Reintroducing Superman: An Open Discussion

[bigbluefan]

Agree, Lex should still be there as a thorn in Superman's side but I'll scream if they don't bring in a cosmic supervillain in the next movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Wally West]

If we don't get another Superman movie for another, say 20 years, than continuing SR's storyline would've been a better option rather than waiting decades for a reboot.

I have to say I agree with that. I'm in favor of a reboot, but if it actually came down to a choice between nothing for two decades and a sequel to SR. I'd take the sequel in a heartbeat.

 

[VenomsMom]

I dunno....I'm pretty sick of him as far as movies go. I know that a lot of Supes fans take the stance 'it hasn't been done right', but I'd rather they put the time and effort for new things instead, or at least wait....like BB-TDK did bringing in the Joker later than right off the bat.

But then again, it may also depend whether or not you're going to tie Luthor in to Clark's origins/growing up. If they don't, then it'll be easier to bring him in later....like perhaps at the end of a first movie, leading into the next (if there will be one). But in general, I'd find it refreshing not having him for a while.

We all have a reason to be sick of him by now since it was nothing new to the character from the ancient 70's films. They don't necessarily need to link him to Clarke's childhood. I think in a new francise he should be established as an essential part of Metropolis with a powerful influence in tha city. He doesnt have to be the major villain in the first movie but he should have a strong presence. Lex is suffering from the same problem Supes is the fact that they both need to be reinvented in a modern era. Lex needs that development shown and they should lay the foundation in the first movie.

 

[VenomsMom]

Agree, Lex should still be there as a thorn in Superman's side but I'll scream if they don't bring in a cosmic supervillain in the next movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't think they should start off with a cosmic threat right away in a new movie. If you mean the likes of Brainiac or Darkseid that needs to be set up properly to be done justice.

 

[Octoberist]

I don't think they should start off with a cosmic threat right away in a new movie. If you mean the likes of Brainiac or Darkseid that needs to be set up properly to be done justice.

But I think many people have been waiting for a villain like Brainiac for years, and probably one of the reason some were turned off by Superman Returns.

It's time. If this is WB/Dc's last shot at Superman..ever, then put them in. There probably won't be a next time after this one unless the family is on the same page with DC/WB.

 

[Wheels]

I want to see a Superman film for my generation, as enjoyable as the first Donner film is, it's time for something new.

 

[KalMart]

I don't think they should start off with a cosmic threat right away in a new movie. If you mean the likes of Brainiac or Darkseid that needs to be set up properly to be done justice.

See, I'd rather hit audiences with that from the start....these new Supes movies need a big launch, so I'd rather go with that first, then maybe reveal that Luthor was involved, but not have to weave in his presence just yet. Hit with more impact from the start, then you can move into deeper areas with Luthor, etc.

 

[Wally West]

I don't think they should start off with a cosmic threat right away in a new movie. If you mean the likes of Brainiac or Darkseid that needs to be set up properly to be done justice.

They could use Brainiac in an origin film if they tied him to krypton's destruction. They could introduce him in the first act during the origin, the second act would focus on Clark meeting Lois, Lex and getting established in Metropolis while introducing the world to Superman, maybe a massive virus or EMP hits(Brainiac being behind it) resulting in blackouts and mechanical failures all over the world giving Superman a scenario to save multiple planes, helicopters and trains (that would certainly surpass him saving any one of the above) The 3rd act would focus on inevitable confrontation between the two. The aftermath of the confrontation and the destruction left in it's wake could be used by Luthor (who would already be a powerful and respected figure as the head of Lexcorp and a philanthropist-albeit with ultimately self serving goals) to gain political support by suggesting Superman's presence puts the Earth at risk of being a battle ground for intergalactic conflicts or something.

Then in the sequel Luthor could become president, and a mysterious benefactor could give him technology allowing the government to create Super villains like Metallo, Parasite, Volcana, Livewire ect who would try to bring Superman to justice. The battle would cause far more destruction and Superman would reluctantly decide to leave Earth on his own. At the end of the film Luthor's mysterious benefactor would be revealed as being an agent of Darkseid and the first waves of his invasion fleet would be shown approaching Earth.

The third film Superman would return and free the World from Darkseid and his armies.

I guess the point of all that was to argue they could get away with an intergalactic threat in the first film. Sorry I went overboard and came up with my own little fanboy dream trilogy on top of it.

