Will you interpret the next \S/ film as a reboot or prequel?

[Superfreak]

Originally Posted by FlawlessVictory

Honestly, I could live with Routh coming back if I was assured this has absolutely nothing to do with SR. Donnerverse gone, real estate Lex gone, etc... But I have a feeling once Routh comes back that there will be other semi/loose connections to SR which I have no interest in.

List the things in SR, that couldn't be righted by a good writer with a prequel. (assuming this prequel would throw the donnerverse out the window as vague history, in exchange for non-vague history of the prequel).

Connections with SR isn't the problem for me... it's the connection with STM and SII. Sever those ties and many of the so called SR mistakes, suddenly become free floating until the individual origins of these mistakes is redefined. Jason no longer has to be the love child, Lex no longer has to be 'crazy' (although could have been driven mad by superman pre-SR) etc etc.

[FaT_tONle]

Originally Posted by lujho

If you use routh you HAVE to keep SR in continuity... you either have to have it be a prequel or a sequel. Retconning SR out of existence, as much as I wish it had never been made, is just wrong from a storytelling point of view, and it's kind of insulting to Singer.

I am not sure how relevant the lead actor for Superman really is. I mean we are talking about one guy here. To me I see it as SR was homage to Donner... it ended up being the Batman & Robin of the franchise (IMO)... they want to reboot... but they want to use the same actor because he is still young and they liked him. I really don't think it is anything more than that. How do you not make it a prequel? New version of Lex would help... I would seriously consider casting Luthor along the lines of the animated series. How on Earth do you sell that as a prequel? That's something definitive... connections to Donner completely severed...

Originally Posted by Superfreak

Connections with SR isn't the problem for me... it's the connection with STM and SII. Sever those ties and many of the so called SR mistakes, suddenly become free floating until the individual origins of these mistakes is redefined. Jason no longer has to be the love child, Lex no longer has to be 'crazy' (although could have been driven mad by superman pre-SR) etc etc.

More complicated than theoretical physics... they'd be better off making a sequel.

[Man of Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by lujho

And BTW, all Levitz said was that he's in the mix, not that he's definitely in.

Actually no...

SHH used the phrase "in the mix."

What Levitz said was "Brandon Routh has come around the offices in New York and Los Angeles as of late to talk about Superman and what we want to do."

And then he went on to talk about how the studio loves Brandon.


He never used the phrase "in the mix" to indicate other candidates in the running besides Brandon.

[Superark]

Originally Posted by FaT_tONle

I say reboot... **** it. WB should go crazy with it. Completely re-tell the origin. Make Clark meet Lois for the FIRST time. Start over. That's the only way you compeletly severe connections to the Donnerverse if they are in fact keeping Routh. WB's rationale should be... "okay we gave you guys Superman Returns as homage to the Donnerverse.... now time for the REAL Superman movie... and we got an actor who has established credibility with the role." That's the only way this works IMO... DO NOT sell this as a prequel. That would be a bigger disaster than SR itself.

Saying something to that affect is a good idea and makes sense.

[batman44]

Originally Posted by Man of Tomorrow

Actually no...

SHH used the phrase "in the mix."

What Levitz said was "Brandon Routh has come around the offices in New York and Los Angeles as of late to talk about Superman and what we want to do."

And then he went on to talk about how the studio loves Brandon.


He never used the phrase "in the mix" to indicate other candidates in the running besides Brandon.

Actually it was Latino Review who said Routh was "in the mix".

[lujho]

Originally Posted by FaT_tONle

I am not sure how relevant the actor really is. I mean we are talking about one guy here. To me I see it as SR was homage to Donner... it ended up being the Batman & Robin of the franchise (IMO)... they reboot... but they want to use the same actor because he is still young and they liked him. I really don't think it is anything more than that. How do you not make it a prequel? New version of Lex would help... I would seriously consider casting Luthor along the lines of the animated series. How on Earth do you sell that as a prequel? That's something definitive... connections to Donner completely severed...

I'm just completely against having the same actor in two entirely different continuities/universes. When you use the same actor you're letting people know it's the same universe... if it isn't, then you're just causing unneccessary confusion, and betraying anyone who liked the previous version.

