Should the Superman reboot add or reinvent the genre?

[Binker]

Makes sense to ask this. Let's look at the gnere's evolution from
1978 forward.

SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE started the genre, made it serious from the very start, and introduced the formula which happens to be the three-act structure in its storytelling makeing this one movie a stable of the genre as a whole: 1: birth of the hero, 2: the inner struggles and trials of the hero, and 3: the hero vs. the villain. But ironically or not, it is the Marvel movies such as SPIDER-MAN, HULK, GHOST RIDER, & IRON MAN that manage to use this structure with no alternation. SUPERMAN and BATMAN BEGINS have made their own variations of this plot structure to make it their own. For example, SUPERMAN extends the birth part into two acts with Krypton first, then Clark in Smalville. And BATMAN BEGINS uses a similar idea from SUPERMAN, but here the main story begins with the "struggle" part, with the "birth" only seen in flashbacks. Regardless, SUPERMAN introduced the three-act plot structure.

BATMAN is the first movie that didn't follow the formula created by SUPERMAN. Not only was it dark, but it instead had a plot where the hero is only in his beginning, and the origin is of, and the struggle the hero encounters, is with the villain.

X-MEN was the first of Marvel's modern-day franchises, but the first big thing it was make the universe and super-heroic characters very real world (pre-dating SMALLVILLE). But its plot
was of a character (two at least for this film; Wolverine; Wolverine and Rogue) whose POV and journey were that of the audiences, meeting and experiencing the journey, struggles, and
overall conflict with the other characters (X-Men).

DAREDEVIL had something that people tend to overlook; it was a film that combined the setting up content (act 1: the origin of how Matt Murdock became blind leading up to his father's death) with the upped ante content normally found in sequels (acts 2-3: Daredevil is already established, love and the death of Elektra, Bullseye-Kingpin). In essence, it was like having the origin and a story for a sequel into one. At least for me.

(EDITOR'S NOTE: Did you know that this type of story was to be for Superman Lives?)

SUPERMAN RETURNS featured another type of plot that had an established chaarcter from an established point in time, returning to refill his absence that has had caused and affected the
establishment.

THE INCREDIBLE HULK is the final on our list, as this movie showcases the characters' origin and the establishment at the film's beginning before the main story, to which the two connect
to form the plot where one is the action and the other is the reaction.

Now on to why I give a damn to waste my time typing this: it just seems appropriate that if you were to make a film on a character that is not only an icon, but started the superhero genre in comics just as well as he started the superhero genre in movies, it should stand out from the rest. It should be reinvented to a degree where, like SUPERMAN, the reboot would be seen as some sort of bible on how to make superhero films in the genre. It doesn't seem to right just to make a Superman film LIKE the rest, but right to make a Superman film that is WAY ABOVE the rest. Get it?

Which leads to this question: will, should, Nolan add or reinvent the genre with the Superman reboot? And if so, what do you think he would do?

 

[Octoberist]

It should be relevant, that's for sure.

 

[sf2]

he is an icon. but don't take that for granted.
the last movie had just did that; thinking everyone would clap hands when he returned. and the movie was 'establishing' on the very wrong foundation.

the new director MUST establish superman again. and that must be the story - why would people feel relief and saved when they see the flying man with \S/ on his chest across the sky; why would the people believe 100% in the alien?

what has he done?

because he is already icon???
NO!!! Show us all his hardworks pls!!!!!!!!!!!!!

this is what i write in another thread on the same issue. i guess.

 

[GreenKToo]

I'm not sure what they should do, but I do know that 15/20 years from now I want to look back on it fondly like we now do S:TM.

 

[GL1]

Batman Begins also evolved the genre by giving us both, by re-establishing a character we already know so well, while still giving us an established character and higher stakes for the third act. Remember, Batman was already established and feared by criminals when he was fighting Scarecrow in act 2.

I don't think any of this storytelling is original, just new to superhero stories. I don't suggest Superman do a momento and completely throw everyone for a loop. It would be cool if it set a new standard, but I don't think that standard is entirely in pacing.

