Could a Superman 'Requel' Work?

[Oddzball]

Yup, plenty of lame scenes from S:TM, Superman 2 and SR. Which is why I want a complete break from this Donner Superman and I want something exciting onscreen that we haven't seen before from someone who bothers to open up a comic book.

NO Luthor. No Luthorish type guy as in S III. Complete and total Luthor not here story. There have been, counting Supergirl, 6 films in the Superman Franchise since 1978. Luthor was the main meance in 1, 3, 4 and SR. He was the secondary Menace in two and Vaugn and Dunaway played imitaion Luthors in 3 and Supergirl. Luthor and Luthorish get a TIME OUT.

It's time for WB to show they can do a Superman movie without Luthor. Either that or start making Luthor Franchises with Superman as guest star.

BRAINIAC is OVERDUE!!!

 

[Lighthouse]

I still don't understand how it can be anything but a sequel or a reboot in some fashion. Sure, Wrath of Khan and Batman Forever didn't have plot threads that needed to tie up from the previous movie. SR does.

 

[Astrodust]

There are many easy ways to do a 'Requel' for the next film.

Essentially this idea is a sequel, while also rebooting everything at the same time with a new origins. A great compromise for everyone.

For example:

- Have the film kick off in the future of the SR verse amidst an apocalyptic battle between Superman (in Kingdom Come attire) and Brainiac

- Brainiac then travels back in time to 1978 to murder baby Kal-El. The baby survives in his ship but Brainiac launches a devastating attack on Metropolis that changes everything.

- Clark now grows up in a very different world; where Lexcorp rebuilds Metropolis and controls the city, America is plunged into war etc and Clark must be the light to guide the world out of darkness.

- There could also be a terminator-esque story here with Superman driven to defeat Brainiac in the present, in order to prevent the apocalyptic dystopia we witness at the start of the film (in the future).

This scenario would allow for Brandon Routh to continue as Superman, Spacey as corperate Lex, Huntington as Jimmy Olsen and Frank Langella to play a gruffer Perry White closer to his Frost/Nixon potrayal.

So you are saying they should do a film that's a vague sequel to another film, which was a vague sequal to another film. I can't see how this can be confusing at all. Especially when the only thing that stood out in SR was that he had a kid, which now has magically vanished.

 

[Superfreak]

NO Luthor. No Luthorish type guy as in S III. Complete and total Luthor not here story. There have been, counting Supergirl, 6 films in the Superman Franchise since 1978. Luthor was the main meance in 1, 3, 4 and SR. He was the secondary Menace in two and Vaugn and Dunaway played imitaion Luthors in 3 and Supergirl. Luthor and Luthorish get a TIME OUT.

It's time for WB to show they can do a Superman movie without Luthor. Either that or start making Luthor Franchises with Superman as guest star.

BRAINIAC is OVERDUE!!!

Luthor should be in EVERY superman movie... it's pretty simple. Look at TAS, Luthor was in almost every single episode, although he was not always the primary villain... and sometimes he was even an allie. Know your superman formula

 

[mjbull23]

NO Luthor. No Luthorish type guy as in S III. Complete and total Luthor not here story. There have been, counting Supergirl, 6 films in the Superman Franchise since 1978. Luthor was the main meance in 1, 3, 4 and SR. He was the secondary Menace in two and Vaugn and Dunaway played imitaion Luthors in 3 and Supergirl. Luthor and Luthorish get a TIME OUT.

It's time for WB to show they can do a Superman movie without Luthor. Either that or start making Luthor Franchises with Superman as guest star.

Absolutely. Completely in agreement.

 

[X Knight]

IMO...Luthor is too important to be left out of a Superman movie. He's more than a villain......he's just as important of a supporting cast member as Lois, Jimmy, and Perry.

Now....he SHOULD NOT be the main or sole villain in EVERY MOVIE, as that would get old very quickly. But, he should always have some kind of presence, whether it's working behind the scenes as a villain, working with another villain ( like Brainiac ), or in some cases, working with Supes against a villain ( also like Brainiac )......

A Superman movie without any presence of Luthor would be like a Superman movie without Lois.....

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^I disagree because a movie is different from a comicbook and a T.V show.

 

[Nightwing1977]

I agree that Lex should only have a small app. in the next film. Just make him the background character while focusing more on the other supervillian like Brainiac or whoever than Lex.

 

[Sam]

There are many easy ways to do a 'Requel' for the next film.

Essentially this idea is a sequel, while also rebooting everything at the same time with a new origins. A great compromise for everyone.

For example:

- Have the film kick off in the future of the SR verse amidst an apocalyptic battle between Superman (in Kingdom Come attire) and Brainiac

- Brainiac then travels back in time to 1978 to murder baby Kal-El. The baby survives in his ship but Brainiac launches a devastating attack on Metropolis that changes everything.

