.he is a real fan IMO.

I think he understood the magnitude of taking on such an icon charcter and presented himself well as Superman outside the realm of film.

It is entirely possible that this is the case.

I think no actor is bigger than Superman, and although I liked Routh's look as Superman and Clark, I don't think he is irreplacable.

[Showtime]

I still don't understand the budget situation.

[X-Maniac]

I still don't understand the budget situation.

The Numbers movie website says this:

Budget Note
Bryan Singer was quoted as saying the budget for Superman Returns was $250 million in late 2004. He has since denied that figure (Entertainment Weekly, January 27, 2006). Warner Bros. has unofficially put the budget at $184 million, "factoring in tax breaks offered in Australia" (Variety, February 22, 2006 and March 27, 2006). Assuming the Australian tax break is 12%, that puts the actual production budget at $209 million, which is the figure we are using. Variety (May 22, 2006) also reports an additional $40 million in "prior pay or play deals," which brings the cost to Warner Bros of $250 million. It is possible the "official" budget for the movie will be lowered when (or even after) it is released, since the studio can spread some of the costs between this release and possible sequels.
Update: In Newsweek's July 3-10, 2006 issue, Singer says, "The approved budget was $184.5 million. We had projected overages for visual effects, and there was a sequence that I wanted that was going to cost an extra $2.3 million. So the hard, honest number is $204 million." We are taking this as the official final budget. Factoring in the tax break puts the cost at $232 million, and adding the $40 million in previous costs to the studio means that the total expense on the project was in the neighborhood of $270 million.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2006/SPRMN.php

[Showtime]

The Numbers movie website says this:

Budget Note
Bryan Singer was quoted as saying the budget for Superman Returns was $250 million in late 2004. He has since denied that figure (Entertainment Weekly, January 27, 2006). Warner Bros. has unofficially put the budget at $184 million, "factoring in tax breaks offered in Australia" (Variety, February 22, 2006 and March 27, 2006). Assuming the Australian tax break is 12%, that puts the actual production budget at $209 million, which is the figure we are using. Variety (May 22, 2006) also reports an additional $40 million in "prior pay or play deals," which brings the cost to Warner Bros of $250 million. It is possible the "official" budget for the movie will be lowered when (or even after) it is released, since the studio can spread some of the costs between this release and possible sequels.
Update: In Newsweek's July 3-10, 2006 issue, Singer says, "The approved budget was $184.5 million. We had projected overages for visual effects, and there was a sequence that I wanted that was going to cost an extra $2.3 million. So the hard, honest number is $204 million." We are taking this as the official final budget. Factoring in the tax break puts the cost at $232 million, and adding the $40 million in previous costs to the studio means that the total expense on the project was in the neighborhood of $270 million.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2006/SPRMN.php

Yeah, I've posted that article about a year ago. I just mean I don't understand why people are throwing in previous failures. The budget for Superman Returns is the budget for Superman Returns. The money spent on previous failures would be thrown into their bottomline years before that. So according to this the budget was 204 million after the tax break. That means the budget was 204 million? Not sure where people are coming up with 270 million.

[X-Maniac]

Yeah, I've posted that article about a year ago. I just mean I don't understand why people are throwing in previous failures. The budget for Superman Returns is the budget for Superman Returns. The money spent on previous failures would be thrown into their bottomline years before that. So according to this the budget was 204 million after the tax break. That means the budget was 204 million? Not sure where people are coming up with 270 million.

I guess because $270m represents the final cost of bringing the movie on to the screen and the previous costs were a 'debt' as they didn't come from anywhere or come off anything. They were a debt that SR was expected to pay back.

But the cost purely of Bryan Singer's involvement seems to be $204m.

If I can dare mention X3 again, that too had previous costs (from the short time Matthew Vaughn was with the project). The budget for X3 on boxofficemojo is put at $210m, whereas The Numbers puts it at $150m. Something accounts for that difference. I am not convinced Vaughn's costs amount to $60m considering the number of attempts at a Superman movie amount to $40m. And Ratner would have streamlined the production to meet the release date, not spent more (except on getting FX people from all over the place working flat-out to finish the digital post-prod).

