World Superman Lives!

[BH/HHH]

Jesus, that's the problem with WBs they used to just care about how they can merchandise these films. I mean look at Batman & Robin they just said forget the end product we need to sell toys. Which I do understand in a respect cause that's where the real money is made but they should have just let Burton make the film he wanted too.
Its interesting to know that about on set writers. I guess some of the dialogue issues really would have been sorted out.

 

[Dr.]

I still maintain that the Strick script is a mess. That may not be Strick’s fault - blame Jon Peters, blame studio execs with merchandizing $ in their eyes. And maybe Burton could have transformed and rehabilitated it. But the script, itself, is painful to read.

Akiva Goldsman co-wrote Batman Forever and was the sole writer on Batman and Robin. But he went on to better things - including earning an Oscar for A Beautiful Mind. I have no doubt that Strick is talented. But you can’t tell that from his Superman Lives effort.

 

[BH/HHH]

I think the action scenes are quite good to be fair and I wouldn't say its a mess, it flows quite nicely. I do think there are moments where they needed an extra scene in I.e. When Lois and Jimmy see Clark in the Arctic I think they needed a scene before to show Clark getting into a trance. So other than bad Brainiac & Lex (especially) dialogue I don't think there's a problem with it.

 

[Dr.]

To me, it read like a comic book. And not just in terms of campy villains, dialogue and subtle-as-a-brick “skull ships.” It felt like a single episode in a much longer series - and seemed to assume a prior and strong familiarity with the material. As such, Lives places Supes (relatively quickly) into a novel and atypical context (he’s weakened, he dies, he undergoes a resurrection and rejuvenation). In other words, there’s a fair stretch of time where the “classic Superman/CK” is actually absent. Again, that may be a welcome bit of narrative freshness and variation if the audience has been keeping up with (and getting slightly fatigued by) a series of more conventional Superman adventures. But Lives was supposed to be a reintroduction/reboot. Arguably, a “death of Superman” storyline (with, of course, an improved screenplay ) would work better as a 2nd or 3rd movie in a trilogy.

 

[BH/HHH]

I think you have to remember that his movie would have come out in the late 90s or at least early 2000s so if u look at it from that aspect of what was out of the time you could probably say it was very comic booky.

I do think if they tackle the death again it would be better saved for a 3rd movie.

 

[batman strikes]

To me, it read like a comic book. And not just in terms of campy villains, dialogue and subtle-as-a-brick “skull ships.” It felt like a single episode in a much longer series - and seemed to assume a prior and strong familiarity with the material. As such, Lives places Supes (relatively quickly) into a novel and atypical context (he’s weakened, he dies, he undergoes a resurrection and rejuvenation). In other words, there’s a fair stretch of time where the “classic Superman/CK” is actually absent. Again, that may be a welcome bit of narrative freshness and variation if the audience has been keeping up with (and getting slightly fatigued by) a series of more conventional Superman adventures. But Lives was supposed to be a reintroduction/reboot. Arguably, a “death of Superman” storyline (with, of course, an improved screenplay ) would work better as a 2nd or 3rd movie in a trilogy.

Exactly, I feel if you are going to make the Death of Superman into a film you should have him die at the end of the second film ending it with the funeral. You can the start the third a few months to a year later and have him return. To me this would a whole lot better than cramming the whole story in 2 hours or less the way WB wanted to do it. I still would of loved to have seen this movie even if it turn out to be a bad film.

 

[BH/HHH]

Yeah that aspect of the film is rushed, before you get to feel the loss he's already back albeit powerless without K. I think you can do it in one film though, the Dark Knight Rises did a good job of showing the loss of Batman in its run time before his inevtiable return to take down Bane.

I just think looking at the way this film was cancelled in favour of Wild Wild West thet might aswell have made it cause that film bombed anyway.

 

[batman strikes]

A good writer could tell the story in one film, but I just think it would be cool to have this epic battle with doomsday at the end of the second film. The ending would be similar to The Dark Knight where the hero may of defeated the villain but in the end the characters lost so much more.


