David Goyer hired to write Man of Steel

[SuperMike335!!]

Waitwaitwait.

When the hell did Superman stop being popular by the GA? I've seen, like 12 kids wearing \S/ shirts, and they sure as hell aren't fanboys.

Thats good point.

There is some TV show I just heard of too. Its been around for like 9 seasons, so someone is watching it.

I think the GA is still into Superman.

For a movie to work, they just need a movie that feels like they are watching Superman.

 

[Crook]

So? Relevence to the general audience comes from movies and he hasnt had a good one for years. Batman, Ironman and Spiderman are mainstream because of their movies.

Wow, a property only becomes relevant when its products are widely accepted by the audience? Amazing!

Last time Superman was mainstream was actually with Lois & Clark. And i remember how everyone was excited when S:Returns was being shot. Everyone was excited about getting a new Superman movie after all this time.

Who, the general audience? Yeah they sure anticipated it. So much so the film opened with disappointing numbers, and continued to do so for the rest of it's run.

So anyway, what does this have to do with Supes being a nice guy? Isnt that his hole shtick?

His waning popularity is in large part due to how corny he is when compared to other modern superheroes. Supes going to a children's hospital? Saving kitties from trees? Should I bring up that quote of yours regarding rolling eyes?

 

[Mr. Earle]

Wow, a property only becomes relevant when its products are widely accepted by the audience? Amazing!

No, i meant that besides the movies the general audience doesnt get into comics or knows anything more about the character. So it depends a lot on how well they manage those movies because otherwise the audience will find the next gig. The last few years and the few that follow will be about supernatural chickflicks for girls and superhero movies for boys.

Superman was unlucky that WB's incompetence didnt grant him a successful movie franchise.

His waning popularity is in large part due to how corny he is when compared to other modern superheroes.

I dont think so. I mean did SR fail because of it? I thought it failed because of how badly the donnerverse has aged, that the villain was a K island, etc. People arent sick of Superman because he's a nice guy. They re sick of the donnerverse, its cheesiness and how unrelatable it is.


So anyway, if every hero has to be grimdark to be successful, then they should adapt Azrael or whatever. Superman is Superman. He's the nice guy, always setting the good example, being optimist, and benevolent. Just give him some planet cracking action, a relatable Clark, clever banter and a good romance with Lois, serious character development for him, Lois and Lex and presto!

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Superman is still popular but he needs to be more popular to warant these 200mil+ budgets.

It doesn't matter if you're for pre or post-crisis, the fact of the matter is Superman is seen as lame by alot of people. The next movie doesn't have to make him some pathetic Batman-lite rebel but it does need to up his cool factor.

I've heard many people call the character a lame goodie two shoes. I haven't heard most normal people say that about Spider-man or Batman. I'm not asking or saying that they should make some lame brainless blockbuster in the vain of Transformers but they do need to up the cool factor.

That is exactly what Kurtzman, Orci and Abrams did with Star Trek and thats what needs to happen with Superman. It's easy really, love them or not the old movies need to be dropped. It's not the 1970's anymore, what was cool then isn't cool now.

WB made a good move in getting a guy to write the flick who probably wants to make a Superman movie for the 2000's.

 

[8Diagrams(WU)]

The reason i got into comics as a kid was because of superman but I also admit that there is a disconnect between the audience and the character. As time has gone by those same narrative techniques have aged and that innocence is just no longer there to be accepted today. It definitely didnt help that when they did make a change they went with electro superman (who would have worked nicely if he was a completely different character in the DCU)

Superman of course is not a dark character. He is the opposite of that really, but in todays age that romanticism of the character is just disregarded as silly when you see an actual human do it on screen. It just takes away from the seriousness of the epic nature behind the motion picture. What the movie has to concentrate on is on showing that superman is a symbol for hope and that when we think all is lost he is there to save us. He is the idealist that keeps fighting despite of the beating he is taking under ridiculous odds so he inspires hope in others.

truth justice and "the american way" just doesnt fly with todays audience. Superman will still be backed by the public but we need an action heavy sci fi epic and not so much of the romantic aspect of the character imo. we need a superman movie for today that puts aside the things that are not easily accepted by the audience to make it the best possible film for everyone

 

[Crook]

No, i meant that besides the movies the general audience doesnt get into comics or knows anything more about the character. So it depends a lot on how well they manage those movies because otherwise the audience will find the next gig. The last few years and the few that follow will be about supernatural chickflicks for girls and superhero movies for boys.