• Set the standard in Superheroic Action. Part of what makes comics and cartoons so amazing is that these characters do so much more than live action people do. We're at a point where we can now have zero gravity mid-air fights with Superman. We can knock people through buildings like they did in Transformers. We can punch people and have shockwaves resonate like in The Matrix 3. Add 5-10 epic sequences in there, with some smart resourceful moves that could only be done by someone with Superman's powers, and just crank up the level of action. Give us an example of why Superman holds back, because when he does cut loose, it's not something you want to do again.
• Establish the character all over again, but this time, do it right so people will love it and praise it. Like Superman, like Batman Begins, have the character on the beginning of their current journey (in my version, pulling into Metropolis for the first time) but also show their origin (raised by the kents, discovering his kryptonian heritage, how he got his morals, etc). I'd take Begins further, and spread those flashbacks throughout the entire film, his 'almost got beat comeback' would feature the last one, for instance.
• Make us feel for Superman and his mission. Make us cry. Once you've put the emotional heart into superhero movies, you'll have reinvented the genre.

 

[The Batman]

...Yes. Hell Yes.

Superman is one of the greats. They should try their hardest to make a film that propels the genre forward. The reason why the comics dont sell as much is because they're no long excting compared to other comics

 

[Superwoman Prime]

In the 30's, Superman set the precedent for superheroes.

In the 70's, Superman set the precedent for superhero films.

In 2012, let him set another precedent for the modern day superhero film.

He's Superman. That's his job.

 

[dulcetpine]

Well this is America, and anyone in power has at least 50% of the population that will not trust them pretty much under any circumstance, and 50% that trust them blindly without question.

If an alien showed up tomorrow that looked human yet had the powers superman did, it very well may take me the rest of my life for me to begin to see enough from him to trust him. I would not trust this creature implicitly, no matter how many cats he rescued from trees.

Superman in this movie and perhaps in subsequent ones would have to climb uphill to convince that he is a force from good... IMO. I mean, there are people in this country whom do not trust people with a different skin color, and they are of this earth!

 

[TheShah]

Honestly, love 'em or hate 'em, the original SUPERMAN movies were awesome, plain and simple.
Mostly due to the fact that it's the largest and most accepted form of Superman on the big screen, even to this day.

That being said, I believe we've come a LONG way since those movies, both in time frame and content that's evolved over the decades.
On the negative side of things, we've had a horrible SUPERMAN RETURNS which kind of tarnished a big commercial SUPERMAN film for the general audience.
But, on the upside, we've had a plethora of comic book material that have further defined the origins of Superman himself.

Everything from BIRTHRIGHT, to Johns' SECRET ORIGIN, to the dynamics explored in MAN OF TOMORROW, even the series SMALLVILLE-- has given us a better understanding of, and deeper motivation to the humanity of Superman.

For those reasons, I think a complete reboot with a BEGINS-like origin tale is in order.
To incorporate all the new stories and angles explored since Donner and C. Reeves' Superman movies.
Also, for DC to maintain a Superman franchise (let's face it, sequels will be considered) they need to start at the beginning an not half ass in the middle that leaves the general audiences confused or wanting more explanation.

A superhero movie to be honest should be made for everyone and should transcend gernes, so keeping that in mind, Superman should be re-introduced to the world on the silver screen.

 

[AG1973]

Well this is America, and anyone in power has at least 50% of the population that will not trust them pretty much under any circumstance, and 50% that trust them blindly without question.

If an alien showed up tomorrow that looked human yet had the powers superman did, it very well may take me the rest of my life for me to begin to see enough from him to trust him. I would not trust this creature implicitly, no matter how many cats he rescued from trees.

Superman in this movie and perhaps in subsequent ones would have to climb uphill to convince that he is a force from good... IMO. I mean, there are people in this country whom do not trust people with a different skin color, and they are of this earth!

Really good point...

 

[Herolee10]

I think one of the things that I thought should have been present in a Superman film was to overall show how much of a impact and change he had brought to Metropolis after he made his debut. I mean, I would have liked to have seen what Metropolis was like BEFORE Clark debuted as superman; to see on how bad crime was over there and such.

I think Superman Returns in general really missed the ball in the park by not focusing more on how badly the world had changed during his time of absence and just focused on his relationship issues. I mean with how everything was presented in that film, it felt as though he had never left to begin with.

 

[AG1973]

Superman is for most of us comic book fans the first superhero we started reading; I know it was for me. Tell the origin from the point of view that he grew into his powers and that his earth parents raised him to be an idealist. Show how powerful he is and how he controls it.

