Superman Returns Supes to Return Again

[Super Kal]

this is Superman, not Batman dammit... He's the Ultimate Boyscout, not the Dark Knight.

 

[SolidSnakeMGS]

I loved the "Go get em Tiger" line but I admit that the X3 line was cheesey and not in a good way. I agree that Superman was a lying bastard, he was not always around.

What a surprise.

 

[Zing79]

Excellent

I'm young enough that barring some major health concern I can let Singer screw around with Superman for a few years -- let him run it into the ground -- and then wait for some other filmmaker to get it *right.

*According to my, and only my personal opinion

 

[explode7]

I hope the sequel is the last superman film. Hopefully it will do lower numbers that SR and a restart will be inevitable in the furture. Go ahead singer continue to **** with superman soon WB will wise up and realize the mistake they have made. I hope they dont wise up too late and let Singer make a third.

 

[BrollySupersj]

I really want Mettalo for a villian, or Mongul. I never really liked that villian, but after seeing him in the SR game, I like him alot. PLUS the DCSH figure looks very good.

 

[Pickle-El]

Excellent

I'm young enough that barring some major health concern I can let Singer screw around with Superman for a few years -- let him run it into the ground -- and then wait for some other filmmaker to get it *right.

*According to my, and only my personal opinion

That's cool.....I'll be young enough to enjoy another very-likely Good Superman flick in 2009. (hasn't let me down yet so far...X1/2/SR)

AND

I'll be around for an eventuall reboot in 20 years.

 

[The Guard]

"SUPERMAN REMAINS"

Patent pending...

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

That's cool.....I'll be young enough to enjoy another very-likely Good Superman flick in 2009. (hasn't let me down yet so far...X1/2/SR)

AND

I'll be around for an eventuall reboot in 20 years.

Me too Pickle, SR2 is now one of my most anticipated CB movies.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

What a surprise.

Stalk much?

 

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

you must have that something ISS.

 

[bunk]

I hope the sequel is the last superman film. Hopefully it will do lower numbers that SR and a restart will be inevitable in the furture. Go ahead singer continue to **** with superman soon WB will wise up and realize the mistake they have made. I hope they dont wise up too late and let Singer make a third.

How can you be a Superman fan and wish for a Superman movie to do terrible? Its like hoping for a terrorist attack because you hate the Bush administration.

 

[I Am The Knight]

I think the sequel will please most people. Singer haters should give the guy another chance for the sequel. I think it's funny that he makes great films but the minute he supposedly makes a mistake, he's no good, he should go sell groceries, he should never direct a movie again, etc etc.

I trust the guy. He didn't let me down with SR, and I think he'll do a great job with the sequel. Just be open minded. You might be in for a surprise. But hell, whatever you think, I'll still be anticipating Singer's sequel.

 

[Tyler23]

Can't wait for the sequel.

My only concern is with the villain(s). Have to concede that I'm not all that familiar with the traditional comic gallery of villains. I loved Superman: The Movie and have followed the films ever since, but only know Lex & Zod.

I very much prefer the quasi-realistic approach Singer/Nolan took with Superman and Batman respectively, and hope a more "sci-fi" element wouldn't make the film too over the top and/or campy.

Hopefully they're able to pull it off without doing something "Green Goblinish". Keep it as serious and foreboding as possible.

 

[Zorex]

Oh, le sigh. Now we're complaining about getting a Superman film.

 

[I Am The Knight]

That's why the Hype "rulez".

 

[BrollySupersj]

Would anyone mind if Mongul is the villian?

 

[I Am The Knight]

We could see Warworld, so no I wouldn't mind. I want the sequel to be more space Sci-Fi.

 

[BrollySupersj]

Then Mongul would be perfect.

 

[Mr. Socko]

I don't hate Singer, just the BS he creates with the disclusion of X2 and Suspects.

 

[romeogbs19]

Yay! I’m happy that WB has green-lit the Superman sequel. I wasn’t blown away by Singer’s first run at Big Blue; like many others, I wasn’t pleased with the script and didn’t feel the character dialogue was up to snuff. For a $200+ million project, it felt rushed and subsequently, unoriginal.

However, Singer is an intelligent and adaptive director. Based on his earlier work, esp. X2, I’m cautiously optimistic Singer will make amends with the sequel, and deliver a Superman movie comic buffs will appreciate more.