I think the reason why The Dark Knight Rises worked is because Bane is a fleshed out villain where Doomsday is just a plot device to kill Superman. This means you have to introduce the main villain and then have him use this creature to kill him. It isn't bad its just takes something away from the villain if he has to use another creature to kill the hero. Where if you use Doomsday as a last resort for the villain in the second, you could have a great scene. Of course this only my opinion and I'm sure you and others on the hype could come up with reason why this isn't a good idea.

 

[BH/HHH]

A good writer could tell the story in one film, but I just think it would be cool to have this epic battle with doomsday at the end of the second film. The ending would be similar to The Dark Knight where the hero may of defeated the villain but in the end the characters lost so much more.

I think the reason why The Dark Knight Rises worked is because Bane is a fleshed out villain where Doomsday is just a plot device to kill Superman. This means you have to introduce the main villain and then have him use this creature to kill him. It isn't bad its just takes something away from the villain if he has to use another creature to kill the hero. Where if you use Doomsday as a last resort for the villain in the second, you could have a great scene. Of course this only my opinion and I'm sure you and others on the hype could come up with reason why this isn't a good idea.

I think you're correct regarding Bane but I think the film makers on Lives knew that Doomsday wasn't an interesting enough villain on his own. Hence why they made him a weapon (of sorts) for Brainiac. Brainiac is your interesting villain whereas his pet is the one who kills Superman. I think there's actually a good story there that you could use in a Man of Steel sequel. Doomsday doesn't have to be a pet, he could be a being that Brainiac discovers (which he pretty much does in Lives anyway) or even creates.

I just don't know how you make it interesting over two films. The start of the sequel would need big action beats and if you dint have Superman returning until about halfway through i just think it could drag. Maybe if they went with a trilogy in the Death Arc and do:

- The Death of Superman
- Reign of the Supermen
- The Return of Superman (Superman Lives)

I think you'd have to do a Reign of the Supermen film in between cause you certainly can't do a whole film on the World without a Superman. This way you have a full on film with other heroes this would by time and fill in the action beats for Superman's returns in the final film. This would be perfect to release using The Lord of the Rings/Hobbit formula where you release each film at Christmas a year apart.

Alternatively I think you could do two films if you had Supergirl in the story.

But I still feel you could tell it successfully over one film but I think you'd need a minimum of 2 hours 45 mins runtime like the Dark Knight Rises had.

 

[batman strikes]

I think you're correct regarding Bane but I think the film makers on Lives knew that Doomsday wasn't an interesting enough villain on his own. Hence why they made him a weapon (of sorts) for Brainiac. Brainiac is your interesting villain whereas his pet is the one who kills Superman. I think there's actually a good story there that you could use in a Man of Steel sequel. Doomsday doesn't have to be a pet, he could be a being that Brainiac discovers or even creates.

I just don't know how you make it interesting over two films. The start of the sequel would need big action beats and if you dint have Superman returning until about halfway through i just think it could drag. Maybe if they went with a trilogy in the Death Arc and do:

- The Death of Superman
- Reign of the Supermen
- The Return of Superman (Superman Lives)

I think you'd have to do a Reign of the Supermen film in between cause you certainly can't do a whole film on the World without a Superman. This way you have a full on film with other heroes this would by time and fill in the action beats for Superman's returns in the final film. This would be perfect to release using The Lord of the Rings/Hobbit formula where you release each film at Christmas a year apart.

Alternatively I think you could do two films if you had Supergirl in the story.

But I still feel you could tell it successfully over one film but I think you'd need a minimum of 2 hours 45 mins runtime like the Dark Knight Rises had.

You bring up a lot of good points. I also agree that the third film would drag if you didn't bring Superman back until 30 minutes into the film. I think the best way to solve this problem is introduce Supergirl or Superboy or even Steel. Of course for a film you would have to choose one or the other so you don't get bogged down with too many characters.

I do like the idea of Doomsday being something Brainiac had collected or created. That's why I was thinking Doomsday could be kind of last resort for Brainiac at the end of the second film. One things for sure if they did do this story arc you would need at least 2 hrs 45 minutes to tell the story well.

 

[BH/HHH]

You bring up a lot of good points. I also agree that the third film would drag if you didn't bring Superman back until 30 minutes into the film. I think the best way to solve this problem is introduce Supergirl or Superboy or even Steel. Of course for a film you would have to choose one or the other so you don't get bogged down with too many characters.