So what exactly are you disputing? Nothing you've said counteracts my point: Superman isn't relevant in today's age, as of now. Whether it be due to ABC or XYZ doesn't change that.

I dont think so. I mean did SR fail because of it? I thought it failed because of how badly the donnerverse has aged, that the villain was a K island, etc. People arent sick of Superman because he's a nice guy. They re sick of the donnerverse, its cheesiness and how unrelatable it is.

It failed because it did nothing to change perception of the character. If anything, all it did was reaffirm Superman's low-rank status. Look no further than Abram's Star Trek to see how to modernize a franchise while respecting the roots.

So anyway, if every hero has to be grimdark to be successful, then they should adapt Azrael or whatever. Superman is Superman. He's the nice guy, always setting the good example, being optimist, and benevolent.

I said nothing opposing otherwise.

 

[Octoberist]

i just think that Superman is probably one of the most iconic and misunderstood superheroes out there. Misunderstood by the ignorant, who thinks he's boring, etc.

 

[SuperMike335!!]

Superman is still popular but he needs to be more popular to warant these 200mil+ budgets.

It doesn't matter if you're for pre or post-crisis, the fact of the matter is Superman is seen as lame by alot of people. The next movie doesn't have to make him some pathetic Batman-lite rebel but it does need to up his cool factor.

I've heard many people call the character a lame goodie two shoes. I haven't heard most normal people say that about Spider-man or Batman. I'm not asking or saying that they should make some lame brainless blockbuster in the vain of Transformers but they do need to up the cool factor.

That is exactly what Kurtzman, Orci and Abrams did with Star Trek and thats what needs to happen with Superman. It's easy really, love them or not the old movies need to be dropped. It's not the 1970's anymore, what was cool then isn't cool now.

WB made a good move in getting a guy to write the flick who probably wants to make a Superman movie for the 2000's.

That is a good point.

I felt that SR really dorked him up too. Its hard to relate to a guy who is hiding in the bushes, hardly has anything to say, and gets shanked by a 1970's villain.

 

[Mr. Earle]

So what exactly are you disputing? Nothing you've said counteracts my point: Superman isn't relevant in today's age, as of now. Whether it be due to ABC or XYZ doesn't change that.

Well all it takes is a bad Batman movie for the audience to forget him. They arent actual fans that will follow the character hoping for the next movie to rock. "The last film sucked, Batman now sucks, lets go see _____"

Give Superman a good movie franchise and a TV series to hook the kids up in DC fandom and he'll be back on top.

It failed because it did nothing to change perception of the character. If anything, all it did was reaffirm Superman's low-rank status. Look no further than Abram's Star Trek to see how to modernize a franchise while respecting the roots.

Agreed.

 

[Octoberist]

It failed because it did nothing to change perception of the character. If anything, all it did was reaffirm Superman's low-rank status. Look no further than Abram's Star Trek to see how to modernize a franchise while respecting the roots.


I said nothing opposing otherwise.

You hit the nail on the head in regards to Superman Returns. You want to make a movie like that appealing to the non-fans. Or even make a 'hater' into a believer. It didn't that. In fact, like what you said, it 'reaffirm' some of the ole stereotypes of Superman.

 

[Crook]

Well all it takes is a bad Batman movie for the audience to forget him. They arent actual fans that will follow the character hoping for the next movie to rock. "The last film sucked, Batman now sucks, lets go see _____"

Give Superman a good movie franchise and a TV series to hook the kids up in DC fandom and he'll be back on top.

You're not saying anything nobody knows. It's a fast-moving audience, if you don't keep up with expectations, you'll get left behind. This has been true since...forever.

All you've been doing is supporting my statement that Supes is irrelevant.

 

[Mr. Earle]

He is irrelevant as long as he doenst have a good movie franchise. Like Batman post Schumacher. Like you guys said, if they make Superman cool again (like Abraams did with Star Trek) then he will be relevant, mainstream and successful.
Although the superhero movies galore that's coming isnt working in his favour.

 

[8Diagrams(WU)]

batman begins had to fight the previous movie stigma to find even greater success in its sequel. Similar situation applies here. They will come out the gate swinging with something very detailed and realistic to distance itself from the previous incarnations

 

[X Knight]

the tricky thing with Superman.....is that you need to make him cool and relevant....without straying away from his core character.

