No Origin... Confirmed by Latino Review

[\S/JcDc\S/]

It's very important for them to show the origins, because if we are being introduced to a new Superman, we have to see how he becomes Superman and why....... this is Superman Returns all over again???? Can't anybody see that??

I had that thought but dunno if I ever said it

I'd hate to see the same problems happening, many of which would not exist if a friggin origin was used

 

[BH/HHH]

honestly........ Not many people know the origins. It's been more than 30 years we seen Superman origins done properly on the big screen?? Smallville doesn't count, it's TV, plus, who watches Smallville except for possible Superman fans and girls who like Tom Welling.....

It's very important for them to show the origins, because if we are being introduced to a new Superman, we have to see how he becomes Superman and why....... this is Superman Returns all over again???? Can't anybody see that??

Ya know I think WB's just think maybe it was the action that caused SR's downfall. I actually think the main factor was Johnny Depp and the Pirates movie. But even if they do a film with Superman and without any Krypton/Smallville stuff it doesnt mean they'll mess up the mythos with a kid n that. PLUS they can always get to the origin later if necessary, in Byrnes MOS all he knows is he arrived in some rocket hes unsure of where hes from etc until later on in the stories.

 

[Nathan]

It's only Superman Returns all over again if it's based on the Donner era, we don't get Superman punching any super powered villains around and Lex has another real estate plot.

 

[BH/HHH]

It's only Superman Returns all over again if it's based on the Donner era, we don't get Superman punching any super powered villains aroound and Lex has another real estate plot.

exactly

 

[Webhead2006]

totally director as i keep saying since we know this will be a new take on the character we definately she have the chance to see why things happened for these characters and put them on their paths to be who they are and all that.

 

[LightningFlash]

honestly........ Not many people know the origins. It's been more than 30 years we seen Superman origins done properly on the big screen?? Smallville doesn't count, it's TV, plus, who watches Smallville except for possible Superman fans and girls who like Tom Welling.....

It's very important for them to show the origins, because if we are being introduced to a new Superman, we have to see how he becomes Superman and why....... this is Superman Returns all over again???? Can't anybody see that??

How does Smallville not count? I'm not talking about the current seasons(or the last five), but when it first started, it had the highest ratings ever for the WB. People remember 2001. And Superman Returns was pretty much like an Incredible Hulk. We got hints on Superman's origins/beginnings. We had a retcon of Superman being an idiot thinking Krypton still existed, which is, imo, the worst storyline ever. Of course Krypton is destroyed.

And I think if they just started it as Lois & Clark had it, this movie will be fine, by the way. I don't need to see a possible hour-long origin for Superman. Superman Returns just brought my excitement for the character down a notch; we need a fun movie. We need a smackdown between Superman and a much powerful villain than Lex(I'm rooting for Brainiac!!).

And also, they could take another hint towards L&C and having John and Martha explain Clark's origins either by voice-over through credits(which would be very different), or they tell Clark in person(and most likely, John will be alive in this film if they go by Byrne's version). And that latter is more L&C then the former, I don't know why I said the former first though, it doesn't make sense to what I was going for, lol.

And most likely we'll get flashbacks with Brainiac anyways. So, we don't need a full-fledge origin. We will get plenty of hints, imo.

 

[Webhead2006]

yea that could work and as i said i would be fine with that, and be glad to have any origins and all that in there. It would just be another mistake to not have anything.

 

[kalelkilla]

You guys act like an origin will take up the entire movie, you don't need every detail but you need to answer the "why" and the "how" Superman became the man he is today that is all. If your trying to reboot Superman for a new generation then you absolutely have to have some of the origin. So what if there is an origin so what? I'm ready to sit through a 3 hour Superman movie, damn 4 hours if its good .

 

[ChickenScratch]

The last thing I need to see is another origin. Really, unless it's some radical departure from the story (like an elseworld's take) then I'm pretty sure even the most general of audiences knows who Superman is, where he's from and what he can do. We are talking the first superhero here, and still number 1 or 2 in popularity (as a solo character, I know a certain team book that sells better).