I do like the idea of Doomsday being something Brainiac had collected or created. That's why I was thinking Doomsday could be kind of last resort for Brainiac at the end of the second film. One things for sure if they did do this story arc you would need at least 2 hrs 45 minutes to tell the story well.

Yeah and you also have the problem that when you bring Superman back, he's not back in the public eye right away. So you need something to give us the action beats, if they were to do it over two-films I think Supergirl would probably make the most sense.

Yeah definitely would need to get as close to three hours as possible.

I really do love the trilogy aspect though, I think something this epic would be benefit from the three films rule. I think it could be something wonderful like Lord of the Rings was.

 

[theMan-Bat]

It would have been a real downer to end the movie with Superman dead. It certainly couldn't have been called Superman Lives or Reborn. Lacking the uplifting moments of Superman's resurrection and triumphantly defeating the villains, the film would have been seen as too dark, gloomy and depressing, especially for general audiences of families, kids, and if that first film ending with the death flopped, the sequel featuring Superman's resurrection would have never been made. I'm glad they didn't try to stretch out the Death of Superman comics arc, I'm also glad that they didn't try to do the Reign of the Supermen with Superman replacements in a sequel, which takes the focus off Superman, just like the comics did, in that case it would have been too much like the comics, when general audiences want to see Superman, he has the marquee value, not all of these other guys like Steel and the Cyborg Superman, etc. I'm glad they didn't try to go that far and make it into a carbon copy of the comics arc. As for focusing on Superman's origin for none-comics readers, at the time in the '90s there was the hit TV series Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman in prime time aimed at adults and families, and Superman: The Animated Series on weekday afternoons aimed at kids, both of which had focused on Superman's origin, so a movie didn't need to be focused on retelling the origin again. Also, there are some flashbacks to the origin in the Superman Lives script by Wesley Strick, without it being the overall focus of the entire film.

 

[BH/HHH]

I don't think back then you could have killed Superman off in one film and then done a resurrection movie but I think you could now. Movies like LOTR's have shown that you if u do the format right (I.e. Consective releases) then you can draw a story out and keep it interesting. In LOTR's we know the ring will get destroyed yet its how they get to that, that makes it interesting. Its the same with the Death and Return of, we know Superman's gonna come back but its interesting how it gets there. I think Reign of the Supermen was fantastic. It was a story that allowed them to keep Superman out of the comics even longer and when Superman returned he had a threat to deal with. It also gave me my second favourite comics character in Superboy. Admittedly I don't like the Cyborg Superman think he's a pretty poor villain tbh. Infact when I read the original story I actually thought the Eradicator was Superman. Plus I would love to see that Steel vs Eradicator fight was epic. I think if they were to do it, skip the Cyborg Superman and just have the Eradictor be the villain. I think now you'd have to do it over two or three movies, you couldn't get away with rushing it now.

 

[batman strikes]

Oh, I was talking about making the film that way back then. I was thinking now because you have Man of Steel coming out then you can have a darker sequel. Then ending it on an uplifting third film.

 

[BH/HHH]

Oh, I was talking about making the film that way back then. I was thinking now because you have Man of Steel coming out then you can have a darker sequel. Then ending it on an uplifting third film.

Well so was I in a sense but I don't think you'd have needed more than one film back then. But now I think you do, I'd rather they did it after two Man of Steel movies as a LOTR style trilogy.

 

[theMan-Bat]

I'm glad they didn't try to spread it out over a couple of movies. I’d much rather they'd just packed the movie with the real substance of the complete storyline. Then the next film could have moved on to a completely different story with another villain. A full complete story leads to more enjoyment for me per movie and I believe would have been far more enjoyable and satisfying for general audiences.

The Death of Superman Lives: What Happened? documentary reached extra funding to $115,110.

Jon Schnepp said "At the last second, $115,110!!! We did it!!! Thanks to everyone who contributed!!! The documentary is going to be made!!!! A few scenes from the stretch goal will be made!!!! This is now happening and is a reality!!!"

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1270411036/the-death-of-superman-lives-what-happened

Here is another interview with Jon Schnepp about Superman Lives.