- Clark now grows up in a very different world; where Lexcorp rebuilds Metropolis and controls the city, America is plunged into war etc and Clark must be the light to guide the world out of darkness.

- There could also be a terminator-esque story here with Superman driven to defeat Brainiac in the present, in order to prevent the apocalyptic dystopia we witness at the start of the film (in the future).

This scenario would allow for Brandon Routh to continue as Superman, Spacey as corperate Lex, Huntington as Jimmy Olsen and Frank Langella to play a gruffer Perry White closer to his Frost/Nixon potrayal.

nice idea for a comic book story, but not for movie.

 

[Oddzball]

IMO...Luthor is too important to be left out of a Superman movie. He's more than a villain......he's just as important of a supporting cast member as Lois, Jimmy, and Perry.

Now....he SHOULD NOT be the main or sole villain in EVERY MOVIE, as that would get old very quickly. But, he should always have some kind of presence, whether it's working behind the scenes as a villain, working with another villain ( like Brainiac ), or in some cases, working with Supes against a villain ( also like Brainiac )......

A Superman movie without any presence of Luthor would be like a Superman movie without Lois.....

You can do a movie without Luthor. Hell, George Reeves did a long TV series without him.

I'd like to see Brainiac get driven off by Superman at the beginning of the film and going to plan B, which involves making a Superman oppoent. Bizarro. Two major villains no room for Luthor.

 

[Christmas]

I am convinced that Routh could come back with Singer or in a whole new production and most people wouldn't mind.

 

[GreenKToo]

I dunno. I would like for Routh to return but if Singer did as well, then my excitement level would drop, and drop big time.

 

[Christmas]

excuse my writing there. I was unclear.

Basically, if Routh came back, with a whole new cast and production team, (or in any other scenario) I don't think the GA would hold it against them.

 

[Superfreak]

^I disagree because a movie is different from a comicbook and a T.V show.

Idisagree with you.

Lex is a core member of any superman cast. He should be in every movie... but he should only be the primary villain in the opener. But in sequels he should be that man plotting in the background. All the while other villains are doing their thing with Superman. Infact, this is what made the TAS Lex so absolutely perfect. He was never the primary villain, but always the one pulling strings.


Even in a movie franchise, Superman's relationship with Lex is just as important as Clark's relationship with Lois. Lex is a core supporting role, after the intro movie (which has been done).

I feel that the Lex-Lois relationship could be interesting in a 'wrath of kahn' like reboot (ie. same players, but the universe is tweaked slightly). As someone pointed out, the difference is that SR has loose ends, while STTMP didn't.

I think the easiest way to do this, is have Jason and Richard go into hiding... because Lex knows, and is still at large... relegate them to the Kent farm, with Ma. Meanwhile, go on with a Brainiac invasion from NK. Pardon Lex, because of his knowledge of crystals. Have a huge Brainiac/supes/military brawl while Lex figures out where the son of superman is hidden, and tries to assasinate him. Superman uses the scraps from Brainiac to revive the fortress, and send Jason to kandor, where he can be cared for.

 

[GreenKToo]

excuse my writing there. I was unclear.

Basically, if Routh came back, with a whole new cast and production team, (or in any other scenario) I don't think the GA would hold it against them.

I gotcha. Yeah, Routh would be fine by me if he came back, but I have serious reservations about Singer.

 

[DChero]

I really think the best solution is to make a prequel to SR, but not directly lead to Superman leaving at the end.

For example, Superman's origin, enter villain, and wrap it up with Lois falling in love with him. It doesn't point to any exsistance with a kid, any casting choices are available, and we base it's sequel possibilities off of how it does. I don't think we need to blatantly risk a reboot yet, because if the reboot fails we run out of options. I mean, how many times can we continue to reboot the same character?

 

[project13]

you mean like superman returns? SR was not a direct sequel.


whait a minute. isnt this similar to star trek?

Yes, it is Star Trek...

So, what you guys are saying is that the "requel" would reboot Superman just like the upcoming Star Trek film?

 

[Webhead2006]

well star trek is a bit different untill the film is out and we see the whole film we dont really know how it really fits with the rest of trek's cannon or doesnt. Personally there i still in the feeling its just a standard prequel/sequel setting and more so with old spock and nero coming from the 24th century and all that jazz.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Why complicate things? Just do a reboot, origin and all.

 

[BATZARRO WWD]

Idisagree with you.

Lex is a core member of any superman cast. He should be in every movie... but he should only be the primary villain in the opener. But in sequels he should be that man plotting in the background. All the while other villains are doing their thing with Superman. Infact, this is what made the TAS Lex so absolutely perfect. He was never the primary villain, but always the one pulling strings.