Using Routh in a complete reboot would be like Sean Connery remaking a Bond film he was already in... it just makes no sense - it's the same actor playing the same character and yet these two sets of events do not exist together in one timeline. Oh, wait they did that.

Different universe - different actor. That's just the way it should be. Anything else is just ugly.

[lujho]

Originally Posted by Man of Tomorrow

Actually no...

SHH used the phrase "in the mix."

What Levitz said was "Brandon Routh has come around the offices in New York and Los Angeles as of late to talk about Superman and what we want to do."

And then he went on to talk about how the studio loves Brandon.


He never used the phrase "in the mix" to indicate other candidates in the running besides Brandon.

Quite right, my mistake. Still, doesn't mean he's definitely in, just that they're discussing it. Probably trying to figure out what to do just as much as we're trying to figure out what they're doing.

[Bester]

I'm guessing WB will go for a generic Superman movie, with no direct ties to the previous movies (apart from possible returning SR cast). I just hope they change that damn suit...

[lujho]

Originally Posted by Superark

Saying something to that affect is a good idea and makes sense.

But people who didn't care for the dredged-up Donnerverse don't neccessarily want to be reminded of that movie AT ALL. Routh is a big glaring neon sign that will constantly do that.

[FaT_tONle]

Originally Posted by lujho

Different universe - different actor. That's just the way it should be. Anything else is just ugly.

Anyone being objective can not argue with that... but you can't tell me rebooting with a new cast is always the best option. There is always a risk. TIH severely underperformed IMO. People don't always want change. Routh worked for audiences hence WB might keep him. That's all there is too it.

[Superfreak]

Originally Posted by lujho

But people who didn't care for the dredged-up Donnerverse don't neccessarily want to be reminded of that movie AT ALL. Routh is a big glaring neon sign that will constantly do that.

this point become moot if this so called prequel is an origin

[Superfreak]

Originally Posted by FaT_tONle

More complicated than theoretical physics... they'd be better off making a sequel.

It's not complicated at all, just fill in the blanks like madlibs

[lujho]

Originally Posted by Superfreak

this point become moot if this so called prequel is an origin

Origin or not, Routh will remind people of SR, and if it contradicts the continuity of SR in any way or just ignores it forever, people are going to be confused that it doesn't match up with SR.

Ifthe keep Routh they HAVE to keep SR in some way or another (and possibly retroactively "fix" it's errors). It's just incredibly messy if they don't.

Maybe the next movie could be set after SR, BUT, have flashbacks in it. Teh first flashback could cover the first half-hour and re-cap Lois and Clark's first meeting etc, Jason's conception, and Superman leaving for Krypton.

Then back to the present for a while, then a flashback to what happened at Krypton (great way to use the deleted scene from SR). then back to the present for the rest of the movie, where Superman deals with some threat that's related to krypton, and Jason and Richard are dealt with... Richard probably has to die.

Question: When Jason was concieved, who do you think she slept with? Superman 2 continuity is out (original or Donner version - neither make sense). I always assume that she must has slept with Superman (without knowing he was really Clark) shortly before he left and she met Richard.

But what if she actually slept with Clark? In some moment of vulnerabillity (for both of them), Clark, desperately wanting to reveal his secret and/or say goodbye before leaving, and Lois starting to get a vague sense of actually having some feelings for Clark, have a one night stand or something? maybe Clark saying goodbye to her as Clark about to go on Holiday was the only way he could do it - he couldn't do it as Superman.

It's something you'd have to handle carefully to get it right, but seriously, the huge logic flaw in SR regarding this matter HAS to be dealt with if you keep Routh (and just as I believe that same actor MUST mean same universe, it has be be the same supporting cast too).

If Lois had slept with Clark, Jason pushing the piano would have been the reveal to her that Clark - Superman. That'd be an interesting way to do it.

So SR happens, Clark and Lois's feelings grow stronger, poor Richard buys the farm, leaving the way open for Clark and Lois to get together with their kid. Of course he's not going to just move in like a douchebag, they wouldn't even get together until the next film, but still.

Honestly this is the only way I can think of doing it that works best - you sever ties to the Reeve films, fix up the continuity errors, and get to subtly re-jig the universe a bit visually without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I still think a complete recast/reboot is the way to go, short of getting in a time machine and preventing Singer from making the mistakes he made on SR, but if we're stuck with SR then this is the best way to go about things.

