Could a Superman 'Requel' Work?

[BestGirl]

^Well, quite a few Superman fans don't want to see the kid storyline continued, and I don't think any future director will want to touch it. If you want to work SR into continuity, think of it as how the Superman saga ends. It can take place after the Donner films and any future Superman films we get.

 

[Webhead2006]

yea the whole kid thing is a big issue to try and fix if they did a sequel. And i would think some directors wouldnt want to get into that whole mess and would like to start on a clean slate and not have to worry what has happened in the past. So then they can do a film in the mannor they want and not get stuck using elements they dont want.

 

[Superfreak]

^Well, quite a few Superman fans don't want to see the kid storyline continued, and I don't think any future director will want to touch it. If you want to work SR into continuity, think of it as how the Superman saga ends. It can take place after the Donner films and any future Superman films we get.

nor do I, what I want to see is the kid plotline removed... but not ignored. Deal with it, get rid of the kid... franchise installment 3+ can be free of the mistake.

WebH, I understand the idea of a 'fresh start' but I also don't want to have to start over from the begining... (ie. with 1/2 the movie devoted to superman's back story, leaving only 45 minutes of the movie for the actual SUPERMAN cental narrative).

 

[Webhead2006]

Yea that is the one thing with a reboot/restart how do you want to go about his origins and since if they would want to be totally different i would want to see a new krypton/differences then past origins. But would it be better to start out start with origin or sprinkle it throughout the film like batman begins did and start off with superman/clark coming to metropolis for the first time.

 

[BuzzGrub]

I'm tired of the start, restart, start, restart.

I agree. I would love to see them continue on with the current timeline simply because I'm tired of the different continuities. At this point, if they wanted to take the Smallville cast to the big screen I would welcome that more than another reboot.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

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 don't get this. You're tired of the start, restart, start, restart? We have had one film series. Superman: The Movie, Superman 2, Superman 3 and Superman 4. All one continuity. Where is the start, restart there? THEN we have Superman Returns that fits into THAT continuity. No restart there either. If we were to get a restart now it would be the first time since 1978 that we would be getting one. So where are you pulling all this start, restart stuff.

And you're tired of simultaneous TV and movies that are unrelated? Huh? We have had Lois and Clark(one continuity), Superman: The Animated Series(one continuity) and now Smallville (one continuity) yet you want all these to have been related in some manner and related with the films on the big screen also? You really lost me. Why would they be related? As long as the continuity is followed within those shows, which they have, then what's the problem? It's not hard to follow.

You make it sound like Superman has gone through endless restarts, when in fact it hasn't. Simply that each program has had it's own start but so has every other superhero program. And Superman has YET to be restarted on the big screen. We are still in Donner continuity! If anything, we are in desperate need of a restart, because this is the first time we would TRULY be getting one on the big screen.

 

[SuperDaniel]

^Exactely.

 

[BuzzGrub]

I don't get this. You're tired of the start, restart, start, restart? We have had one film series. Superman: The Movie, Superman 2, Superman 3 and Superman 4. All one continuity. Where is the start, restart there?

I think it has to do with all of the reboots lately, Hulk, Bond, Star Trek etc. in film. All the different continuities on TV for Supes in the last twenty years.

 

[Showtime]

I think he is referring to the failed projects...

 

[FlawlessVictory]

I think it has to do with all of the reboots lately, Hulk, Bond, Star Trek etc. in film. All the different continuities on TV for Supes in the last twenty years.

What does TV have to do with film? So you want all Superman shows on TV and Superman films to share one continuity and be intertwined with each other? No superhero does this. Spider-Man hasn't, Batman hasn't, Wolverine/X-Men, why would someone expect this of Superman?

Yea, and um, look at what that restart did with Bond and look at what it will do with Star Trek. Hulk you can make a case for because Lee recently started a fresh continuity and then Leterrier came along and started another one shortly thereafter. But again folks, 1978!

I think he is referring to the failed projects...

Don't see what failed projects have to do with this though. Fact remains we haven't had a restart since 1978. Those failed projects never came to fruition so they are meaningless. Is someone really supposed to say, "Well a few years ago, we ALMOST had a Superman restart, so it would make no sense to do one now." That would hold no logic.

 

[BestGirl]

nor do I, what I want to see is the kid plotline removed... but not ignored. Deal with it, get rid of the kid... franchise installment 3+ can be free of the mistake.

WebH, I understand the idea of a 'fresh start' but I also don't want to have to start over from the begining... (ie. with 1/2 the movie devoted to superman's back story, leaving only 45 minutes of the movie for the actual SUPERMAN cental narrative).

Someone once suggested that Superman's backstory could be a mystery spread out over a whole trilogy. It's a little risky because there's no guarantee three movies would even be made, but it's one way of avoiding a full-blown origin in the first movie.

Another, less ambitious, idea would be to tell Supes' history through flashbacks in the next movie. That way we could start with Superman and action but still be introduced to his past.

 

[Sub-Zero]

is this really a 5 page thread? wasn't superman returns a "requel?" it wasn't good. word of mouth more than box office hurt it. it's really easy to make a superman movie, but the powers that be keep thinking we need to see the same crap over and over again. there are villains other than luthor out there : parasite, metallo, brainiac, hell even darkseid could work in a movie. it's superman, an ALIEN that protects earth, why is everyone at wb so dumb to think that it has to be REALISTIC and DARK? ugh...