Even in a movie franchise, Superman's relationship with Lex is just as important as Clark's relationship with Lois. Lex is a core supporting role, after the intro movie (which has been done).

I feel that the Lex-Lois relationship could be interesting in a 'wrath of kahn' like reboot (ie. same players, but the universe is tweaked slightly). As someone pointed out, the difference is that SR has loose ends, while STTMP didn't.

I think the easiest way to do this, is have Jason and Richard go into hiding... because Lex knows, and is still at large... relegate them to the Kent farm, with Ma. Meanwhile, go on with a Brainiac invasion from NK. Pardon Lex, because of his knowledge of crystals. Have a huge Brainiac/supes/military brawl while Lex figures out where the son of superman is hidden, and tries to assasinate him. Superman uses the scraps from Brainiac to revive the fortress, and send Jason to kandor, where he can be cared for.

Why is Superman abandoning his son again? There are already many jokes about Superman's role as a father in Returns. Do you think the reaction will be positive if he WILLFULLY leaves him?

 

[Superfreak]

Why is Superman abandoning his son again? There are already many jokes about Superman's role as a father in Returns. Do you think the reaction will be positive if he WILLFULLY leaves him?

I don't get what your saying?

I'm more in the direction that Superman can't be Jason's father... not in the way that Richard can be. Just like Kal'el was raised by a human, perhaps Jason should also.

Moreover, in the concept I'm outlining, Jason would be mortally wounded, and superman would be doing a father's duty (just like his father actually) by sending his son away to survive. He's not abandoning Jason, but ensuring that he survives whatever damage Luthor has done to him.

 

[Christmas]

I think the jason storyline dies with Singer being off of the project.

What director would jump at the chance of sorting thru that tangled situation?

 

[Superfreak]

I think the jason storyline dies with Singer being off of the project.

What director would jump at the chance of sorting thru that tangled situation?

I think a director would get more recognition for righting the problems, rather than ignoring them and treating them like they didn't happen.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

I think the jason storyline dies with Singer being off of the project.

What director would jump at the chance of sorting thru that tangled situation?

Agreed.

I think a director would get more recognition for righting the problems, rather than ignoring them and treating them like they didn't happen.

Recognition by who? The fanbase is pretty much split on whether they want to see Jason again. Most of the GA was indifferent towards that storyline so they could care less either way, if Jason was in the next film or the next film started with a "clean slate". The risk isn't worth the reward. There are not enough people clamoring to see what will happen next with Jason and Richard. So why bother? So long as the next director brings in Routh then most people will be happy, then he can "start over" with a Batman Forever type film if that's what the studio decides.

 

[Superfreak]

Agreed.



Recognition by who? The fanbase is pretty much split on whether they want to see Jason again. Most of the GA was indifferent towards that storyline so they could care less either way, if Jason was in the next film or the next film started with a "clean slate". The risk isn't worth the reward. There are not enough people clamoring to see what will happen next with Jason and Richard. So why bother? So long as the next director brings in Routh then most people will be happy, then he can "start over" with a Batman Forever type film if that's what the studio decides.

I'm all for a restart, if it excludes an extended explanation of what happens on krypton... ie. kal'el lands on earth in a rocket, and go from there. Get to Superman ASAP, and get on with a decent story. Leave the background as something to be explored over the course of the film and franchise, rather than being barfed out at the beginning.


that being said, I'm also hard on continuity. I'm tired of the start, restart, start, restart. I'm tired of simultaneous TV and movies that are unrelated. etc etc. I'd prefer to see a film that provides a solution to the fanbase's dislikes. That's why I keep theorizing on plotlines.

I think that a direct sequel, that minimizes Jason and Richard's involvement, by hiding them on the Kent farm as a sort of witness protection (for superman) is a simple way to do this. Have Luthor on the lam, but know Jason's secret. Lois would have nothing to do with hiding. Richard would be the responsible parent, and protect Jason on the farm. This would be a secondary plotline (not the central plotline of a film) that would help to wrap up those disliked narrative threads, while allowing for the franchise to continue without leaving loose ends.

As I proposed above, a Brainiac invasion from NK is a logical next step. Luthor getting a pardon, as well as government resources, with his knowledge about the Kryptonian crystal technology, lets him get closer to discovering where jason is hidden. This is the central plot line of the film.

by the end, Luthor discovers Jason's location and mortally wounds him. Allowing for either death, or some supermagic that spirits jason away to the old fortress where he can be saved, and be sent to another dimension as the price (or whatever)


I keep repeating it, because I'm thinking about it, and trying to reconceptualize it better. I just think the universe can be salvaged, and problems dealt with, and even removed with some careful writing. Again, I'm all for a restart, but I love continuity, and would prefer that someone take the lame mistakes of SR, and deal with them, rather than pretend they didn't happen.