 

[Frodo]

People know Superman's origin. It's not a mystery . People may know different post and pre-crisis versions depending on which version they grew up with, but it's not like anyone off the street would be baffled if you asked them where Superman came from. Superman the movie wasn't the first film to do his origin anyway and it wasn't the last . It's been done several times since i.e The cartoons in the 80's to an extent, Superboy, Lois And Clark, Superman the Animated Series , Smallville, SR to an extent, Not to mention reruns of the 50's series , serials etc and all kinds of media Superman is in. The public has had 70 years worth of the story being told and retold again and again . Flashes in the opening credits wouldn't be bad but really there isn't a need to go the STM route and do the whole thing all over again . Unless, as someone said , they do a radical change like the JJ Abrams version would have, there isn't a great need to shoe horn it in there imo.

 

[SuperMike335!!]

Does anyone know how much they would have to pay the siegels before using the origin?

 

[Nightwing1983]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

http://www.superherohype.com/news/supermannews.php?id=9101

All this talk about the WB going with a reboot, now this news about no reboot. I don't like that we are not getting a reboot, I want to be introduced to this new Superman, not just thrown in my face like Brandon Routh....

Since there is no origin, you can't consider this a reboot in my opinion. A reboot is a restart, which this is not

I'm happier without the origin. I'd rather they just said, "hey, let's put Superman on whatever adventure we want." As long as it retcons Superman Returns out of existance, I'm happy.

Plus, just because it's not the origin, that doesn't mean you're not "introduced to this new Superman." An introduction doesn't need to be an origin. Within the first half hour, if they have him doing a typical Superman-thing--hanging out in the Daily Planet, then thwarting an ordinary bad guy--that's an "introduction" in my book.

 

[LightningFlash]

I'm actually loving my idea of having Jonathan and Martha Kent doing a voice-over of how they first meant Clark during the meteor shower during the opening credits.

 

[Nightwing1983]

People know Superman's origin. It's not a mystery . People may know different post and pre-crisis versions depending on which version they grew up with, but it's not like anyone off the street would be baffled if you asked them where Superman came from. Superman the movie wasn't the first film to do his origin anyway and it wasn't the last . It's been done several times since i.e The cartoons in the 80's to an extent, Superboy, Lois And Clark, Superman the Animated Series , Smallville, SR to an extent, Not to mention reruns of the 50's series , serials etc and all kinds of media Superman is in. The public has had 70 years worth of the story being told and retold again and again . Flashes in the opening credits wouldn't be bad but really there isn't a need to go the STM route and do the whole thing all over again . Unless, as someone said , they do a radical change like the JJ Abrams version would have, there isn't a great need to shoe horn it in there imo.

Right. And let's not forget the number of children's books and other smaller merchendise that's retold it... not to mention the comics themselves (the first issue of Man of Steel sold a million copies). Now, someone might argue that most people haven't seen any of these, except for the first film (which made almost a billion dollars in today's money and spent many years as a staple of syndicated movie-of-the-week airings, and won an Oscar for visual effects); but also the George Reeves series, which 90%+ of kids watched back then, Smallville which drew in about 8-million viewers a week in its prime (probably more given the lousy way in which TV ratings are counted) and all the rest.

 

[Nightwing1983]

I'm actually loving my idea of having Jonathan and Martha Kent doing a voice-over of how they first meant Clark during the meteor shower during the opening credits.

The only problem I have with that is that if it isn't the origin, it might be confusing for Jonathan Kent to be alive. Otherwise, I do like that as a narrative device.

 

[rocco2216]

Can WB use Jonathan and Martha Kent?

 

[Kurosawa]

Does anyone know how much they would have to pay the siegels before using the origin?

There's still lawsuits ongoing I'm sure. Until all the suits and appeals are done I wouldn't expect WB/DC to negotiate with them, since WB/DC is hoping to win the suits and not have to pay anything.

Can WB use Jonathan and Martha Kent?

Not sure. The Jonathan and Martha names were not set until the 50's, but the fact that he was raised by a couple and the couple themselves were in the first two weeks of comic strips that the courts ruled Siegel and Shuster owned.

 

[LightningFlash]

The only problem I have with that is that if it isn't the origin, it might be confusing for Jonathan Kent to be alive. Otherwise, I do like that as a narrative device.

Well John Byrne kept Jonathan alive, so if the script is indeed mostly from Byrne's usage of Superman, then it would make sense to just keep Jonathan alive as well, ala L&C.