Superman is his own character. He is not Batman, Spider-man, Iron Man, or Wolverine.

you just can't make him "cool" by making him a walking bad a** or making him "hip."

Hopefully, if Goyer is indeed writing the next Superman film, he will be able to make Superman cool and relevant but also stay true to his character.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I can't deny that it is probably going to be a little tough to change people's perceptions of the charcter.

There has to be a perfect balance of bringing in new non-fans and not spitting in the faces of people who liked old Superman.

And Again, Star Trek did this. Most people liked Star Trek and felt that it kept the feeling of old Trek while updating it for new people...people who actually hated Trek.

Hell, I don't care for James Bond flicks but I dug Casino Royale. To bad the follow up was lame.

My neice and nephews don't know s**t about the original Trek T.V series and they loved JJ abrams flick.

Superman can be saved but the next movie is going to have to take some risks.

It was a risk to use that convoluted and not entirely sensible Time Travel plot

It was a risk to cast not only an unknown lead but little known co-stars

It was a risk to completely change the interier of the Ship

It was a risk making making Spock and Uhura a couple

Yes Superman Returns risked something by making Superman have a kid and that was an um...interesting risk but they also made Superman seem like an A-hole in the process by making him have unprotected sex with Lois then running off without telling her where he was going. That risk was f**ked up when the writers made Superman do that. So I want well thoughtout good risks.

 

[Kurosawa]

You re so eager to take every discussion to this obsession of yours with respecting the original writers that its not even funny. Seriously Kurosawa, are you Siegel himself? Or if he is dead, are you his ghost? Jesus.

Nobody disrespected him. We acknowledge his contribution but we re all telling you that he wrote Superman before WW2 and thus Superman has to evolve through time. Even you admit that businessman Lex is better than goofy scientist. "YOU DONT RESPECT TEH SIEGELS YOU WILL BURN IN HELL".

Sometimes even the ****ty bat forums seem better than this. At least there you can discuss the character without some guy screaming "you dont respect Bob Kane and Bill Finger" at every post that doesnt agree with some version of the character that existed BEFORE MY ****ING PARENTS WERE EVEN BORN.

The reason you don't see these kinds of conversations among Batman fans is THEY DIDN'T TAKE BATMAN AWAY FROM HIS ROOTS AND HIS CORE. There is no Pre-Crisis/Post-Crisis schism among Batman fans. And no, I feel Maggin's three dimensional character Lex is better than Kingpin clone Lex, it's just that I don't feel that character is completely worthless, especially if Superman is depicted as fighting for the oppressed and has a strong social conscience.

If examples from All Star Superman are what you are using to prove how inferior pre-Crisis Superman is to post-Crisis than you obviously don't know anything about pre-Crisis Superman. I am a huge fan of Byrne's take on Superman but some of you guys are being ridiculous. I'm starting to get the impression that half of you don't even know anything about pre-Crisis Superman.

Nah, they don't. If they did they wouldn't post covers from superdickery like those were definitve.

Superman is still popular but he needs to be more popular to warant these 200mil+ budgets.

It doesn't matter if you're for pre or post-crisis, the fact of the matter is Superman is seen as lame by alot of people. The next movie doesn't have to make him some pathetic Batman-lite rebel but it does need to up his cool factor.

I've heard many people call the character a lame goodie two shoes. I haven't heard most normal people say that about Spider-man or Batman. I'm not asking or saying that they should make some lame brainless blockbuster in the vain of Transformers but they do need to up the cool factor.

That is exactly what Kurtzman, Orci and Abrams did with Star Trek and thats what needs to happen with Superman. It's easy really, love them or not the old movies need to be dropped. It's not the 1970's anymore, what was cool then isn't cool now.

WB made a good move in getting a guy to write the flick who probably wants to make a Superman movie for the 2000's.

Exactly. That's why I think a return to his early populist roots would be a good idea. Superman is seen as too establishment. Early Supes was hardly establishment. They can have a Supes who is heroic and noble but still takes no **** and puts creeps in their place.

the tricky thing with Superman.....is that you need to make him cool and relevant....without straying away from his core character.

Superman is his own character. He is not Batman, Spider-man, Iron Man, or Wolverine.

you just can't make him "cool" by making him a walking bad a** or making him "hip."

