Sequels Should they kill the kid off?

[mego joe]

Watch the Richard Donner Cut of superman II to find out.

As for the Kid? I'd be more interested in a complete Batman begins style restart than a continuation of this Super baby story.

Two phenomenal ideas in one post, good job!

 

[El Payaso]

No, he'll have a spinoff series similar to smallville.

link?

 

[Mr. Socko]

Singer took Superman III and IV out of continuity so maybe a few years from now someone else will make a sequel to Superman I and II and take SR out of continuity.............

 

[VenomsMom]

They can take them out of continuity, but you cant erase them from Superman lore. Which is too bad.

 

[El Payaso]

Singer took Superman III and IV out of continuity so maybe a few years from now someone else will make a sequel to Superman I and II and take SR out of continuity.............

You mean SR and its sequel. 8)

 

[VenomsMom]

Make the kid Zod's.

 

[El Payaso]

Yeah, Zod shagged Lois somewhere in Superman II. Beautiful.

 

[VenomsMom]

Yeah, Zod shagged Lois somewhere in Superman II. Beautiful.

Why not, we dont know when Superman shagged her. Apparently it wasnt at the fortress. While we're rearranging history and exempting things why not add that.

 

[Billy Batson]

Since the young Lad is sickie, have his condition can worsen as he grow older and become Bizzaro.

" ME Love Momma LOIS"
"ME AM SAVE MOMMA"

The Bizzaro syndrome is already taking shape on the left side of his face

 

[VenomsMom]

Since the young Lad is sickie, have his condition can worsen as he grow older and become Bizzaro.

" ME Love Momma LOIS"
"ME AM SAVE MOMMA"

The Bizzaro syndrome is already taking shape on the left side of his face

LOL.Me like yOu idea better than mE idea.t:

 

[YÅ«gi's BM]

As a Superman fan, I see no rational for killing off Jason. If anything, it should be Clark who dies for the lad, to show how Superman's legacy transcends (spell?) physical conventions...and simply to do something new, of course.

 

[lexlives]

As a Superman fan, I see no rational for killing off Jason. If anything, it should be Clark who dies for the lad, to show how Superman's legacy transcends (spell?) physical conventions...and simply to do something new, of course.

Actually one of my fears was that that was Singer's plan for the end of the trilogy (which thankfully is not happening now) - kill off Superman and introduce a new "hip" mutant type Superman in his son. Another reason to be glad to see Singer gone.

 

[Billy Batson]

You have my vote of killing off Singer's Clark.
Singer the man who killed Superman. t:

 

[VenomsMom]

Doomsday anyone?

 

[Billy Batson]

^That'll be Singer .

 

[VenomsMom]

Yeah, Superman is already dead if you ask me.

 

[Billy Batson]

Sadly, you're right.

 

[lexlives]

Yeah, Superman is already dead if you ask me.

Singer indeed has pretty much killed the Superman film franchise and as it reveberates it will negatively affect the rest of the franchise as in the books and such.

The question is can the franchise ever recover? I am not sure if it can, but if there is ever a rebirth it is going to be decades away. Its going to take that long to get out of the dark shadow Singer and his "team" have cast over everything Superman.

 

[YÅ«gi's BM]

Sure, Singer was wrong to reintroduce The Man of Steel the way he did (sucking up to the past franchise) but I wouldn't say he has forever destroyed Superman, not one bit.

Seems to me you are all being unreasonable with your judgement.

 

[Rated-X]

The superman franchise is not dead, but it is in serious condition.

 

[VenomsMom]

Sure, Singer was wrong to reintroduce The Man of Steel the way he did (sucking up to the past franchise) but I wouldn't say he has forever destroyed Superman, not one bit.

Seems to me you are all being unreasonable with your judgement.

Unreasonable, no realistic.

 

[lexlives]

Sure, Singer was wrong to reintroduce The Man of Steel the way he did (sucking up to the past franchise) but I wouldn't say he has forever destroyed Superman, not one bit.

Seems to me you are all being unreasonable with your judgement.

I didn't say it is forever destroyed but I did say it is possible it could not recover.

As of now the odds we will see another Superman film before 15 or 20 years are slim to none. That will be Singer's legacy. Its not totally out of the realm of possibility we will never get another Superman film. If that happens then Singer did indeed kill off Superman.

 

[YÅ«gi's BM]

Uh...there's one coming out in two years.

 

[Jimmy, GL]

Singer indeed has pretty much killed the Superman film franchise and as it reveberates it will negatively affect the rest of the franchise as in the books and such.

The question is can the franchise ever recover? I am not sure if it can, but if there is ever a rebirth it is going to be decades away. Its going to take that long to get out of the dark shadow Singer and his "team" have cast over everything Superman.

Yet again i must respond to this statement wit hthe simple fact that you are being too pessimistic. It does not take THAt long for superhero franchise to regain its legs. Look at the Batman series. The opinion I hear of them is that the first four kinda sucked and then they did a reboot about 8(?) years after the last one came out. It did superbly in my opinion. Now there is Hulk. The movie series is basically getting a reboot with a release date of somewhere around the time of 2009 - 2010. Not a bad leap knowing that it came out in 2001(?). In my opinion even if the sequal does do bad, the series still has a great possibility of regaining its legs. Hell look at the Transformers series. It's pretty much sucked since the cool days of Beast Wars and now a movie is coming with action that managed to an R rating. Meaning it it going to be on the level Superman should have been.

 

[lexlives]

Yet again i must respond to this statement wit hthe simple fact that you are being too pessimistic. It does not take THAt long for superhero franchise to regain its legs. Look at the Batman series. The opinion I hear of them is that the first four kinda sucked and then they did a reboot about 8(?) years after the last one came out. It did superbly in my opinion. Now there is Hulk. The movie series is basically getting a reboot with a release date of somewhere around the time of 2009 - 2010. Not a bad leap knowing that it came out in 2001(?). In my opinion even if the sequal does do bad, the series still has a great possibility of regaining its legs. Hell look at the Transformers series. It's pretty much sucked since the cool days of Beast Wars and now a movie is coming with action that managed to an R rating. Meaning it it going to be on the level Superman should have been.

It will take that long IMHO. SR is totally different from the Hulk and the late 90s batman film.

First off, though all three films were critically panned, the Hulk and Batman made back at the domestic box more than they cost to make. SR did not. The other two were moderate financial sucesses while SR was not. Plus there was the 10 years of development hell for SR and Lord knows the money WB actually blew on that.

Superman won't come back as quickly for fiancial reasons alone and too with Batman being a huge success now I expect we will see a run of 4 or 5 batman films. Plus JLA will likely get a trilogy and spin off if WB is lucky too potentially huge franchises.

WB will have all it can handle with batman, JLA, Flash, WW, GL, Aquaman and more for the next several decades. The simple truth is the studio does not need the Superman franchise as it has far more lucrative or potentially lucrative franchises.

Will they ever try again - yeah I think so in 15 - 20 years at a time when they have established success through Bats and these other characters as Marvel has now and can afford to put some money at risk by trying to bring Superman back again.