 

[Oddzball]

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.

You're free to disagree all you want but the fact is six Spiderman vs the Green Goblin movies would be ruinous to the Franchise as would FF vs Doctor Doom, Batman vs joker, Red Skull in all Captain America movies and so forth.

Give luthor a break. Clancy Brown is not available to play him and frankly no one else is good enough to play Lex.

It's time for Brainiac or Bizarro or some combination of guys like Parasite and Mongul...

 

[Rorschach II]

Because that's what WB wants. They're keeping Routh and with the talks of Singer's camp still onboard, this may be the best way to satisfy everyone.

I'm just suggesting a scenario that works with what WB is currently doing.

They could also do one of those "because we said so" reboots, like The Incredible Hulk, and just keep Routh.

 

[Webhead2006]

if its a reboot i rather see a full on reboot so we can clean slate the whole thing. Its harder to try and reboot it and keep routh and all that.

 

[griffolyon12]

nor do I, what I want to see is the kid plotline removed... but not ignored. Deal with it, get rid of the kid... franchise installment 3+ can be free of the mistake.

WebH, I understand the idea of a 'fresh start' but I also don't want to have to start over from the begining... (ie. with 1/2 the movie devoted to superman's back story, leaving only 45 minutes of the movie for the actual SUPERMAN cental narrative).

I personally wouldn't mind if half of the film was devoted to his backstory as long as it was done in a different manner than how Donner did it. There is a whole new generation out there that the majority have never seen the Donner film. As a fan I can see how you do not want to see the origin told once more on film, since it was already done so well by Donner, but the fact of the matter is times are different now. Majority of the primary characters in the Superman universe have changed so much since the Donner film that I feel it is time to re-do the origin, but not retread what Donner did. The filmmakers need to think outside the box. Something in the vein of Superman: Birthright would be terrific. It'd feel familiar, but at the same time it would be something new that we haven't seen on film before.

 

[nintendo nerd]

They should just kill everybody and replace them with their younger brothers. Oh wait, Smallvill already did that.

 

[Nightwing1983]

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.

The only thing is that it's technically "aborting" Jason, so I'd like whatever leads to Jason's not being born to be the "fault" of Brainiac. I know that's kind-of silly, but that's how I feel.

 

[DChero]

Well, I think the main focus should be on the story itself, then to worry about continuity. There may be a great prequel story that alters they way Superman Returns is primarily viewed. For example Jason may not be Superman's son. That's something I see working for some people against the character.

If the best story out there is a reboot, then I have no problem seeing it. The same goes for a sequel.

 

[Nightwing1983]

^Well, quite a few Superman fans don't want to see the kid storyline continued, and I don't think any future director will want to touch it. If you want to work SR into continuity, think of it as how the Superman saga ends. It can take place after the Donner films and any future Superman films we get.

Mixed feelings here. The kid saga is what turned me off of Superman Returns, but at the same time, I don't want the feeling that that's what it's building toward.

On the other hand, am I obligated to? When I watch Superman: the Movie, I'm not obligated to think, "Superman Returns is what happens next."

 

[Nightwing1983]

Again, what if the movie could--however loosely--follow the first two, just like Superman Returns did, but with a completely different (i.e.: good) story, production values and everything else? Would that be so horrible? Would that constitute a "requel?"

 

[BestGirl]

Again, what if the movie could--however loosely--follow the first two, just like Superman Returns did, but with a completely different (i.e.: good) story, production values and everything else? Would that be so horrible? Would that constitute a "requel?"

It would probably confuse the audience to have the whole cast come back except the kid, and I personally am ready to leave the Donnerverse behind. I suppose it could work though I wouldn't like it.

 

[mego joe]

nor do I, what I want to see is the kid plotline removed... but not ignored. Deal with it, get rid of the kid... franchise installment 3+ can be free of the mistake.

WebH, I understand the idea of a 'fresh start' but I also don't want to have to start over from the begining... (ie. with 1/2 the movie devoted to superman's back story, leaving only 45 minutes of the movie for the actual SUPERMAN cental narrative).

IMO, better to have 1/2 the movie about Superman and his backstory than 1/2 the movie trying to eliminate the kid storyline. The first movie I'd see, the second I wouldn't. The just needs to go away and start over.

 

[mego joe]

^Well, quite a few Superman fans don't want to see the kid storyline continued, and I don't think any future director will want to touch it. If you want to work SR into continuity, think of it as how the Superman saga ends. It can take place after the Donner films and any future Superman films we get.

That would work perfectly if he had died at the end of Returns.

 

[Webhead2006]

The whole kid thing did put them in a big corner and any thing they would do about it will either pissed of folks who liked the kid or fans who didnt like him and all that. I still prefer to star fresh and make it totally clear to everyone this is not superman returns 2 or any connection to donnor/reeve elements. As for how to do the whole orgin deal there is may ways to go about it.

TIH ruote and show flashs of key origin pieces in opening credits, start film with clark/superman just arriving in the film and over the course of the film flash back to krypton/smallville days, or a full start from krypton-smallville-met way.