Man of Steel 2 and why the film should be greenlit

I thought MoS was a decent foundation but it would be weird to go back to it a lot later and when he's had a lot happen in non-sequel followups (which even those are a while ago now). Also not sure about involving aliens again, or Supergirl, but Brainiac with involvement with Krypton's downfall could make sense and Metallo I think has been pretty overdue.

 

If Brainiac isn’t involved in a Man of Steel sequel, I don’t even want to see it. They should’ve just made Burton’s Superman Lives back in the 90s. Lex, Brainiac, and Doomsday in one movie would have been amazing.

 

I would be okay with a reboot because MoS has a lot of things I don't like. Jonathan Kent's portrayal was awful, Lois knowing Clark's secret from the start, the way Superman is introduced to the world (he should've already been out in public before Zod called him out), Superman not caring about destroying the city, and of course Superman killing Zod... all things I don't like about the movie.

 

I thought Lois knowing the secret from the start was a refreshing change that felt pretty natural (and a new Lois finding out at the end of a movie or in a second one would feel very already-done) but yes Superman not debut-ting in public until after Zod arrived was change for its own sake and for increased conflict that felt felt very forced.

 

As someone who REALLY wanted to like Man of Steel, these are all my thoughts exactly. I lied to myself for a few years, telling myself that I loved the movie. But while I thought that it had a lot of positives going for it, I cannot help but think that it was a disappointment. That let down was only exasperated by BvS, which took a dump on the character. Snyder’s JL then showed that he would’ve taken the character even farther down the trail of being irredeemable. My perception is that ZS was ashamed of the character and his inherent goodness and felt the need to force him into being morally weak.

My son said it best to me: in a perfect Superman story, there should be no character arc for Superman. His morality is static and he does not waiver. He is the catalyst by which every other character in the story is transformed and his virtue and ethos are what drives everyone else’s character arcs, for good or for bad.
MoS fundamentally rejects that approach, which was displayed by the issues that you address. That’s why I personally see it as an enormous missed opportunity.

 

I liked MOS alot , but at this point, I think it's time to move on, wipe the slate clean, and start with a rookie Superman who you can build a new storylines on without the baggage of the past decade.

At the same time, I have zero faith in the current leadership at WB , and with the studios uncertain future , I'm skeptical they could even pull off a reboot at this point.

Despite alot of the chatter that Cavill may be returning, I still think a rebooted Superman franchise is the better way to go.

 

I think very few screenwriters or directors would want to make a film like that and if one did the critics would consider the movie average at best and also probably not realize that was intentionally done, would just think the movie was really about the other characters.

Though I do think it makes more sense to have that after all this time you still have the pretty big problem of most people don't want to see a new origin story but, Spider-Man: Homecoming and I guess The Batman aside (and those had popular recent predecessors), people also aren't necessarily willing to accept starting a new version *not* from the beginning either.

 

I actually don't think people, meaning the GA, wouldn't mind if a reboot started off without an origin.

It's basically people in the fan community who tend to expect and want each version of a hero origin be repeated .

But when it comes down to it, the GA is more than willing to just go with a reboot that doesn't repeat the Krypton stuff, growing up in Smallville, etc.

After 80 odd years, everyone knows Superman's origin and they could begin with Clark arriving in Metropolis for the first time ala The Lois and Clark pilot and you hit the ground running from there.

Then, if they want to revisit his origins they can do it in sequels or like SMHC, or it can be alluded to in a brief line of dialog.

The GA really doesn't need a refresher on why Clark has powers, how he grew up in Smallville etc.

Spiderman Homecoming , The Batman , even the first X Men film just began with the heroes in tact without ,showing how they got to where they are.

So showing the origin for a character like Superman who's had a thousand versions really isn't necessary.

A well executed story doesn't demand a retelling of Superman's origin.

 

I guess “screenwriters” “directors” and “critics” don’t like Superman. Because this is who he is. He is not what we got in MoS.

 

Boy, keep everything established already except Sasha Callie's Supergirl, huh? I see you.

That is an extremely bad take from just a basic story telling standpoint. Having an arc does not mean his personality or morality has to change. I mean, you are essentially echoing Snyder's Jesus metaphor in slightly different words.

 

I don't agree with that. I feel that in a Superman-centered story -- an origin, or one still dealing with his early years -- it's a big missed opportunity not to create conflict out of the implications of being a mega-powerful god, or an outsider, or having to deal with everyone's expectations, or being painfully aware of the world's suffering, or all of those put together. "What would Superman's inner life be like?" is a genuinely interesting question to build a film around, and a solid audience hook. I think MOS's mistake was answering that with "He'd be a mopey lost soul, incapable of personal interests or human-level skills". But broadly speaking, they had the right idea.

I like, for instance, the idea of exploring a savior complex... the assumption that only he should handle it all, and gradual realization that frail little humans can be just as heroic as he is. Or his admiration of humanity, who accomplish so much while having none of his powers... an ironic inferiority complex. Or creating controversy by taking up a political cause and standing by a principle, á la Cap in Civil War. There's a lot of juice there that none of the movies have tapped into cleverly enough, and I feel it's the only gateway towards making Supes feel truly "modern". I'm not very interested in seeing him framed as a can-do-no-wrong alien for another character's benefit.

 

Superman should be relatable, probably one of the best of us but still clearly one of us.

 

I get in general what they were going for with MoS, but honestly I didn't love it. People have already covered my bigger issues (Jonathan Kent, the excessive destruction without stopping to care, the mopey dark Superman, etc). Honestly starting fresh probably be for the best, but I feel like they can still rebound from here.

Feels like in today's world the kind of optimism and positivity of Superman should be needed more than ever. Doesn't have to be a rock that doesn't change, a Jesus metaphor, or perfection incarnate. But just needs to be that optimistic center of a universe that can get pretty dark. DC still has a chance to do things right. You can have the darker broody characters, the optimistic characters, and some comedic ones too. DC is full of heroes across the whole spectrum. Just let Superman be Superman.

 

Sasha Calle has already been cast as Supergirl so why not have her show up in this film also

 

If the reshoots for The Flash are what they’re rumored to be, Sasha Calle can (and should) be involved in a MOS sequel.

 

Agree with that. I’d love to see Cavill’s Superman as a mentor. Originally I thought to Shazam, but it seems that role is taken

Supergirl obvs works.