Please, no "Superman Begins"

[Kahoot]

i find it funny that fanboys are the only ones that dont care for origin stories.

yeah...because the general audience will be sooo excited to wait an hour before superman starts smacking things around. the truth is, the only ones that give a damn period about an origin, whether they use it or not, are fanboys. the general audience will not care whether they use it or not.

IMO, this movie's already in danger of being formulaic...why make it worse by wasting time with the same origin format STM created in the first place?

I'm totaly not a Superman Fanboy, actually I find Superman to be the worst of all the Superheros coz's he's just too super. But I've had enough with all these origin storys this decade and we all know most of them but the different movie directors all have to put some spin on it to make people wanna see it again. Just do as short an origin as possible and go into the movie. Maybe do flashbacks showing things in the movie and it's sequels but don't get dragged down with another origin movie.

 

[Superman-Prime]

No reboot, please! They need to make a sequel of SR immediately!!

 

[November Rain]

is superman's origin integral to the character?

 

[Kahoot]

is superman's origin integral to the character?

Depends how you play it. If you say he's an Alien then you kind of need some sort of back story but if he's just a super powered orphan looking to find himself and save people then that's not so back story heavy.

 

[batman44]

I much prefer an origin movie, I also think it's the best way to move away from the Donner Universe.

 

[NotFadeAway]

An origin story is essential to the rebirth of the franchise. We must move away from Donnor.

Superman vs. Braniac in an origin flick centered around Superman's first appearence in the world and the trickle effects. Sounds different from Donnor already.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I can see the arguments for and against a reboot, and ultimately I'd understand if the filmmakers did go the "Superman Begins" route.

However, I personally think the best option would be to go for the "loose sequel" approach, as seen with "The Incredible Hulk" or the Bond films over the years.

For argument's sake, let's take something along the lines of the current Brainiac story from Action Comics as a template. You have a pre-credits sequence set during the last days of Krypton, retro-actively working in Brainiac as playing a role in the planet's destruction. Then perhaps an opening montage showing the Kents finding baby Kal-El and Clark's evolution into Superman.

From there, you reintroduce the recast Daily Planet ensemble, likely with certain issues (IE the whole deadbeat dad thing) quietly streamlined out of continuity. And whether you're going for respectable businessman Lex Luthor or supervillain mad-scientist Lex Luthor, you reintegrate him as a character in darker, less campy fashion.

And from there, you introduce the threat of Brainiac, and launch right into the epic action.

 

[Commodore Schmidlapp]

I can see the arguments for and against a reboot, and ultimately I'd understand if the filmmakers did go the "Superman Begins" route.

However, I personally think the best option would be to go for the "loose sequel" approach, as seen with "The Incredible Hulk" or the Bond films over the years.

For argument's sake, let's take something along the lines of the current Brainiac story from Action Comics as a template. You have a pre-credits sequence set during the last days of Krypton, retro-actively working in Brainiac as playing a role in the planet's destruction. Then perhaps an opening montage showing the Kents finding baby Kal-El and Clark's evolution into Superman.

From there, you reintroduce the recast Daily Planet ensemble, likely with certain issues (IE the whole deadbeat dad thing) quietly streamlined out of continuity. And whether you're going for respectable businessman Lex Luthor or supervillain mad-scientist Lex Luthor, you reintegrate him as a character in darker, less campy fashion.

And from there, you introduce the threat of Brainiac, and launch right into the epic action.

I like where you're going here, and I prefer the businessman Lex.

 

[I Am The Knight]

What a useless thread...And yes, I AM sorry I clicked on it, so save it.

 

[myway]

I can see the arguments for and against a reboot, and ultimately I'd understand if the filmmakers did go the "Superman Begins" route.

However, I personally think the best option would be to go for the "loose sequel" approach, as seen with "The Incredible Hulk" or the Bond films over the years.

For argument's sake, let's take something along the lines of the current Brainiac story from Action Comics as a template. You have a pre-credits sequence set during the last days of Krypton, retro-actively working in Brainiac as playing a role in the planet's destruction. Then perhaps an opening montage showing the Kents finding baby Kal-El and Clark's evolution into Superman.