Everything Action: "Superman Lives (1997-1998), as you have said, is a very polarizing topic among fans. Some love the ideas and the shape it was taking, others are completely dumbfounded that it ever got as far as it did. Others fall somewhere in between. Where did you stand when it was initially announced? Did your feelings change as details leaked out? Does the fact that we never actually got to see the film change your reaction to the vision of Superman they were trying to sell?"

Jon Schnepp: "I think that this was the reboot that the character needed at the time, and that ultimately, fear got in the way. Fear of trying something new, something that wasn’t just more of the same. This fear was born in the voice of the fans, who sometimes become too overprotective of a character or icon, and do not allow it to grow. They could be right, they could be wrong, but I think for the most part you have to let films happen, just like any kind of media. Only then can you either have change that is good, like Batman Begins (2005), born from Batman & Robin (1997). I followed the release of production art and design with great interest. It looked really out there, in a good and exciting way. That we never got to see this, and instead were given a well shot but bland rehash of the Superman '70s movie, with Lex Luthor trying to buy land and Superman floating around lifting various items (Superman Returns (2006)). This just made me really want to see the more extreme, rebooted version of Superman."

Everything Action: "Keeping with the theme of polarization, some of the creative choices made were interesting to say the least. For my money, the casting of Nicolas Cage as Superman and hiring of Tim Burton as director are at the forefront of these choices. In the grand scheme of things, do you think it was the people bringing this very unique vision of the Man of Steel to life that made Superman Lives so outlandish, or was it the vision itself (as mandated by Jon Peters, and written by Kevin Smith) that made Superman Lives so head-scratchingly weird?"

Jon Schnepp: "I think it is the combination of extremes that creates the clash and the ultimate shut down of projects. Tim Burton was ideally a great choice for where the character of Superman was at the time, and Jon Peters’ desire to see giant spiders and polar bears kind of went against that. Even the casting of one of the greatest character actors turned action star was met with oddness by the same fans who rejected Michael Keaton’s casting as Batman until they saw the film and then later rejoiced."

Everything Action: "Alex Ford, the quasi-legendary fan who managed to pitch Warner Brothers a seven-film Superman series, has a great quote about his experience working with Warner Brothers: 'I can tell you they don’t know much about comics. Their audience isn’t you and me who pay $7.00 (to see the movie). It’s for the parents who spend $60 on toys and lunch boxes. It is a business, and what’s more important, the $150 million at the box office or the $600 million in merchandising?'"

Jon Schnepp: "He was very correct, it is a business. The Batman Animated Series (1992) figures of Aqua-Batman and Orange-Batman and Spacesuit-Batman always outsold the Riddler and the Penguin, so with this new Superman, they wanted many different outfits and vehicles. Hence, Original Suit Superman, Robot Suit Superman, Regeneration Suit Superman, Reborn Silver Suit Superman for the Superman Lives toy line."

Everything Action: "Are there any other unmade Superman movies that captured your interest?"

Jon Schnepp: "Well, when Superman Lives (1997-1998) got shut down, the JJ Abrams/McG Superman: Flyby (2001-2003) came to life, and was another film that got very close to production, with casting shoots using a Stan Winston designed suit, to full 3D animatics being done. Then fans went nuts again, and we got Superman Returns (2006), the movie the fans thought they wanted. Now we are getting a new reboot, with some echoes of the previous versions embedded within."

Everything Action: "Arguably, there is no more iconic role an actor can land than that of the Man of Steel. In that same respect, there’s probably no single role that comes with as much pressure or will be subject to such scrutiny by fanboys and casual moviegoers alike. What was your gut-level reaction to the casting of Nicolas Cage as Superman?"

Jon Schnepp: "Inspired! Truly inspired casting to get someone who could actually act, and get inside this larger-than-life character. I think he would have been incredible, and it’s a sorry state that a bunch of idiots keep referring to (The Wicker Man (2006)) 'Not the Bees!' YouTube clips, and not his actual work as an incredible character actor. Though those 'Bee' clips are hilarious, especially him running around in a giant bear outfit."

Everything Action: "Do you have a favorite Nicolas Cage movie or moment?"

