World Should there be a Superman reboot movie?

Very Stupid question!

 

Don't be mean.

I don't think there should be a reboot...everybody knows Superman's origin--its been told time and time again in various mediums. To retell it again would just be a complete waste of time.

If anything, they can resort to Superman I or for a more modern interpretation the pilot episode of SV.

Or better yet, pick up a few comics, "Superman for all seasons", "Birthright", etc.

 

They don't necessarily have to retell his origin, but they really should cut loose from the films made circa 1978-1987.

 

A retelling of the origin is redundant and unnecessary in some respects, while being necessary in others (this also depends on who you are asking, mind you). The core elements have been retold in film, TV, and print more times than you could shake a stick at (and you can shake a stick at quite a bit). Some folks are in separate camps who feel a new origin film would've been a good thing. In the end, I'm kind of divided. I loved most aspects of the Donner origins and felt that if they were going to base a continuation movie off of anything, then that should be it. Lois and Clark as well as Smallville didn't nail anything for me in regards to what his origin should've been like. If I would be able to design my own origin for the film it would be something that is a mixture of aspects from the majority of the previous ones. The one thing that I was worried about in the beginning of SR's production was that they would just use the same sets from the previous movies, but I was ecstatic to see the changes made to the Fortress as well as the Daily Planet. The farm needs to stay the same because well...it's a farm.

 

I was kinda split to when Superman Returns started production. But now I love the idea of useing Superman: The Movie and Superman II as a vague history like in the vein of James Bond or something. Like everybody has said; there is no need to tell the origin story again. The only mistake that was made with the original movie is how they portrayed Luthor (I know it wasn't Donnor's fault since that's how he was portrayed in the comics at the time.) and Krypton. I didn't like how they made the whole planet out of ice, it made it hard for me to care about Kal-El leaving his home planet because Earth to me still looked like a better place to live. But I still love Marlon Brando's portrayel as Jor-El though.

 

I do think there should be a new Superman story-arc started, breaking away from the Reeve movies; aside from Reeve's performance, there isn't a whole lot I liked about them. But as much as I'd like to see something like Birthright made into a movie, the origin story has been told a bajillion times and doesn't need another re-telling.

I'd love to see a reboot movie, but have Superman already in the mix of things, like Burton's Batman (and that's the only time you'll ever hear me say anything positive about that movie). If SR turns out to be a hit, then by all means keep the current series going, but I personally would like to see another take on it (preferably one where Pa Kent isn't dead)

 

Sorry but that is NOT how Luthor was in the comics back in 1978! Dont know where people get that foolish notion to begin with. If anything, Hackman's Luthor was a similar to how the villains were like in the Batman TV series, which was still fresh in people's minds. Although Donner tried to make STM a lot less campy, the script still had campy elements to it even though most of them were removed by Mankiewicz.

Hey, Nicholson's Joker was a bit over the top too.

 

Returns is a reboot. There are similarities in the SR Superman's origin to the Donner origins BUT there are differences, everythings updated..modernized.

Routh's Superman appeared in the late 90s and disapeared in the year 2000 (according to the DP newspaper pic). The origins may have been tweaked too, the 12 year FOS journey may have been removed etc..

I know the new scenes shot with Steven Bender will likely contradict the teen Clark scenes from STM.

...So, Superman Returns IS a reboot....it just isnt done in the same boring origin-story way.

Its a reboot in the same way Batman (1989) was a reboot. It didnt start with the origins but it was definately a reboot.

 

I agree with most of the sentiment here against a full reboot. The Superman franchise is different from the Batman franchise. An in-depth Batman origin (concerning his motivation, training, resources, etc) had never been done. Superman's story isn't that involved and the general public is pretty aware of how he came to be.

That said, I would have liked to have seen them get rid of the comic-relief part of Luthor's flunkies. I think using Mercy Graves would have worked. Also, I echo the earlier statement of having Jonathan alive.

 

Mercy? Forget that. Lex shouldnt need to hide behind a woman. Hes Lex flippin Luthor.

 

This is a stupid thread. The reboot of the Superman series is SR but they're just keeping a few elements of Superman 1 and 2 in there.

 

When Smallville ends, and it ends with Clark getting the suit and wearing it, it will be Superman Begins!!!

Steve

 

I wouldn't have him hiding behind her, but if a female is going to be present at Lex's side, I rather have it be someone who brings something to the table. The idea of Miss Tessmacher, Part 2 bothers me. I don't care much for the campy aspect.

Why should we trust him?

 

Returns is kind of a reboot.
And since everyone knows the origin there's no need to try to remake Superman, the Movie, which can't be done much better anyway.

 

Shes just Lex's ho that he uses for his public appearances and such. Shes just a tool, an accessory.

The mysogenist in me enjoys this idea.

 

I think it's hard for some people to get the vague sequal idea into there heads. I mean we have Marlon Brando as Jor-El (not Complaining) when we could of got another actor just as easily to play him, and not to mention Bryan Singer is using Glenn Ford's picture in Superman Returns. Yeah I can kind of see why some people think this could be a Sequal to Superman: The Movie and Superman II.

 

That's what i was hoping the new one would be....but since it isn't, I'll settle into what they're doing. "SHOULD" it have been? Absolutely...maybe.

 

I always thought that Gene Hackman was miscast as Lex Luthor. I would have given the role to Yule Brynner. He could have delivered the laugh lines, but he would have been able to put a covering of malevalence around them such that a chill was going down your spine as you laughed.

In keeping with this thread, I don't like the post-crisis Superman at all. I grew up with him, and Superman was always the ultimate HERO. I never thought he needed a dark side, he was to be admired.

I used to read every issue. Post crisis, I read maybe 1 issue ever couple of years. In my mind, it's not Superman.