How much action should a Superman movie have?

[LastSunrise1981]

This film will be wall to wall action, mark my words.


WB will push for this to be an action film primarily. They've said it over and over.


This is great given how the past decades turned live action Superman into some wussy romantic comedy/drama. Good chance that approach is dead now.

But with Nolan overseeing the project it wouldn't be a wall to wall action film with no story.

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Lighter on romantic tone would be good for the first film imo. I just want to see chemistry and some slight hints as sparks flying "in the future" between Lois/Clark/Supes

 

[Webhead2006]

yea with the nolans/goyer we should get a good story, and good character developments. Then of course studio wants action and i am sure we will get a good bunch of action scenes/sequences.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

The original Siegel and Schuster Superman stories are all-action. You know the sequence in Superman (1978) when Supes deals with the effects earthquake, including saving the train, saving the bus on the bridge, and building a dam? Or in Returns, when there'sa very similar scene where he flies around and saves a guy falling from a crane, then catches a falling sign, destroys falling glass with his heat vision and so on? That's what the original stories are like, one thing after another, rapidly.

What people forget is that Superman is not, and has never been, about super-powered fighting. There were no supervillains in the comics for many years at first. Superman is about Supes rescuing people seconds from disaster in the most spectacular, dramatic way possible. It's about constant, ever-bigger challenges being thrown at him and him performing miracles to win through every one.

It's the Twelve Tasks of Hercules. That's what Superman is about.

 

[GreenKToo]

True, but if you want a huge hit these days, then people want non stop action in their CB films, including supervillain fights....Right or wrong, thats just the way it is.
People are spoiled now-a-days with films like Avatar, I.M., TDK, etc etc..They expect every film to be like those now.

 

[Webhead2006]

totally true there man.

 

[The Overlord]

The original Siegel and Schuster Superman stories are all-action. You know the sequence in Superman (1978) when Supes deals with the effects earthquake, including saving the train, saving the bus on the bridge, and building a dam? Or in Returns, when there'sa very similar scene where he flies around and saves a guy falling from a crane, then catches a falling sign, destroys falling glass with his heat vision and so on? That's what the original stories are like, one thing after another, rapidly.

What people forget is that Superman is not, and has never been, about super-powered fighting. There were no supervillains in the comics for many years at first. Superman is about Supes rescuing people seconds from disaster in the most spectacular, dramatic way possible. It's about constant, ever-bigger challenges being thrown at him and him performing miracles to win through every one.

It's the Twelve Tasks of Hercules. That's what Superman is about.

Except that would be boring for a whole film, Superman just saving people for 2 hours is a total bore. There should be a physical foe he fights, that's a better climax then superman just lifting an island.

Superman can save people, in the beginning, but I wouldn't watch a film where that's all he does.

 

[/(^_^)\]

I think everyone is getting carried away with "more action, more action!" It's the story that makes a movie good, whether you care about the characters, not just the amount of action. How much action did Donner's Superman: The Movie have? If you write a Superman film well, you don't need to inject it with action or a super-villain or anything. I don't want a Superman film that's like The Hulk.

 

[The Overlord]

I think everyone is getting carried away with "more action, more action!" It's the story that makes a movie good, whether you care about the characters, not just the amount of action. How much action did Donner's Superman: The Movie have? If you write a Superman film well, you don't need to inject it with action or a super-villain or anything. I don't want a Superman film that's like The Hulk.

Except superman Returns was just a remake Superman I and look how well that worked out. I can forgive Superman I for not having a lot of action, it was made in 78 and was the first Superman movie, but Superman II was still better because it had more action. I want story and action, Superman returns didn't do either of those things well.

Superman fights super villains in his comics, why can't he do that in the movie, guys like Brainiac and Metallo exist so Superman has someone he fight and they have the special effects tech to bring them to the life, so why not do it? There have been 5 Superman movies and the only villains from the comics we have seen are Zod and Lex, that's just a waste.

 

[/(^_^)\]

Except superman Returns was just a remake Superman I and look how well that worked out. I can forgive Superman I for not having a lot of action, it was made in 78 and was the first Superman movie, but Superman II was still better because it had more action. I want story and action, Superman returns didn't do either of those things well.

Superman fights super villains in his comics, why can't he do that in the movie, guys like Brainiac and Metallo exist so Superman has someone he fight and they have the special effects tech to bring them to the life, so why not do it? There have been 5 Superman movies and the only villains from the comics we have seen are Zod and Lex, that's just a waste.

As long as there's brains and heart behind it. That's all I'm saying.

I don't want an insufferable punch-fest like the Transformers films.

 

[GreenKToo]

I dont think we will have to worry about the story..Nolan loved it so much he personally went to WB with it.
It's the action that i'm kinda worried about. WB said that they understood that SR didn't have enough action and that they will remedy that in the reboot, but I wonder if they really do get it and if they really understand what folks want to see in a Superman film.
When the director is announced, The first few words out of his mouth will set the tone on what we can expect.

 

[The Overlord]

As long as there's brains and heart behind it. That's all I'm saying.

I don't want an insufferable punch-fest like the Transformers films.

I don't want it to be Transformers either. But I don't want it be a pretentious, boring mess like Superman returns was either.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Hopefully more than Ironman 2.

 

[Webhead2006]

yea i want a good balance of story/drama with good action/fights too.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Except that would be boring for a whole film, Superman just saving people for 2 hours is a total bore.

May I suggest you watch a little film called Superman: The Movie?

 

[Kevin Roegele]

True, but if you want a huge hit these days, then people want non stop action in their CB films, including supervillain fights....Right or wrong, thats just the way it is.
People are spoiled now-a-days with films like Avatar, I.M., TDK, etc etc..They expect every film to be like those now.

To be clear, I am all-for all-action, but Superman is a saviour, not a warrior. Batman is the one who primarily fights supervillains. Superman is there to help people.

 

[Gamma Burst]

Hopefully,there's gonna be a lot of action.

 

[The Overlord]

May I suggest you watch a little film called Superman: The Movie?

I liked Superman II better then Superman the Movie.

And Superman Returns was nothing more then rehash of Superman the Movie and I thought it was crap, so did a bunch of other people, which is why a sequel was never made.

I didn't have problem with the lack of fight scenes in Superman the movie for a few reasons, one its made in 1978 so it had limited technical capabilities, you couldn't have had a Parasite on the screen back then. Two it was the first Super Hero movie ever, so there was a bit of leeway I could give it. So obviously with a first superman movie they have use Lex and they didn't have the special effects capabilities to do most of the super villains from the comics so I had no problem with the way that movie turned out. However its not 1978 anymore, so I expect something better then rehash of Superman I. Would Superman II have worked if it was just a rehash of Superman I?

I mean you don't think its a problem that the only comic book villains we have seen on screen so far are Zod and Lex? I do. I think its a big problem.

Thew thing is a movie has to present the best and most epic stories of a super hero, not the kind of stories that are just filler. How the best superman stories just had Superman save people? Superman should save people, but I want to see an epic battle or two as well. Superman fights super villains in the comics, why shouldn't he in the movies? There tons of comics where Superman fights a super villain and how many episodes of the animated series had Superman fight a super villain vs. just saving people for the whole epiosde?

Superman just saving random people would be like a spider-Man movie where he just stops random bank robberies, not an epic enough story for a movie.

 

[Webhead2006]

totally man

 

[MiddleSuperName]

65% action 25% character development 10% romance