Again - rebooting competely with Routh is ****ing stupid, inelegant and ugly.

[Bad Superman]

I don't see how WB says they're using Hulk's re-boot as an example for Superman to follow. If they have serious intentions on giving the Superman franchise a brand new fresh start, they have to completely ignore what has been done previously. Routh coming back and a rumored Spacey returning as Lex IS NOT the right way to re-start the franchise. People will be confused.

It's as if WB would've re-started the Batman franchise with George Clooney after the Batman and Robin debacle.

If they go through with those casting plans, I interprert the next film to be another clusterf#$k.

[Superark]

Originally Posted by lujho

But people who didn't care for the dredged-up Donnerverse don't neccessarily want to be reminded of that movie AT ALL. Routh is a big glaring neon sign that will constantly do that.

It seems with Superman there is no pleasing everyone. No matter what they do there always going to be someone for or against WB's direction.

[Superark]

Originally Posted by Bad Superman

I don't see how WB says they're using Hulk's re-boot as an example for Superman to follow. If they have serious intentions on giving the Superman franchise a brand new fresh start, they have to completely ignore what has been done previously. Routh coming back and a rumored Spacey returning as Lex IS NOT the right way to re-start the franchise. People will be confused.

It's as if WB would've re-started the Batman franchise with George Clooney after the Batman and Robin debacle.

If they go through with those casting plans, I interprert the next film to be another clusterf#$k.

In all fairness to WB, they never used the words "reboot" and they certainly never said they were going to use the Hulk as an example to follow.

[lujho]

Originally Posted by Bad Superman

It's as if WB would've re-started the Batman franchise with George Clooney after the Batman and Robin debacle.

EXACTLY! The could have made a ****ing kickass Batman film with Clooney and completely ignored Batman and Robin and everything that came before... but it would still be stupid because Clooney would be in it yet none of the stuff in B&R ever happened to him. You just don't do that. It's silly.

If they go through with those casting plans, I interprert the next film to be another clusterf#$k.

Heh. Agreed. Full reboot with Routh starring is just boneheaded.

[lujho]

Originally Posted by Superark

It seems with Superman there is no pleasing everyone. No matter what they do there always going to be someone for or against WB's direction.

Yes, but they'd stand a whole lot better chance of pleasing people if they didn't make huge silly, easily avoidable mistakes mistakes in their first film that have to fixed or ignored in the next one.

If the 2006 film had be a a complete reboot unconnected from the previous films with no silly continuity errors and logic holes a whole hell of a lot more people would have been pleased.

[Bad Superman]

Originally Posted by Superark

In all fairness to WB, they never used the words "reboot" and they certainly never said they were going to use the Hulk as an example to follow.

They didn’t?

http://www.superherohype.com/news/su...ws.php?id=7609

Warner Bros. Confirms Superman Reboot
Source:Steelsheen
August 22, 2008


Just a few days after this article was posted, Warner Bros. Pictures Group President Jeff Robinov has told The Wall Street Journal that the studio is going to be reintroducing Superman. We assume this will be similar to how Louis Leterrier's The Incredible Hulk was a reboot of Ang Lee's Hulk. Here is what the article says:

Warner Bros. also put on hold plans for another movie starring multiple superheroes -- known as "Batman vs. Superman" -- after the $215 million "Superman Returns," which had disappointing box-office returns, didn't please executives. "'Superman' didn't quite work as a film in the way that we wanted it to," says Mr. Robinov. "It didn't position the character the way he needed to be positioned." "Had 'Superman' worked in 2006, we would have had a movie for Christmas of this year or 2009," he adds. "But now the plan is just to reintroduce Superman without regard to a Batman and Superman movie at all."
The article also talks about Warner Bros. adapting other DC properties over the new few years. "By 2011, Mr. Robinov plans for DC Comics to supply the material for up to two of the six to eight tent-pole films he hopes Warner Bros. will have in the pipeline by then," it says. Those projects will likely be about single characters at first, and will be darker much like The Dark Knight:

With "Batman vs. Superman" and "Justice League" stalled, Warner Bros. has quietly adopted Marvel's model of releasing a single film for each character, and then using those movies and their sequels to build up to a multicharacter film. "Along those lines, we have been developing every DC character that we own," Mr. Robinov says.

Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well.

The studio is set to announce its plans for future DC movies in the next month. For now, though, it is focused on releasing four comic-book films in the next three years, including a third Batman film, a new film reintroducing Superman, and two movies focusing on other DC Comics characters. Movies featuring Green Lantern, Flash, Green Arrow, and Wonder Woman are all in active development.

We'll let you know as soon as the studio has announced its plans for future DC movies.

As for the Hulk's comparisson, you're right. It wasn't Hulk. It was Batman Begins.

[I Am The Knight]

Originally Posted by Bad Superman

They didn’t?

http://www.superherohype.com/news/su...ws.php?id=7609

Reboot

That was ComingSoon's/Superhero Hype's "take" on the article. The R word never slipped from Robinov's mouth

[dark_b]

so WB told SHH to use the word ''reboot'' in the title?

[Superark]

Originally Posted by Bad Superman

They didn’t?

http://www.superherohype.com/news/su...ws.php?id=7609

Warner Bros. Confirms Superman Reboot
Source:Steelsheen
August 22, 2008


Just a few days after this article was posted, Warner Bros. Pictures Group President Jeff Robinov has told The Wall Street Journal that the studio is going to be reintroducing Superman. We assume this will be similar to how Louis Leterrier's The Incredible Hulk was a reboot of Ang Lee's Hulk. Here is what the article says:

Warner Bros. also put on hold plans for another movie starring multiple superheroes -- known as "Batman vs. Superman" -- after the $215 million "Superman Returns," which had disappointing box-office returns, didn't please executives. "'Superman' didn't quite work as a film in the way that we wanted it to," says Mr. Robinov. "It didn't position the character the way he needed to be positioned." "Had 'Superman' worked in 2006, we would have had a movie for Christmas of this year or 2009," he adds. "But now the plan is just to reintroduce Superman without regard to a Batman and Superman movie at all."
The article also talks about Warner Bros. adapting other DC properties over the new few years. "By 2011, Mr. Robinov plans for DC Comics to supply the material for up to two of the six to eight tent-pole films he hopes Warner Bros. will have in the pipeline by then," it says. Those projects will likely be about single characters at first, and will be darker much like The Dark Knight:

With "Batman vs. Superman" and "Justice League" stalled, Warner Bros. has quietly adopted Marvel's model of releasing a single film for each character, and then using those movies and their sequels to build up to a multicharacter film. "Along those lines, we have been developing every DC character that we own," Mr. Robinov says.

Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well.

The studio is set to announce its plans for future DC movies in the next month. For now, though, it is focused on releasing four comic-book films in the next three years, including a third Batman film, a new film reintroducing Superman, and two movies focusing on other DC Comics characters. Movies featuring Green Lantern, Flash, Green Arrow, and Wonder Woman are all in active development.

We'll let you know as soon as the studio has announced its plans for future DC movies.

As for the Hulk's comparisson, you're right. It wasn't Hulk. It was Batman Begins.

Again, where did Robinov say the word reboot? I saw the word "reintroduction". SHH put reboot in their title of the article. The word or headline of "reboot" isn't even on the actual page of where the article was orginally posted (Wall-street Journal)

[I Am The Knight]

Originally Posted by dark_b

so WB told SHH to use the word ''reboot'' in the title?

No, I don't think so. Here:

Just a few days after this article was posted, Warner Bros. Pictures Group President Jeff Robinov has told The Wall Street Journal that the studio is going to be reintroducing Superman. We assume this will be similar to how Louis Leterrier's The Incredible Hulk was a reboot of Ang Lee's Hulk. Here is what the article says:

Comingsoon/SHH "assumes" it means a reboot (As would most people) but the truth of the matter is that Robinov himself never said the actual word. Obviously I DO think they're gonna reboot, even if they keep Routh. I'm not saying anything here. Just sayin'. WB is kinda crazy.

[Bad Superman]

Sorry guys, I just realized you're low on thinking gas. Later.

[I Am The Knight]

Originally Posted by Bad Superman

I have been corrected. I must exit now.

Fixed