[VenomsMom]

Then the actual factual cost of producing SR without throwing in back figures from failed projects that had nothing to with Singer was around 204 mil. Right? Thanks for clearing that up.

[VenomsMom]

I think no actor is bigger than Superman, and although I liked Routh's look as Superman and Clark, I don't think he is irreplacable.
You are most certainly correct about this. And I agree wholeheartedly. Routh was not the first and he wont be the last.

[mego joe]

SR is entertaining and enjoyable. It was a tribute to Superman 1 and 2 :supes:

A tribute and yet it got Superman's character so wrong....

[mego joe]

That is just your version of what could be done to fix a sequel to Batman and Robin, it doesn't mean that the audience or WB would think its fixed. I believe a writer could fix Superman Returns, the only plot point that really hangs over you as a writer is Jason and Richard. Sure it's no small task, but it certainly is fixable.


I've got a script that fixes SR. But it reboots the franchise within the story itself.

There is a reason that version of Batman did not continue after Batman and Robin, and its the same reason why Superman might not continue. The movie didn't pull its weight at the box office and the fans were mixed. Whatever way you look at it, it's the same boat up the creek, just painted a different color.

I would say though, that they could have made another Batfilm with the same Alfred and extras and it could have been fine. I'm not saying it would have worked, just that there were less issues with it and no particular story point that needed to be addressed. Whereas with SR, the Jason/ RIchard story point must be addressed, and yet only the hardcore SR fans want to see it. To the 'haters' (about 1/2 the core SUperman fans) that is the turn off to the sequel.

[mego joe]

I disagree completely, I think it's one of the worst comicbook movies ever made, but that is my opinion vs yours. Nothing we can really do about that.

As I do with SR... one of the worst comic films ever made.

[Showtime]

I've got a script that fixes SR. But it reboots the franchise within the story itself.

Send it in.

I would say though, that they could have made another Batfilm with the same Alfred and extras and it could have been fine. I'm not saying it would have worked, just that there were less issues with it and no particular story point that needed to be addressed. Whereas with SR, the Jason/ RIchard story point must be addressed, and yet only the hardcore SR fans want to see it. To the 'haters' (about 1/2 the core SUperman fans) that is the turn off to the sequel.

I don't necessarily want to see a Jason/Superman story resolved, but you have to when doing a sequel. It's definately a hurdle, but anybody with some writing skills can work it out.

[Showtime]

As I do with SR... one of the worst comic films ever made.

Fair enough.

[Dark_Lord]

where's the "reboot with Routh" option?

:up: :up:
:super:

[mego joe]

Send it in.


I've already contacted WB through multiple channels as well as DC Comics.

I didn't share my rejection letter from Paul Levitz, b/c you remember how my letter from WB was received last year, right?

I can prove it really is from Paul Levitz, though, b/c he's tied up in my basement right now!

Wait a minute, I don't have a basement.


I don't necessarily want to see a Jason/Superman story resolved, but you have to when doing a sequel. It's definately a hurdle, but anybody with some writing skills can work it out.

I guess it all depends on how it is resolved though, doesn't it?

1. All the angsty drama you would expect

2. Essentially ignore it and just gloss over

3. REboot as part of the storyline

I know that it can be dealt with, I just have no real interest in it besides option 3.

I really can't see Singer doing a sequel with anything but option 1, why else introduce the concept. I'm wondering if this was the biggest stumbling block with the two rejected pitches.

I'm also wondering if WB will keep Singer hanging on until he just walks, and never approve anything he comes up with for a sequel. Or give him a reboot script and say "here's your next Superman movie, direct it or walk."

He doesn't have script approval in his contract does he?

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Look. I like Routh. Really he is great as Superman, and also a great ambassodor of the character. However there is a reason I didn't put "Reboot with Routh"

Quite simply, it is silly to suggest that as a viable option. If there is a reboot, it means a relaunching of another franchise. It would be confusing to have an SR franchise started with Routh, and then reboot the franchise using the same guy giving a different history to the character. Oh and if you KEEP the history then you are making a prequel which would beg the question "Why didn't they just do a beginnings type story at the start?"

So yes it is either sequel with Routh or a reboot with everyone new including the lead actor. Get REAL.