Jon Schnepp: "Most of his facial acting in Raising Arizona (1987) and Face/Off (1997), and his total performances in Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans (2009), Kick-Ass (2010), Vampire's Kiss (1989), Wild at Heart (1990), Kiss of Death (1995) and Adaptation (2002)."

Everything Action: "Depending on how you look at things, Tim Burton’s track record with superhero adaptations is either brilliant or tragic. Obviously, he had taken substantial liberties with the source material when directing Batman Returns (1992), which for many fans is considered more of a Tim Burton movie than a Batman movie. Is this something that worried you or intrigued you when Tim Burton was announced as director? Has your opinion changed in the past 15 or so years?"

Jon Schnepp: "Do Christopher Nolan’s character liberties with Batman in The Dark Knight Rises (2012) bother fans? That anyone can be Batman, that this is a replaceable symbol that can re-retire once he’s found a replacement? This is Christopher Nolan’s take on the character, and now another director will come in a few years and reboot it all again. This is what is so great about these characters — they can be reinterpreted for every new generation."

Everything Action: "I find myself fascinated with all of the proposed DC films that never saw the light of day. Some got much farther than others. In particular, I have always been haunted by the Darren Aronofsky and Frank Miller adaptations of Batman: Year One (2001-2002). Are there any other DC films that never came to be that you would put up there with Superman Lives (1997-1998) in terms of wishing it had been made? If so, is there any chance we may see a Jon Schnepp documentary about it one day?"

Jon Schnepp: "I have recently come into a lot of the Batman: Year One (2001-2002) artwork and designs. The scripts, it would have been different, but it does not interest me in the way Superman Lives (1997-1998) does. There are so many unmade superhero films that got so far and then the plug got pulled. The list I have is quite impressive, and also quite sad, especially compared to what actually got made.

Everything Action: "What is the single biggest unanswered question you have about Superman Lives that you hope to answer in your documentary, The Death of Superman Lives: What Happened?"

Jon Schnepp: "What was the ultimate set of circumstances that caused this project to collapse? I need to find the first and the last domino of this story."

Everything Action: "Above all else, what do you want fans to take away from your documentary, The Death of Superman Lives: What Happened?"

Jon Schnepp: "I want to make a film about not only what could have been, but of how what was not made had a ripple effect across every other iteration. How the actual production of a franchised character will go through all these different permutations and changes and challenges, and what is ultimately the final product that criss-cross past us as we wait for the next. I also want to show how ideas can be powerful, how negativity destroys creativity, and that everything has the ability to become fantastic!"

Everything Action: "Pretty cool, right? The best part is that, as of this writing, The Death of Superman Lives: What Happened? has officially surpassed its funding goal, so it is no longer a fanboy dream – it’s actually going to happen!"

http://www.everythingaction.com/2013/03/09/an-interview-with-jon-schnepp/

 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

I would like to see The Death of Superman Lives: What Happened.
The Script of Superman Lives was quite fun, it was very Burton...

 

[BH/HHH]

Cannot wait for this doc

 

[titansupes]

"A few scenes from the stretch goal will be made".

...Whhooooooo.

 

[Super Kal]

i was really curious to see what the score was going to be like, but i guess they didnt make enough money for that

 

[nouan]

I would really like to see how the "light" suit would have looked like. The one that was going to be dark blue and chrome like with all the lights going underneath. I think it could have been really beautiful. I've been trying to figure it out with photoshop, but it seems hard to create.

 

[BH/HHH]

I would really like to see how the "light" suit would have looked like. The one that was going to be dark blue and chrome like with all the lights going underneath. I think it could have been really beautiful. I've been trying to figure it out with photoshop, but it seems hard to create.

Well if he ages to interview Steve Johnston he might show him some stuff

 

[Kane52630]

Jon Schnepp said "At the last second, $115,110!!! We did it!!! Thanks to everyone who contributed!!! The documentary is going to be made!!!! A few scenes from the stretch goal will be made!!!! This is now happening and is a reality!!!"

Can't wait. t:

 

[theMan-Bat]

Funny video...
[YT]Pvx22WmjxfE[/YT]

 

[titansupes]

Haha, the end with Schnepp and Batman.