 

[craigdbfan]

But I think many people have been waiting for a villain like Brainiac for years, and probably one of the reason some were turned off by Superman Returns.

It's time. If this is WB/Dc's last shot at Superman..ever, then put them in. There probably won't be a next time after this one unless the family is on the same page with DC/WB.

My thoughts exactly. Time to move on.

Sure I want Lex involved to some capacity but we need to see Superman's alien foes.

With todays level of special effects WB can definitely set up SM's more visually demanding villains.

While Superman Return wasn't a bad movie it certainly didn't move the character anywhere.

SM has a cache of villains that deserve to see the silver screen. Brainiac is definitely my villain of choice but wouldn't mind another villain that isn't Zod or Luthor.

 

[MadVillainy]

Am I the only one who thinks that Parasite cant hold his own Superman film?

 

[Octoberist]

Yeah, I feel like Parasite and even Metello can't hold the movie together unless there's another threat involved.

Even though I don't know the whole plot of Iron Man 2, a villain like Whiplash probably needs another villain like Justin Hammer to complete the circle.

 

[GreenKToo]

I'd go ballz to the wall with the reboot. Lex, Metallo, and Brainiac.

 

[The Guard]

How can some of you be sick of Luthor? What's next? Being sick of Superman?

If you want Luthor to be involved in the franchise, leaving him out of the first film seems silly.

I like the idea of Lex having a key role, but not neccessarily being the main threat/villain, etc. At least in the first film, and perhaps even the second.

And let's not get ahead of ourselves. Luthor doesn't need to be "reinvented". He needs to be done justice for once.

 

[Octoberist]

Lex, Metallo and Brainiac? that's too much for even me.

I would say maybe Brainiac and Lex. the problem would be the movie after that: you can you follow up Brainiac with? Darkseid? But shouldn't they save him for the third movie then?

 

[craigdbfan]

How can some of you be sick of Luthor? What's next? Being sick of Superman?

If you want Luthor to be involved in the franchise, leaving him out of the first film seems silly.

I like the idea of Lex having a key role, but not neccessarily being the main threat/villain, etc. At least in the first film, and perhaps even the second.

And let's not get ahead of ourselves. Luthor doesn't need to be "reinvented". He needs to be done justice for once.

No one has even written the words "tired" and "Luthor" in the same post.

I think folks don't want to see Luthor as the lead villain. He should be involved to some capacity as I and others mentioned.

Also using the business tycoon version of Luthor wouldn't be "reinventing" but adapting a more modern version of Luthor which has been present in the comics for a while now.

 

[Octoberist]

My personal problem is that when Lex is the main threat in the movies (Superman 1, Superman Returns),he's not entirely interesting. nor does he share enough screen time with Superman, making his character arc disconnected with the rest of the movie(s).

Of course, I just dislike the con man Lex, so I'm open for the Lexcorp Lex anyday.
But for sure, I love his character. I'm just sad that he hasn't gotten the right portrayal yet.

 

[GreenKToo]

Lex, Metallo and Brainiac? that's too much for even me.

I would say maybe Brainiac and Lex. the problem would be the movie after that: you can you follow up Brainiac with? Darkseid? But shouldn't they save him for the third movie then?

It would depend on how its done.

If its an established Superman film with no origin, then i'd open it with superman in the middle of a fight with metallo. After 10 mins or so of fighting, Superman defeats him. Lex would be watching from Lex-corp and is enraged. Afterall, metallo was his answer to Superman.
Brainiac arrives later, makes contact with lex and.......you get the idea.

If its an origin, then Have superman make his first appearence in metropolis doing some huge rescue with lots of media attention, etc etc.

Lex is angered because the spotlight is taken off of him and placed on Superman instead. Lex gets to work on a plan to get rid of Supes.
First its intergang. That fails. Next Metallo, again it fails but he does give superman a pretty good fight.
Then, as luck would have it, Brainiac arrives. He makes contact with Lex and a partnership is formed.......

 

[The Guard]

It's all about the tone. The things you mentioned sound relatively "big" on paper, but it's execution just did not translate that feeling.

I have no idea what would translate that feeling if you don't grasp the scale outright. These are massive events, and many of them felt massive.

The execution is a completely separate element. It's a valid point to make. But many of the larger scale elements WERE executed well. And a big scale is a big scale.

