I suppose this was posted:
http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/08/03/brandon-routh-as-superman-again-why-not/
The fact is that with all the people who saw Superman Returns in theaters and all those who did on DVDs and TVs, now Brandon is Superman and the press tour for Scott Pilgrim is confirming that. Everyone refers to him as Superman and asks about a sequel or a new movie.
SR may not have worked as a "strong" reintroduction of the character to the younger viewers who probably were looking for a faster, less brainy approach, but now it would be stupid not to build on that.
Goyer and Nolan could probably do their "Wrath of Khan", keeping the cast (or most of it, I too would not cry if Lois get recast), the great Daily Bugle design and shifting the tone.
The same could have been done back in 2007 with the Justice League movie.
Exactly, SR has given the current generation its Superman and that is Routh. Wherever Routh goes, people refer to him as Superman and thats a fact which WB cannot deny.
I see no reason why Routh cannot continue in this supposed "standalone" Nolan produced Superman movie.
The potential with Routh is that they could have more than 4 or 5 Superman movies with him easily, regardless of who the director may be, etc, (That is if they plan to make each movie a standalone story, and not rely on a sequel aspect or a sudden cliffhanger.). Every few years, a new Superman movie could be made with Routh, regardless if a new director is in charge or not. They just have to ensure quality control.
and besides, all these lot saying that because its a reboot or reintroduction, that Routh cannot be cast again are obviously living in cuckoo land.
You do realise that in Iron Man, one of the main characters was recast, and Don Cheadle took over the role, even though he looks nothing like Terence Howard at all, yet the General audiences accepted it.
The same with Katie Holmes and Maggie Gyllenhall, most general audiences couldn't give a donkey's ass why the actor was replaced, they just accept it and get on with it.
and now the same with the Hulk, Mark Ruffalo looks nothing like Ed Norton, yet is taking over his role.
You get my drift?
With those casting rules in mind, I see no reason why Routh cannot continue. If general audiences can accept a different looking person as a character, surely they would be able to accept Routh in a new Superman movie, even if other cast members have changed??
Its only fanboys who seem to cry at this apparently ridiculous concept.
Having Routh continue as Superman is actually less risky than having someone entirely different, given the amount of merchandise floating around the world where Routh's face is plastered everywhere.
We are now in a unique situation which has never happened before,
where the lead actor for Superman is by far the best current choice. It took WB years to get Superman off the ground, they finally found a great choice, and because they weren't happy with that movie (which they were happy to pump 200 million into by the way) they decide to dump Routh?
Keep these points in mind people.