[VenomsMom]

Edit

[\S/JcDc\S/]

We already have one: Smallville. And even that isn't perfect.





Please :rolleyes:

What he is talking about is an origin where Clark finds himself which certainly is not going to include him knowing Lex, Lois, Perry, Jimmy, etc... Before he even moves to Metropolis becoming Superman. The history that the show creates has nothing to do with a big screen adaption. There is a large group of fans who didn't like SR and don't like SV and want things done closer to the comics they grew up with. While I liked SR, and for the most part SV is OK, I definitely see where that polarized group of fans is coming from.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Oh and to whoever brought up Batman Begins as starting this "reboot" idea for Superman fans. That is plain WRONG. A good majority of us have gone through all these years of development hell and continually voiced our opinion that it was time for an origin story of Superman and a reboot to bring the character to the next generation. Before BB ever was even announced fans of Superman have supported this for years!

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I'm getting pushed to the point where I could say reboot the franchise and just release this (buzz word) "extended" cut of SR that would include RTK sequence and all of the deleted scenes that should have stayed.

[Super Kal]

even all those deleted scenes won't make it a better movie :csad:

[Showtime]

It's better in my opinion, with the deleted scenes.

[Super Kal]

well, it would be better if the color correction wasn't there, but I don't ever see that happening :csad:

[VenomsMom]

It's better in my opinion, with the deleted scenes.
It may explain more in detail perhaps.

[Super Kal]

no sum of deleted scenes will change how it looks on screen...

[nintendo nerd]

Reboot with Tom Welling as Superman.

GOD SAVE US ALL!!!!!!!

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I think no actor is bigger than Superman, and although I liked Routh's look as Superman and Clark, I don't think he is irreplacable.

Well Brandon wont be the last person to play Superman in our lifetime, thats for sure, but from this generation of actors, i honestly cant see them getting anyone better, so in a way, i think he is irreplacable.

[bullets]

I thought Routh did a good job. it would be a shame to see antoher superman without him .

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^Agreed totally, i thought he was awesome.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The Numbers movie website says this:

Budget Note
Bryan Singer was quoted as saying the budget for Superman Returns was $250 million in late 2004. He has since denied that figure (Entertainment Weekly, January 27, 2006). Warner Bros. has unofficially put the budget at $184 million, "factoring in tax breaks offered in Australia" (Variety, February 22, 2006 and March 27, 2006). Assuming the Australian tax break is 12%, that puts the actual production budget at $209 million, which is the figure we are using. Variety (May 22, 2006) also reports an additional $40 million in "prior pay or play deals," which brings the cost to Warner Bros of $250 million. It is possible the "official" budget for the movie will be lowered when (or even after) it is released, since the studio can spread some of the costs between this release and possible sequels.
Update: In Newsweek's July 3-10, 2006 issue, Singer says, "The approved budget was $184.5 million. We had projected overages for visual effects, and there was a sequence that I wanted that was going to cost an extra $2.3 million. So the hard, honest number is $204 million." We are taking this as the official final budget. Factoring in the tax break puts the cost at $232 million, and adding the $40 million in previous costs to the studio means that the total expense on the project was in the neighborhood of $270 million.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2006/SPRMN.php

I think that is the article i was referring to, so the official budget was $204 million, thanks for posting it.

[Showtime]

Well Brandon wont be the last person to play Superman in our lifetime, thats for sure, but from this generation of actors, i honestly cant see them getting anyone better, so in a way, i think he is irreplacable.

That's cool my friend. I won't argue your opinion.

[Snoo]

Well Brandon wont be the last person to play Superman in our lifetime, thats for sure, but from this generation of actors, i honestly cant see them getting anyone better, so in a way, i think he is irreplacable.

That's how I feel, too. Very strongly. :up: I know not everyone liked him as much as I did or not at all but to me personally he embodies Superman in every way and he is now Superman of the present to me, just like Reeve was in my childhood. Very hard to imagine anyone else in the role when the guy you like is already perfect. :woot:

I'm thinking: "Why would we need another Superman? Routh's right there."

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

That's cool my friend. I won't argue your opinion.

I know you wont argue my opinion Show, you are one of the few people on here that can accept the opinions of BOTH side's, and your arguments always make sense as you neither overly praise nor criticise the movie.