Hopefully, if Goyer is indeed writing the next Superman film, he will be able to make Superman cool and relevant but also stay true to his character.

Going away from the core is what led to his decline in the first place.

 

[Webhead2006]

YEa for me i respect what siegel and shuster did decades ago and they created the characters we love today. So yes i respect them and understand what they did with the character. But like others have said the characters are decades old with many other writers/artists who came aboard to define and change the character to what we have today. so for me i enjoy the character as a whole. Yes i know more of post crisis stuff myself. Since i am a post crisis age fan. But i see too that both have their good and bad points. That is why i really want them to look at the character as a whole. And find the best stuff to use while making it fresh and relatable to fans and the non fans. Like what JJ did with star trek.

 

[markmclre]

Why not something like Action Comics 775 - What's So Funny About Truth, Justice, and the American Way

 

[Lead Cenobite]

From my perspective, I can't see anything that makes Superman any less cool than any other popular superhero today. If Superman is so lame and corny, what does that make Spider-Man? Especially the Tobey MacGuire Spider-Man. Was he badass? Was he edgy? Hell no. He was just a goody two shoes geek, and people loved those movies, and they're all box office smashes.

 

[Octoberist]

From my perspective, I can't see anything that makes Superman any less cool than any other popular superhero today. If Superman is so lame and corny, what does that make Spider-Man? Especially the Tobey MacGuire Spider-Man. Was he badass? Was he edgy? Hell no. He was just a goody two shoes geek, and people loved those movies, and they're all box office smashes.

oh that's easy, and mind you i like both characters.

Spider-Man, to me, was like kinda a 60s (or modern at the time) take on Superman. He was a kid from the working class who had to juggle his superhero duties with real life (girls, school, work, etc). In many ways, Marvel decontructed the superhero genre back then, giving these heroes some real life problems.

that's why Spider-Man still conncets with the audience today. I think he's more of a real American than Superman (in some ways) where as Superman is like the ideal American. Peter has struggles besides being Spider-Man.

It's not that Superman is boring. I think it's his simplicity that makes him great. But he also an easy character to screw up.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Well the difference between Spider-Man and Superman is so obvious that no one should have to explain.

You can not like the Spider-Man movies but they were huge smashes that connected with audiences. Superman's latest wasn't a huge smash and it didn't connect with alot of people so...Superman has a huge problem. Thats all that really matters.

I like Superman but he as become stale because, when it comes to his movieverse, people seem to be afraid of doing something new, interesting and updated.

I'm not asking for the greatest movie of all time but it would help if the next Superman movie were actually fun/entertaining. And thats just for starters. People can disagree but the audience and critics found the first two Spider-Man movies to be fun/entertaining adventure flicks. Same with Iron Man. IMHO the next Superman movie should follow the Iron Man and Spider-Man 1 and 2 molds.

Lets look at JJ Abrams script for a second. It was nothing like Superman and should have been thrown out but atleast JJ tried something new. After the deserved uproar over JJ and Burton's Superman flicks WB decided to play it too "safe," and ended up with a IMHO bland movie that offered things that we mostly had seen before in the franchise.

I think hiring Goyer and J-Nolan to write the screenplay is a good step but I hope WB doesn't get cold feet and decide to make another love letter to Donner's classics.

 

[Octoberist]

Superman is a product of his time, and while I don't think he should be radically changed in the new movie, there should be risks to make him relevent to today's audience.

i absolutely agree that Superman should take the same path that JJ Abrams took with Star Trek. Fresh but still respectful.

 

[craigdbfan]

I mean my mom really, really liked Superman Returns thinking it was a great sequel to the Donner's Superman. That should be a testament that a different fresh overhaul is necessary.

None of my friends liked it. While it wasn't my ideal SM movie I still enjoy it for what it is as disappointing it may be.

 

[Octoberist]

Superman Return was well directed but terribly misguided. it was just..trying too hard.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

My Brother liked Superman Returns, some other people in my family liked Superman Returns but the problem is the movie was a turn off to a good amount of folk and the story didn't really have anywhere interesting to go.

All they would have done is pander to the people who didn't like the kid by getting rid of him or limiting his screentime to only a few mintues. They would have also jettinson Lois's man. The second movie wouldn't have been good to anybody because it would have spent it's time trying to win back the folks who didn't like the first. And nobody would've wanted to see that. Even the Superman Returns fans should be happy about a Donnerless sequel.