Yes let Luthor be the villain but make him a brilliant billionaire business man not a huckster/ con man. The thing is they should stay true to the heart and essence of the Superman story. Reboot the story and do it right.

And then make sure the cape and boots are red not crimson

 

[AG1973]

I think one of the things that I thought should have been present in a Superman film was to overall show how much of a impact and change he had brought to Metropolis after he made his debut. I mean, I would have liked to have seen what Metropolis was like BEFORE Clark debuted as superman; to see on how bad crime was over there and such.

I think Superman Returns in general really missed the ball in the park by not focusing more on how badly the world had changed during his time of absence and just focused on his relationship issues. I mean with how everything was presented in that film, it felt as though he had never left to begin with.

You hit the nail on the head...

 

[Herolee10]

You know, ideally for me at least, I would have preferred this film to be a semi origin film where:

In the first film, we're introduced to a young adult Clark where he has just arrived in Metropolis and finds employment in the DP as freelance reporter, who in Perry's eyes, needs to prove himself if he wants to a full time position.

The film could deal with Clark realizing that instead of going around and secretly helping ppl in the dark, ala like how they're doing with SV at current moment, that the ppl of Metropolis needs a symbol of hope to get through the times of crisis that the populace is facing due to the high rates in criminal activity.

As far as his kryptonian origin is concerned, the film wouldn't have to dive so much time into it, and just established that Clark was found in a spaceship in Kansas by the Kents, and grew up with powers not knowing of who he was.

Depending if Brainiac was the film's villain, he would reveal to Clark of his kryptonian origins, which could be further explored in the sequel.

Throughout the film, we would see Clark struggling to gain the acceptance and trust of the people, where by the end of the film, Clark has gained the hearts of the public.

 

[El Payaso]

It should just be good.

 

[The Sage]

Reinvent and make some sort of statement.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

It should just be a good movie, but they should run a massive marketing campaign that says that all the other superheroes are just lame johnny-come-lately-s.

 

[Karelia]

I... can't believe people are using Smallville in a positive way on this board, that's awesome. I don't think I've seen that happen until now.

I'd definitely like to see this movie reinvent super hero movies. Theirs a LOT of comic book films coming out, It needs to keep fresh so people won't lose interest in them. (I don't think people will, unless every one of them starts to bomb from now on.)

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Personally I want to see it making 'good' superheroes COOL again.

It seems to have been a trend set by Batman and X-men (with the focus on Wolverine) and Daredevil and Punisher etc that only the 'badass' heroes are popular.

And even now, I keep hearing people banging on about making Superman 'badass'.

I'd much rather have Superman open the door to heroes that don't have to have a dark side, that don't have to go through some moral conflict in which they don't know if they are really a good guy.

I mean, Spiderman is that to some extent, but he'll always be cool because he's kinda just a teenage kid swinging through the city, winning the girl and kicking bad guy butt. It's a whole different type of hero.

 

[The Batman]

In the 30's, Superman set the precedent for superheroes.

In the 70's, Superman set the precedent for superhero films.

In 2012, let him set another precedent for the modern day superhero film.

He's Superman. That's his job.

Yup. Simply saying "lets make the film like Iron Man or Spider Man" will not do. That will make the Superman reboot as dull as the current comics.

 

[TheShah]

I heard a long time ago, that Mark Millar had thought about an epic Superman trilogy.
He said he wanted the entire first movie to deal with Jor-el and life on Krypton, and have it be a more political sci-fi. Establishing Krypton, introducing Jor-el, Zod, etc and how Jor-el discovers the imminent destruction of Krypton, and that movie would end with the destruction of Krypton and launch of Kal-el's pod.

The second movie would be the origins of becoming Superman, discovering his powers with age, life with the Kents, discovering his heritage, etc etc... developing into Supes basically.

Third movie would bring back the Kryptonian plots and arcs set up in the first, Zod and all, Superman having to fight not only for Earth but also his father's legacy, (that's how I interpreted it anyways) ending with Superman man being the only being alive on Earth.

I'd watch these, but 100% chance of these NEVER getting made. lol.

 

[BestGirl]

^I wouldn't watch it. The ending sounds too depressing.