That's how I feel, too. Very strongly. :up: I know not everyone liked him as much as I did or not at all but to me personally he embodies Superman in every way and he is now Superman of the present to me, just like Reeve was in my childhood. Very hard to imagine anyone else in the role when the guy you like is already perfect. :woot:

I'm thinking: "Why would we need another Superman? Routh's right there."

Exactly how i feel my friend, he is right there, and yet there is a possibility he will be replaced, if he is, they WONT find anyone better IMO.

[Showtime]

I know you wont argue my opinion Show, you are one of the few people on here that can accept the opinions of BOTH side's, and your arguments always make sense as you neither overly praise nor criticise the movie.


Thanks man. I think I blushed. I walk the line.

To me right now, Routh is Superman, until somebody takes it away from him.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Thanks man. I think I blushed. I walk the line.

To me right now, Routh is Superman, until somebody takes it away from him.

You always do walk the line Show, one of the few that do :up:

[Showtime]

Johnny Showcash.

[Venom'sDad]

Budget Note
Bryan Singer was quoted as saying the budget for Superman Returns was $250 million in late 2004. He has since denied that figure (Entertainment Weekly, January 27, 2006). Warner Bros. has unofficially put the budget at $184 million, "factoring in tax breaks offered in Australia" (Variety, February 22, 2006 and March 27, 2006). Assuming the Australian tax break is 12%, that puts the actual production budget at $209 million, which is the figure we are using. Variety (May 22, 2006) also reports an additional $40 million in "prior pay or play deals," which brings the cost to Warner Bros of $250 million. It is possible the "official" budget for the movie will be lowered when (or even after) it is released, since the studio can spread some of the costs between this release and possible sequels.
Update: In Newsweek's July 3-10, 2006 issue, Singer says, "The approved budget was $184.5 million. We had projected overages for visual effects, and there was a sequence that I wanted that was going to cost an extra $2.3 million. So the hard, honest number is $204 million." We are taking this as the official final budget. Factoring in the tax break puts the cost at $232 million, and adding the $40 million in previous costs to the studio means that the total expense on the project was in the neighborhood of $270 million.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2006/SPRMN.php

Need I say more. :rolleyes:

[Super Kal]

lol, so many numbers

[Showtime]

Budget Note
Bryan Singer was quoted as saying the budget for Superman Returns was $250 million in late 2004. He has since denied that figure (Entertainment Weekly, January 27, 2006). Warner Bros. has unofficially put the budget at $184 million, "factoring in tax breaks offered in Australia" (Variety, February 22, 2006 and March 27, 2006). Assuming the Australian tax break is 12%, that puts the actual production budget at $209 million, which is the figure we are using. Variety (May 22, 2006) also reports an additional $40 million in "prior pay or play deals," which brings the cost to Warner Bros of $250 million. It is possible the "official" budget for the movie will be lowered when (or even after) it is released, since the studio can spread some of the costs between this release and possible sequels.
Update: In Newsweek's July 3-10, 2006 issue, Singer says, "The approved budget was $184.5 million. We had projected overages for visual effects, and there was a sequence that I wanted that was going to cost an extra $2.3 million. So the hard, honest number is $204 million." We are taking this as the official final budget. Factoring in the tax break puts the cost at $232 million, and adding the $40 million in previous costs to the studio means that the total expense on the project was in the neighborhood of $270 million.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2006/SPRMN.php

Need I say more. :rolleyes:

The budget for Superman Returns was 204 Million. The "project" was Superman Returns, therefore the budget for Superman Returns was 204Million. Bryan Singer went 20 Million Dollars over the original budget. The other projects are unrelated to Superman Returns, WB had to include these failed productions in the bottomline in previous years. So all this talk about Superman Returns costing 270 million is ridiculous.

[Pickle-El]

The budget for Superman Returns was 204 Million. The "project" was Superman Returns, therefore the budget for Superman Returns was 204Million. Bryan Singer went 20 Million Dollars over the original budget. The other projects are unrelated to Superman Returns, WB had to include these failed productions in the bottomline in previous years. So all this talk about Superman Returns costing 270 million is ridiculous.

It's simply easier to say SR was a failure when you count all previous costs.....

