Reintroducing Superman: An Open Discussion

[Showtime]

From what I've read from Robinov & Horn they had very little intention of doing a sequal once the figures started rolling in. Robinov is quoted as saying the film didn't quite work & Horn was quoted in saying it should have done $500m minimum..

The studio signed Singer to a pay or play deal in late October 2006 and announced it just before Halloween of 2006. At this point Superman Returns had almost completed its theatrical run and they had months and months to mull over the numbers. Since they signed Singer to this fairly iron clad deal at that point in its theatrical run suggest they were very serious about a sequel early on.

 

[KalMart]

Exactly.

I've only ever heard fanboys b**ch about orgin stories. If normal people like what they are seeing in a movie they aren't going to run out of the theater because the action doesn't start right away.

I didn't see them running from the Superman: The Movie, Batman 89 (not a full orgin story like the others but it was somewhat of an orgin story) Spider-Man or Iron Man. And need I point out all of the non-comicbooks that took 30 minutes to really get going?

Seriously, people on here can not want an orgin story and not like orgin stories but normal people don't give a s**t if they like the movie.

I just hate how some people are suddenly pretending that orgin stories don't make huge bank all the time.

The only reason I didn't bring up Batman Begins is because despite the fact that it did get a seque,l it wasn't some big hit in theaters.

You say people won't mind sitting through it if they like it, which I agree with....but they also won't miss it not being there if they like what is. So it goes both ways.

But the reason I propose it IS for making a better movie, and one that's a little more unique....and at the same time, as an added bonus, getting more out of the origin than just having it be an origin/intro. Don't look at it as avoiding the origin, look at it more like getting more out of it...and ultimately...the movies themselves by using it a different way. I see it as possibly a more creative narrative approach overall...why not use that for Superman's advantage?

 

[KalMart]

The studio signed Singer to a pay or play deal in late October 2006 and announced it just before Halloween of 2006. At this point Superman Returns had almost completed its theatrical run and they had months and months to mull over the numbers. Since they signed Singer to this fairly iron clad deal at that point in its theatrical run suggest they were very serious about a sequel early on.

As an offshot.... say they later decided that they wanted to reboot completely...would that contract only apply to a direct sequel either way?

Perhaps more related...doesn't that kind of a deal also act as insurance for Singer that he'd get dibs on a sequel, and on the other end that Singer wouldn't be lured away from continuing like with, say, what happened with Fox/X3?

 

[M.O.Steel]

Leave the origin/growing up for a second movie, if it gets that far. People need to reinvest in Superman being Superman....AS Superman. That's what needs an updated approach moreso than the origins. Leave more time and momentum for taking people on a wild ride. Introduce Superman/Kent off the bat right as he first arrives in Metropolis, almost as if we're introduced to him like the people of Metropolis are.....out of the blue comes something that changes what you thought you knew about what's possible. Then go from there with the gas pedal all the way down.

i consider this part of the origin.

 

[Webhead2006]

All i know is that the only reasonable way to go with next movie is to do a full origin with all the characters so WB better pay the Siegels for it. The first movie has to be an origin to estabilish the characters right for once. With modern cinematography and storytelling, it doesn't have to be a linear origin.

Hopefully so man, we need to clearly show the next film is different and not set in the same setting as the past films. Bring the characters to more modern takes and more modern elements, better comic elements included and all that. It does suck the whole court drama is just one giant factor in things and we dont know what is ultimately going to go down in the end with the courts.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Let me clear something up, I wasn't implying that the audience would miss it if the movie were good.

I didn't bring that up because I wasn't talking about that. I wanted to b**ch about fanboys attitudes about orgin stories. I was going to write that the opposite is true but I honestly didn't feel like it fit in my post.

 

[mego joe]

so where was the gay part?? as Singer is openly homosexual

"My two Dads"- the story of Jason WHite

 

[KalMart]

i consider this part of the origin.

Or just a moderately different way of 'reintroducing', no?

 

[KalMart]

Let me clear something up, I wasn't implying that the audience would miss it if the movie were good.

I didn't bring that up because I wasn't talking about that. I wanted to b**ch about fanboys attitudes about orgin stories. I was going to write that the opposite is true but I honestly didn't feel like it fit in my post.

It's just a possible option...and honestly, I could see it raising its own difficulties. But it'd be cool to see a superhero movie taking that chance, especially one that's in such dire need of a new pick-me-up. A little 'out of the box' thinking, without having to change who/what Superman is, if you will.

 

[mego joe]

I think my problem with Superman Returns was that it had great ideas but nothing was explored. NOr was it progressive in the right way: the kid for example.

SR did have a lot of great ideas, and you are right they were not explored. The kid would have been OK if Jason had been Richard's son and Superman had not left Lois cowardly. Giving Superman a dysfunctional family is a horrible idea. That's what killed it. In many other ways though it is just underwhelming- great ideas never explored or simply poorly executed. Perhaps the result of trying to include too much.

 

[mego joe]

I have no problem starting with an established Superman, but I do feel we need some mention/hint of the origin, just to show that this is a new continuity. We don't need to spend a lot of time on it. Just a flashback or two, or a conversation on the Kent farm, showing BOTH parents, just to help distance us from the previous films, that's all. I really agree with you on the whole Godfather, really establishing the origin/history in the second film. Especially if we have some kind of Kryptonian villain, or even the Colu Brainiac with his info on Krypton, and possibly Kandor in his posession. That is where the Krypton stuff should really come in.

I think it would be interesting to do an established SUperman who doesn't know his own origins and part of the story is his discovery of who he is. We then learn along with him w/o having to do the linear storytelling but we get the benefit of the origin that defines it as a reboot.