From there, you reintroduce the recast Daily Planet ensemble, likely with certain issues (IE the whole deadbeat dad thing) quietly streamlined out of continuity. And whether you're going for respectable businessman Lex Luthor or supervillain mad-scientist Lex Luthor, you reintegrate him as a character in darker, less campy fashion.

And from there, you introduce the threat of Brainiac, and launch right into the epic action.

This guy has the right idea. For those that were unhappy with SR or previous Superman movies, this does the trick. For people like me who liked SR and the Donner movies, it still fits in with continuity. I think the latest Hulk movie did a great job of rebooting the franchise for those who didn't like Ang Lee's movie but if you liked Lee's movie, you could sort of fit TIH in continuity wise.

 

[Sam]

However, I personally think the best option would be to go for the "loose sequel" approach, as seen with "The Incredible Hulk" or the Bond films over the years.

Maybe i am the only one on this, but i think that Incredible Hulk failed.

While i enjoyed the movie, and i think its better than the first one, on marketing standpoint to put franchise on the right track was a HUGE flop.

Besides, Hulk origin was told 4 years ago. So, no point on redo his origin. Superman's was done 30 years ago. Big difference there.

And Superman Returns was exactly that: "loose sequel". Point is, there are stuffs done in SR that cant be missed an a "loose sequel", like Superman havind a kid.

 

[NeoRanger]

For those that were unhappy with SR or previous Superman movies, this does the trick.

It really doesn't. If I see yet another Krypton made out of crystals, I'll deliberately pop a blood vessel in my brain. And if you change the crystals, if you change Lex, if you change the music, you really just end up with a reboot that tells no origin.

SR was a loose sequel and it didn't work. The general idea of a loose sequel isn't necessarily a bad one, but at the moment, it's unwise.

 

[The Guard]

Jor-els story is not as simple as what you've posted here. It's a story about a rebel who has to resort to drastic means to save the life of his son. It's a great story and a great bit of science fiction if it's done right. It could be epic in it's own right like one of the great science fiction films of the past - like Logan's Run.

Jor-El's story could be epic, sure. But a Superman movie should be about Superman, and Jor-El's role in his mythology. Not about just Jor-El and his personal struggles. In Superman mythology, Jor-El is essentially responsible for saving Kal-El's life, and indirectly, for his Kryptonian heritage, and that's about it in terms of the big picture. Could you make him more relevant? Sure, and maybe you should, but you don't have to. Richard Donner actually tried to make Jor-El more relevant than he'd ever been to Superman's overall story by having Jor-El "train him" and provide him with his mission on Earth.

See, I don't neccessarily have to see Krypton explode, or Jor-El send Kal-El away, or Jor-El's struggles with the council in the first movie. I don't even neccessarily want to see Ma and Pa Kent finding him. I want to see the thematic relevance of all that. I want to see an element Superman movie, not one that merely ticks off the basics of the origin story.

STAS was fun, but I don't know that it's first few episodes should be used as the blueprint for the next Superman movie. Braniac being tied to Superman's origin could work, and is all well and good. But I say you make a movie that deals with the origin of Superman in the public eye, a movie that hints about where he came from, not a movie that is directly about where he came from. He need not even know he's FROM Krypton to start with. That creates conflict, drama, etc, and it gives you somewhere to go in a sequel that is dramatically satisfying. You start with Braniac, and his ties to Krypton right off the bat, and where do you go? Right to another alien threat? Zod? Darkseid? The Death of Superman?

 

[fabman]

Jor-El's story could be epic, sure. But a Superman movie should be about Superman, and Jor-El's role in his mythology. Not about just Jor-El and his personal struggles. In Superman mythology, Jor-El is essentially responsible for saving Kal-El's life, and indirectly, for his Kryptonian heritage, and that's about it in terms of the big picture. Could you make him more relevant? Sure, and maybe you should, but you don't have to. Richard Donner actually tried to make Jor-El more relevant than he'd ever been to Superman's overall story by having Jor-El "train him" and provide him with his mission on Earth.

See, I don't neccessarily have to see Krypton explode, or Jor-El send Kal-El away, or Jor-El's struggles with the council in the first movie. I don't even neccessarily want to see Ma and Pa Kent finding him. I want to see the thematic relevance of all that. I want to see an element Superman movie, not one that merely ticks off the basics of the origin story.