[Super Kal]

It's simply easier to say SR was a failure when you count all previous costs.....
good point

[Roland]

April 11, 2034

Variety reports that Warner Bros. is planning its fifteenth reboot of the "Superman" franchise.

WB studios spokesman Jerry Thunderkunt reports that studio execs are greenlighting another reboot of the ancient and enervated superhero franchise. "We've learned from the last fourteen critically panned flops which failed to recoup their initial budget," said Thunderkunt. "Clearly, audiences did not respond to the characterization of Lois Lane as a whored-up Jezebel attempting to seduce a bisexual autistic Man of Steel."

According to Thunderkunt, the WB Studio's nearly $320 billion combined loss on the past fourteen "Superman" trainwrecks has done nothing but steel studio executives' resolve to "buckle down, lay off the coke for fifteen minutes, and attempt to wring another dime from a bloodless and lifeless franchise."

"Clearly, having Superman undergo sexual transgendered reversal at the hands of Brainiac, travel back in time, impregnate himself, and then give birth to his own son who was--in fact---himself, confused audiences and accounted for the Burbank WB studios being firebombed by Underoo-wearing fanboys."

The Superman reboot saga goes back to the first decade of the century when forgotten director Bryan "Coxsman" Singer produced "Superman Returns" on a budget of over $200 million. The massively budgeted movie featured miniature train sets being destroyed by a home crystal-growing set, a super-powered bastard child, a seventeen-year-old Lois Lane, and a Superman on loan from the "Man-Hole" corner bar in San Francisco's Castro district. Years after the debacle, Singer remarked, "I was attempting to pull the greatest subversive act in the history of cinema: to slip right under the noses of unsuspecting straight Americans a totally gay superhero with virtually no interesting qualities, conflicts, or action. In the end, I simply made an unwatchable movie that sucked almighty balls."

[Pickle-El]

April 11, 2034

Variety reports that Warner Bros. is planning its fifteenth reboot of the "Superman" franchise.

WB studios spokesman Jerry Thunderkunt reports that studio execs are greenlighting another reboot of the ancient and enervated superhero franchise. "We've learned from the last fourteen critically panned flops which failed to recoup their initial budget," said Thunderkunt. "Clearly, audiences did not respond to the characterization of Lois Lane as a whored-up Jezebel attempting to seduce a bisexual autistic Man of Steel."

According to Thunderkunt, the WB Studio's nearly $320 billion combined loss on the past fourteen "Superman" trainwrecks has done nothing but steel studio executives' resolve to "buckle down, lay off the coke for fifteen minutes, and attempt to wring another dime from a bloodless and lifeless franchise."

"Clearly, having Superman undergo sexual transgendered reversal at the hands of Brainiac, travel back in time, impregnate himself, and then give birth to his own son who was--in fact---himself, confused audiences and accounted for the Burbank WB studios being firebombed by Underoo-wearing fanboys."

The Superman reboot saga goes back to the first decade of the century when forgotten director Bryan "Coxsman" Singer produced "Superman Returns" on a budget of over $200 million. The massively budgeted movie featured miniature train sets being destroyed by a home crystal-growing set, a super-powered bastard child, a seventeen-year-old Lois Lane, and a Superman on loan from the "Man-Hole" corner bar in San Francisco's Castro district. Years after the debacle, Singer remarked, "I was attempting to pull the greatest subversive act in the history of cinema: to slip right under the noses of unsuspecting straight Americans a totally gay superhero with virtually no interesting qualities, conflicts, or action. In the end, I simply made an unwatchable movie that sucked almighty balls."

Nice one...I hope you enjoy the vacation!

[wellsy]

April 11, 2034

Variety reports that Warner Bros. is planning its fifteenth reboot of the "Superman" franchise.

WB studios spokesman Jerry Thunderkunt reports that studio execs are greenlighting another reboot of the ancient and enervated superhero franchise. "We've learned from the last fourteen critically panned flops which failed to recoup their initial budget," said Thunderkunt. "Clearly, audiences did not respond to the characterization of Lois Lane as a whored-up Jezebel attempting to seduce a bisexual autistic Man of Steel."