 

[Webhead2006]

Hopefully things can come about for superman and the next time around it is a better film for all and it does the numbers wb expects.

 

[Webhead2006]

That could work out and i and i know others have said their is so many ways things could go in a reboot origin story to have action off the bat and still tell the nitty gritty of krypton/smallville life.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It's just a possible option...and honestly, I could see it raising its own difficulties. But it'd be cool to see a superhero movie taking that chance, especially one that's in such dire need of a new pick-me-up. A little 'out of the box' thinking, without having to change who/what Superman is, if you will.

I understand what you are saying.

I think it would be interesting to do an established SUperman who doesn't know his own origins and part of the story is his discovery of who he is. We then learn along with him w/o having to do the linear storytelling but we get the benefit of the origin that defines it as a reboot.

I'm sure somebody has said it before in another way but for some reason this idea peaks my interest quite a bit right now...maybe it just hit me at the right time.

Let me think things over a bit...

 

[Webhead2006]

Yea it could work and it would be a great way to change things up, from the start just know he is alien, came to earth in a space ship. But doesnt know if his world/race still exists could be a interesting take.

 

[Crook]

Although Jamie would disagree with me I think that every single movie costing 175mil is a bad idea. It's just plan bad for business.

D9 reportedly (I ofcourse don't know if it's true) cost 30mil to make and it looks fine, other movies have cost less than 175mil and they looked fine. It's not impossible for these movies to cost less than these new fangled massive budgets, hollywood just doesn't seem to want them too.

Oh well I guess it's their business and they know more than I do. Still even with the added revenu of DVD's, T.V rights and toys do they really make a ton on all of these outrageously budgeted films?

I don't know, maybe they do but it doesn't seem like it to me. Van Helsing made over 300mil worldwide and they still didn't make a sequel. Sounds like that 160 million dollar budget did hurt it.

I know District gets brought up a lot now as a case for low-budgeted flicks, but even the director has admitted he had a lot of factors on his side that most Hollwood projects don't. That movie was shot almost entirely on a handycam, in a landfill, no-name actors, and with well-connected sfx experts. The budget was absolutely understandable considering these conditions.

It's practically impossible to work with that type of money for a modern blockbuster. This isn't even an issue of knowing how to budget, but mere logistics of filming costs. Shooting on-location in big cities is already a hefty amount. You factor in your stars, a worldwide marketing campaign, massive cgi post-processing....it's very easy for those dollar amounts to go up.

 

[mego joe]

Not really. 2 years after it released the Wal-Mart were I worked had a few hundred DVD copies of it, and they were only able to move roughly 1/3 of them. To this day, they STILL have at least 100 copies left from that first shipment that have not sold, even though they marked down to 5 dollars. I remember the electronics dept. manager was always complaining about how they always had trouble finding places to stash them, since they clog up a lot of shelf space and no-one buys them.

Wal-Mart and Target both sell SR for $5, still. Sometimes Target marks it down to $4.75. The $5 films are always older than SR, by nearly 10 years and w/o the broad appeal of the Superman character. For example- "Sense and Sensibillity" the Emma Thompson version. By comparison, "Ghost Rider" is a $13 film. What does that tell you?

 

[KalMart]

Wal-Mart and Target both sell SR for $5, still. Sometimes Target marks it down to $4.75. The $5 films are always older than SR, by nearly 10 years and w/o the broad appeal of the Superman character. For example- "Sense and Sensibillity" the Emma Thompson version. By comparison, "Ghost Rider" is a $13 film. What does that tell you?

It tells me you need to get NetFlix. :P

 

[Webhead2006]

So true their about how big budget films go. You pretty much need 100million dollars-240million dollars these days.

 

[Webhead2006]

As for low priced SR dvds i seen it all over the place at various dvd/electronics stores in my area usually around 5 dollars. And once i see it in one of those 1 claw machine things at a rest stop.

 

[KalMart]

I know District gets brought up a lot now as a case for low-budgeted flicks, but even the director has admitted he had a lot of factors on his side that most Hollwood projects don't. That movie was shot almost entirely on a handycam, in a landfill, no-name actors, and with well-connected sfx experts. The budget was absolutely understandable considering these conditions.

It's practically impossible to work with that type of money for a modern blockbuster. This isn't even an issue of knowing how to budget, but mere logistics of filming costs. Shooting on-location in big cities is already a hefty amount. You factor in your stars, a worldwide marketing campaign, massive cgi post-processing....it's very easy for those dollar amounts to go up.

Paying union rates, production design, etc...




....and planting corn.

 

[Crook]

Paying union rates, production design, etc...




....and planting corn.

At the time, it seemed like an amazing gesture in the loyalty and dedication from the production crew.



...in hindsight, it was a colossal waste of money that could have easily gone somewhere more efficient.

 

[mego joe]

Yea it could work and it would be a great way to change things up, from the start just know he is alien, came to earth in a space ship. But doesnt know if his world/race still exists could be a interesting take.

Not even alien, just differnt. In Byrne's MOS, the Kent's thought he was a Russian child that had been experimented on and sent into space.!!

In the original comics he didn't discover his origins until 1948! Superman # 53 I believe.

ANd I have mentioned this idea before...

 

[Webhead2006]

TRue there.

 

[Timstuff]

Really, it doesn't surprise me that people didn't want to watch SR over and over again on DVD, like with most big summer movies. It had very little action, is tediously long, has a depressing, foggy color pallet, and the story moves at a snail's pace and is depressing. Nothing that really screams "Man, remember how awesome [scene x], [x] and [x] were? Let's pop in the DVD and watch the movie!"