STAS was fun, but I don't know that it's first few episodes should be used as the blueprint for the next Superman movie. Braniac being tied to Superman's origin could work, and is all well and good. But I say you make a movie that deals with the origin of Superman in the public eye, a movie that hints about where he came from, not a movie that is directly about where he came from. He need not even know he's FROM Krypton to start with. That creates conflict, drama, etc, and it gives you somewhere to go in a sequel that is dramatically satisfying. You start with Braniac, and his ties to Krypton right off the bat, and where do you go? Right to another alien threat? Zod? Darkseid? The Death of Superman?

Couldn't agree more... So, who do you think should be the villain in the Superman reboot?

 

[The Guard]

Superman himself. Eh? Eh?

 

[fabman]

Yeah.

 

[SymbioteKal-El]

This whole reboot thing is getting way out of hand. SR had its problems, but the last thing we need imo is another origin story; and a "dark" one at that. BB was good and necessary because we never really saw Batman's origins on the big screen. Superman's origins make up the first 40 min of S:TM so we'd really just be getting a remake with a full on reboot. At this point in the Superman franchise, his character is well established, as is Lois, Lex etc; he's primed for a showdown with a Supervillain. Don't supporters of a reboot realize that in order for the movie to be anything but a string of Superman money shots, a reboot is going to have to spend siginficant time reintroducing everything? Now that everybody's ga-ga over TDK, they think we need to give Superman a "Begins" movie of his own so that he can fight a supervillain; totally unnecessary. Of course the Mods will think that this has nothing to do with the reboot and will move it to a board which noone reads unless I spell everything out, so let me say this: is there anyway to salvage the backstory of previous Superman movies while appeasing people who were unhappy with SR?

All along I have never believed that a Superman movie should be Superman Begins, combine S:TM and Smallville, and there are MORE than enough people out there who know Superman's origin, or at least the essentials, an origing would make less money than SR IMO.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I think if WB are indeed going to re-boot, which it seems they are, then they need to tell an origin story, simply for the purposes of getting the story accross to the GA.

 

[fabman]

There's so much you can do with the story and the script - and the character - to don't just make a "generic origin movie." That's the least you should do with Superman. Because, let's face it - HE IS / CAN BE THE MOST GENERIC SUPERHERO (and that's why he doesn't appeal to everybody anymore), but if you write it right - then there's some interesting stuff to tell. I think Superman is the last comic book character who can be in a generic superhero. If Hulk's in a generic flick ('The Incredible Hulk'), it may turn out mediocre, but a generic Superman flick could be the most boring **** ever.

So, well thought-out, "non-generic" script - that's what I want!

 

[The Sage]

I think if WB are indeed going to re-boot, which it seems they are, then they need to tell an origin story, simply for the purposes of getting the story accross to the GA.

I agree.

Prior to SR, I would've said an origin isn't necessary. But in order to distinguish this series from SR and even Smallville, a new origin story should be done to avoid any confusion.

And really, now is the best time with the technology available. Superman has one of the best origin stories ever. Would be great to see it all on the big screen.

 

[millennium movies]

Man i can't wait for the next film, and i really hope Routh comes back, they'd be stupid not to cast him. Also now i guess we'll never get to see the return to Krypton scene, way to go Singer what a waste.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Man i can't wait for the next film, and i really hope Routh comes back, they'd be stupid not to cast him. Also now i guess we'll never get to see the return to Krypton scene, way to go Singer what a waste.

That kind of footafe always resurfaces...Sure, it might take them 20 years to release it, but, eventually, it should be made available...

 

[The Guard]

Yes, it always resurfaces...

If it ever existed to begin with...

Eh?

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I can't believe that someone suggested a loose sequel to SR. That kind of thinking is what got us in trouble the first time.

I will always be for a re-orgin because anything less will be confusing.

Pa Kent comes walking into the movie= audience confused.

Kid gone = audience confused.

It will end up just like TIH at the boxoffice...if it's lucky. Hopefully it's a good movie though, too bad it's the last one for a long while.

 

[El Payaso]

If they're REALLY making a different fresh approach to Superman's origin then I'm all for it. If they are actually going to explore his psyche and reasons and dilemmas and will not merely showing him in amazing CGI shots. Yes why not.

But if it's only same story with better effects then no.