According to Thunderkunt, the WB Studio's nearly $320 billion combined loss on the past fourteen "Superman" trainwrecks has done nothing but steel studio executives' resolve to "buckle down, lay off the coke for fifteen minutes, and attempt to wring another dime from a bloodless and lifeless franchise."

"Clearly, having Superman undergo sexual transgendered reversal at the hands of Brainiac, travel back in time, impregnate himself, and then give birth to his own son who was--in fact---himself, confused audiences and accounted for the Burbank WB studios being firebombed by Underoo-wearing fanboys."

The Superman reboot saga goes back to the first decade of the century when forgotten director Bryan "Coxsman" Singer produced "Superman Returns" on a budget of over $200 million. The massively budgeted movie featured miniature train sets being destroyed by a home crystal-growing set, a super-powered bastard child, a seventeen-year-old Lois Lane, and a Superman on loan from the "Man-Hole" corner bar in San Francisco's Castro district. Years after the debacle, Singer remarked, "I was attempting to pull the greatest subversive act in the history of cinema: to slip right under the noses of unsuspecting straight Americans a totally gay superhero with virtually no interesting qualities, conflicts, or action. In the end, I simply made an unwatchable movie that sucked almighty balls."

Its still kind of funny, but its getting old and stale too.

Or maybe I am... :wow:

[X-Maniac]

The budget for Superman Returns was 204 Million. The "project" was Superman Returns, therefore the budget for Superman Returns was 204Million. Bryan Singer went 20 Million Dollars over the original budget. The other projects are unrelated to Superman Returns, WB had to include these failed productions in the bottomline in previous years. So all this talk about Superman Returns costing 270 million is ridiculous.

What WB will be considering is that the $204m cost of Singer's SR only just scraped past the USA/domestic box office revenue of $200m. I understand that only the domestic (USA) box office is considered as a measure of success. WB obviously would have ideally wanted to recoup the costs of earlier attempts as well, but they didn't get their $270m back on the domestic front. It's now very obvious why WB left the movie out there until it made at least $200m, as they wanted at least the $204 budget back in ticket sales.

Showing the movie in IMAX (with some 3D scenes) brought in $22.8million according to The Numbers website but it doesn't say if this is considered part of the general box office take or if it is additional income.

I'd have liked to see SR in IMAX, I must admit. But I didn't. I've seen Beowulf in IMAX 3D - what a dreadful disappointment that movie is! A hollow visual spectacle that I never wish to see again.

[C. Lee]

Goodbye Roland....leave your prejudices at home.

[Superman-Prime]

Reboot with Tom Welling as Superman.

Oh, hell no.

It's not that I hate Tom Welling and Smallville. I love Smallville, but I don't want Tom Welling to become Superman for the movie.

[Superman-Prime]

April 11, 2034

Variety reports that Warner Bros. is planning its fifteenth reboot of the "Superman" franchise.

WB studios spokesman Jerry Thunderkunt reports that studio execs are greenlighting another reboot of the ancient and enervated superhero franchise. "We've learned from the last fourteen critically panned flops which failed to recoup their initial budget," said Thunderkunt. "Clearly, audiences did not respond to the characterization of Lois Lane as a whored-up Jezebel attempting to seduce a bisexual autistic Man of Steel."

According to Thunderkunt, the WB Studio's nearly $320 billion combined loss on the past fourteen "Superman" trainwrecks has done nothing but steel studio executives' resolve to "buckle down, lay off the coke for fifteen minutes, and attempt to wring another dime from a bloodless and lifeless franchise."

"Clearly, having Superman undergo sexual transgendered reversal at the hands of Brainiac, travel back in time, impregnate himself, and then give birth to his own son who was--in fact---himself, confused audiences and accounted for the Burbank WB studios being firebombed by Underoo-wearing fanboys."

The Superman reboot saga goes back to the first decade of the century when forgotten director Bryan "Coxsman" Singer produced "Superman Returns" on a budget of over $200 million. The massively budgeted movie featured miniature train sets being destroyed by a home crystal-growing set, a super-powered bastard child, a seventeen-year-old Lois Lane, and a Superman on loan from the "Man-Hole" corner bar in San Francisco's Castro district. Years after the debacle, Singer remarked, "I was attempting to pull the greatest subversive act in the history of cinema: to slip right under the noses of unsuspecting straight Americans a totally gay superhero with virtually no interesting qualities, conflicts, or action. In the end, I simply made an unwatchable movie that sucked almighty balls."