Comparatively speaking, TDK was a much smaller-scale film than SR (on paper), yet undoubtedly felt much, much, bigger.

Can't agree with that. TDK felt more immediate in its dangers, and that's due mostly to there being more people in smaller environments. But a city being afraid of a serial killer and a bunch of people standing around on a boat waiting for what ended up nothing to happen was tense, but hardly larger in scale than a city undergoing a sizeable Earthquake that rocked buildings, a series of underground explosions that threatened the city's (nuclear) power facility, and a continent growing in the middle of the ocean that was going to flood what, like 60 percent of the Earth until it's lifted from the ocean and thrown into space.

A flipping semi truck on a relatively empty road is cool, but it simply doesn't compare in scale to a man picking up a plummeting space shuttle and plane, and catching one of them in an crowded baseball stadium.

Granted, a hospital blew up, and that was pretty big, but there was no one in it.

There's definitely more in the way of combat in THE DARK KNIGHT, but that's not so much a "scale" issue so much as its the difference between the two characters.

Batman fought people one and one, and Superman put out entire house fires with one burst of superbreath, waded through a giant machine gun's ammunition, etc.

The people of the city was sort of at stake in THE DARK KNIGHT. It's pretty clear that the events in SUPERMAN RETURNS actually did physically affect the city and its people, and that they were going to be global if not stopped.

the flying through space is basic stuff now . it is not complicated anymore to model planets and fly through them.

Basic, perhaps, in terms of effects, but it's still still huge in scale.

spaceship landing? it was a f..... reflection on the windows. you see martha in the house. and you only see the spaceship landing in the reflection.

It was still a big event. There was, when Martha Kent got there, across her very large farm, a very large spaceship in flames. Whereas Batman managed to dent up a van and a garbage truck.

I'm not knocking THE DARK KNIGHT. A lot of the stuff in it was executed well, but it's nowhere near as "big" as the events in SUPERMAN RETURNS. And I'm not saying that the events were executed as largely or as perfectly as they possibly could have been, but they were large events.

 

[Octoberist]

If your first idea, Metallo would be the 'cold opener' villain. like in a Bond movie before the credits or perhaps, the Scarecrow's cameo in Dark Knight?

 

[GreenKToo]

Exactly. He would be the Metallo that we know, but he would only be there for like 10 mins or so at the most.
It could be shown that he is carted off to some maximum security ''whatever'' so as to leave it open for his possible return.( you don't wanna anger the fanboys after all )

 

[craigdbfan]

I like GreenKToo setup.

That'd be a good way to start off a new SM movie.

 

[GreenKToo]

Really though, I don't care which they do. I just want another film and I fear we're not gonna get one. Not anytime soon anyway.

 

[KalMart]

SR tried to depict city-wide destruction and calamity, and the world coming to an end. But in TDK, it definitely felt more like it really was coming to an end. It is about how you deliver and compose your presentation. That's the craft of the storyteller and the filmmaker, and their ability to involve us in what we're watching. In SR, it seemed that there was more emphasis in our involvement with stuff such as the eavesdropping, the moping, the heartache, etc.....and we were basically just left watching the few 'action' sequences. Whereas in something like TDK, or classics like Raiders/Star Wars etc....we're more involved and engrossed in the experience, and not just because of personal taste....it's because the films actually do that for us, whereas others don't. Again, the difference of just watching it happen, like in SR...and experiencing it, like in TDK....even if the former involves an entire island and an airplane/shuttle, and the former merely a truck and a motorcycle.

 

[GreenKToo]

I've yet to see a scene in a CB film that can top the plane/shuttle scene. That's just me tho.
A couple more scenes that were that intense in SR, and we might be talking sequel now instead of what coulda, shoulda, woulda.

EDIT: The earthquake in metropolis scene lacked the intensity that was needed. a few broken windows, a sign or two falling, and a fire in the sewer was basically it. Add to that two or three highrise buildings collapseing and you up the anti.

 

[KalMart]

I've yet to see a scene in a CB film that can top the plane/shuttle scene. That's just me tho.
A couple more scenes that were that intense in SR, and we might be talking sequel now instead of what coulda, shoulda, woulda.

I thought that scene was rather bland when all was said and done. It had good elements, but someone with more flare for action sequences could have done much more with it in terms of pacing and dynamics...especially the end.

The flying/fighter jets scene in Iron man had a lot more punch than the plane saving scene in SR. Better flying helped, as well.