Can WB use Jonathan and Martha Kent?

They are allowed to use characters and elements outside of Action Comics 1. And I don't think the Kents were in Action Comics 1.

 

[Kurosawa]

Well John Byrne kept Jonathan alive, so if the script is indeed mostly from Byrne's usage of Superman, then it would make sense to just keep Jonathan alive as well, ala L&C.



They are allowed to use characters and elements outside of Action Comics 1. And I don't think the Kents were in Action Comics 1.

They were in the first two weeks of newspaper strips which they also own, although they were not named-the mother was named in Superman #1 as Mary. The ruling says S&S own the parents, I assume that means both sets of parents.

 

[rocco2216]

They were in the first two weeks of newspaper strips which they also own, although they were not named-the mother was named in Superman #1 as Mary. The ruling says S&S own the parents, I assume that means both sets of parents.

So then WB can't use Martha and Jonathan Kent then. I guess they could show Clark running the farm himself like in Superman 3.

 

[Webhead2006]

yea thats the thing i hate with all the legal stuff who has what and what each can do. For me i really hope things can get settled out and both wb/dc comic and the heirs and work out agreements over wb/dc to continue using all elements via license fees(which i hope can be a reasonable sum for both). Becuae i want to have any future tv shows/cartoons/movies have the chance to use all traits of the character and story.

As for origin in reboot as i said for myself i would be happy if we just get some flashs and certai things told. So we could set up stuff to be used in later movies if they cant be done in this first film. But i just dont want no origins told, and not getting to see how these characters became who they are and why they are like this or that in this next film. Cause i want to see characters grow and see why they are different this time. Plus come on this reboot should have the chance to make its mark in the superman lore and be able to do its own thing.

As i said i dont want for the rest of my life time the only film origin of superman to forver be donner's smallville/donner's krypton. There is so much more you can do with krypton and with smallville. So we should have the chance to see where they can take things.

 

[Kurosawa]

So then WB can't use Martha and Jonathan Kent then. I guess they could show Clark running the farm himself like in Superman 3.

I don't know...Siegel and Shuster own Action #1 and that means they own Clark and Lois, and you know they'll use them...I'm not really sure how all this works really. Sooner or later the two sides will settle.

 

[rocco2216]

I don't know...Siegel and Shuster own Action #1 and that means they own Clark and Lois, and you know they'll use them...I'm not really sure how all this works really. Sooner or later the two sides will settle.

Well WB are using Clark and Lois so who knows.

 

[DavidTyler]

I'm very much a fan of doing a new origin. For those who insist we've seen it all before ... WE HAVEN'T.

I keep posting how Krypton would be the story of Jor-el's heroic actions against a ruling body who refuse to face their own iminent demise and how he risked all to save his infant son. It wouldn't have been more than 10 minutes. You'd be surprised how much story you can squeeze-in in only that amount of time. Smallville wouldn't have been much more than 5 minutes. That would barely impact the running time of the film and the 'fidgeting' quotient would be fairly low because there'd be so much intersting stuff going on.

I'm so wanting to see a beautiful new version of Krypton on the big screen a la Byrne. Those tall golden spires reaching impossibly high up into a bright blue sky and, all around them, lush foliage.

I don't know how Goyer/Nolan will separate this new franchise from anything that's gone before without some kind of origin. Maybe, like some are saying, we'll get that from Brainiac as a flashback. Maybe the film won't have Clark know where he's from until his encounter with him.

 

[Timstuff]

I'm not going to make any assumptions about whether or not the origin will be covered until we have more info. Not being an origin movie could simply mean that it won't be an hour into the film when he finally dons the costume. We could have the Kents finding Clark when he's a baby, and then during the opening credits showa montage of him growing into maturity and donning the costume by the end.

Personally though, I really wish they'd go all out with the origin and have Metallo, Lex, and some other evil robots integrated into it. I had a really cool concept for the scene where young Clark discovers that he can fly, and it would take a lot of cues from the introduction of Supergirl from STAS. He'd be flying alongside birds, skimming over lakes while his reflection gleams in the water, all with an enchanted look of adolescent glee on his face. Like most fanboy ideas we'll probably never see that anyway, but still there's a lot that could be done with the origin today that was impossible in 1978.