Wow. That's pretty harsh, and IMMATURE. :whatever:

And in 2034, I will be 50!! OMIGOSHH!!!!111!!!

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Forget Tom Welling and SV really. We have an issue with fans being split where some don't like SV, some don't like SR, and some can't stand either. If there is a reboot it needs a fresh story reintroducing the characters for the first time. That would not include Superman having grown up knowing Lois, Lex, Perry, Jimmy, etc... in Smallville before he even came to Metropolis and became Superman :rolleyes: This is not to say I hate SV but it like some would say about SR is an elseworld's tale so to speak.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Nice one...I hope you enjoy the vacation!

It's been done before, didn't even bother to read all of that rubbish :o

[Arkady Rossovich]

Reboot.

[That'ssuper!]

I want only the best villains for a Superman series of rebooted films. Luthor will be a moderate villain in each film, but a larger more powerful enemy of Superman will be center spotlight.

Metallo
Bizarro
General Zod
Brainiac
Darkseid
Doomsday

[superbaby]

I want only the best villains for a Superman series of rebooted films. Luthor will be a moderate villain in each film, but a larger more powerful enemy of Superman will be center spotlight.

Metallo
Bizarro
General Zod
Brainiac
Darkseid
Doomsday

unfortunately, WB these days take it as too conventional and boring. they just wanna invent new things to surprise us.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The budget for Superman Returns was 204 Million. The "project" was Superman Returns, therefore the budget for Superman Returns was 204Million. Bryan Singer went 20 Million Dollars over the original budget. The other projects are unrelated to Superman Returns, WB had to include these failed productions in the bottomline in previous years. So all this talk about Superman Returns costing 270 million is ridiculous.

Exactly, why should Singer/SR be burdened with the costs of projects that DIDNT involve him or his movie, the official budget is $204 million, as i have said countless times.

[X-Maniac]

Exactly, why should Singer/SR be burdened with the costs of projects that DIDNT involve him or his movie, the official budget is $204 million, as i have said countless times.

Warner obviously hoped the movie would be big enough to recoup all the costs of getting Superman on screen again. That's fair enough. But it didn't happen.

You can see why they let the movie stay on release until it had at least earned its own costs back from domestic box office.

[That'ssuper!]

I think we could really go on for a storyline in which Superman is being forgotten by humanity. Lois and Richard move on together with Jason under their arm. Jor-El is no longer in contact with his son, and the only connection with his Kryptonian heritage is gone. Clark is still unactive in his social factor. and all in all, he is forgotten. Clark decides to move on with life... Until that is, a villain such as Brainiac arrives with promises to reunite Superman with humanity, and reconnect to Krypton, while also wishing to bridge humanity with communication with the rest of the universe. This makes him a more popular alien, and everyone loves him. But we know the true reason he has come...

[markaudette]

It's literally going to take nothing less than a think tank of the most gifted writers, director, producers, set & costume designers and actors who just GET what Superman is all about to breathe new life into the franchise. I vote to keep Brandon.

Brandon IS Superman. He's our Superman now. He is very much worthy of the cape and crest.

[markaudette]

Edit: double post. My bad.

[The War Machine]

One basic conclusion from this thread...

http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5769157,00.jpg

FTW.

[C. Lee]

A reboot....with Routh (I didn't have any problem with him)....without Bosworth....with Langella.....without the kid who played Jimmy....with Spacey (but Lex has to be the corporate one).....and without any references to the Reeve Superman movies (it's been done).

[O'Haire]

I don't care what they do. I just want Routh as Superman.

[Spiderine]

I thought this was a great cast except for Bosworth.

[mego joe]

I want only the best villains for a Superman series of rebooted films. Luthor will be a moderate villain in each film, but a larger more powerful enemy of Superman will be center spotlight.

Metallo
Bizarro
General Zod
Brainiac
Darkseid
Doomsday

Lex should always be an Antagonist, a supporting member of the cast like Perry and Jimmy, just not ALWAYS the main villain.