So, this said, here are SIX general areas I believe Singer/WB need to tackle in order to ensure the sequel succeeds where SR didn’t. This post is long but I wanted to spell out what I feel are critical pieces Singer et al need to look at closely. By no means is this a comprehensive list, nor do I contend that it’s the best list, but I do feel many of these echo the concerns a lot of viewers of SR expressed:

1. Stronger Character Dialogue: The weakest element of SR was its conversation; no way should the line we’re meant to remember from a Superman movie be “I’m always around.” There was little in the way of development, and that’s mostly due to a bland, sometimes inept script with no memorable zingers or character-driven speech. For the sequel, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE seek out real authors such as Michael Chabon (who I think would be fantastic – remember STM was done by Mario Puzo), and hire a handful of the comic’s writers too, such as Jeph Loeb or Grant Morrison.

2. Action: Yes, we need more action, but not action for the sake of action. Unfortunately, I felt the sequences in SR, while well directed, were woefully unoriginal and as Ebert suggested, “duty” driven. Superman stopping a robbery? Slowing a crashing plane <yawn>? While this doesn’t mean we don’t appreciate them, these failed in terms of being memorable. It should be said that what made STM’s action so terrific were the personal punch-lines (“Bad vibrations;” “Something wrong with the elevator?”), none of these existed in SR. Superman isn’t Spider-man, but that doesn’t mean he’s the silent rescuer. Either build in numerous “small” action sequences like STM or venture out to original rescue scenes. No matter what, give him personality, or at least good-natured one-liners! Raimi, BTW, handles these to near perfection. Singer should look at his work -- they're 'friendly' action sequences that deliver both personality and intensity.

3. Lighter Tone: And that brings us to the tone/feel of the movie. A lot has been said about the color scheme of SR – which many consider too dark and grim. Color, however, is only one part of tone, and yes, SR is too dark. Moreover, one element (of many) the Donner version absolutely nailed was the lighter conversational tone – the dialogue was sweet when it needed to be and serious when the moment called for it. SR feels like it’s set in Gotham, not Metropolis – and it’s perpetually dark (does anyone smile in SR?). This is exemplified by Routh’s final flight at the end; unlike Reeve, he doesn’t smile – and it’s a stark grimness that drags down SR. Give the movie a brighter color set and take down the level of seriousness several notches. There needs to be a level of personality that makes us chuckle in Superman; if we want brooding, we’ll see Batman. Superman does not brood, which he did too often in SR.

4. Understandable villain or villain(s): What make X-Men and Spider-man work (Batman, too) are villains with back-stories that allow us to understand their intentions. We may think the villains are off their rockers, but their ideologies are thorough. Lex is interesting in the comics because his ideology of rescuing humanity is in direct contrast with Superman’s: Big Blue feels humans should be allowed to live and determine their own will – Lex, on the other hand, believes rescuing man is best achieved through his decisions alone. It’s ultimately a battle of philosophies that, unfortunately, we never get in SR. Spacey’s Lex is just the run-of-the-mill bad guy who wants to conquer the world <yawn>. Whether it’s Magneto, Joker, or even Green Goblin, there needs to be some underlying motive beyond simple power/greed. Otherwise, we get what we got in SR – a villain that’s evil for evil’s sake. Unoriginal and one-dimensional. Singer of all people knows this, which is why I suspect the sequel to handle this much better.

5. Read the comics: We all know Singer never read comics growing up, and that’s fine. However, given the direction with Richard/Jason, please read at least “Secret Identity” and “Son of Superman” – both books provide themes/ideas that could and should be incorporated into SR’s sequel, esp. if Singer intends to carry on this whole Superman family-line idea. While I’m on this, again, I am pleading that WB add a real author to the script. And of course, I endorse Michael Chabon again – he is more than capable of adding that layer of intelligence we saw in STM.

6. Tighter focus on relationships that matter: And that brings us to this final point. There are too many characters in SR – and none of them feel well developed by the end; needing to include Jimmy/Richard/Lois/Jason/White left us with little more than cutout characters. Tension never really got through – much less relationships. Superman’s humanity is never explored and that is central to a compelling plot. What made STM and at least long parts of 2 and 3 good were Superman’s struggle for his own humanity. This only happens if he’s in relationships – which is one of the key reasons why Richard/Jason screwed up the storyline. Without the Clark/Lois/Superman triangle, there’s no interest. Face it, there’s a reason why Superman cartoons/shows lose interest when this triangle is broken or dissolved (i.e. Lois finds out who Supes is, effectively ending the triangle). There is no triangle, and while I understand Singer’s desire to add tension, the time between Richard/Lois steals time we want with Lois/Clark, and in a 2-3 hour movie, there’s no time for all of that. In a sequel, the central focus must remain strictly on Lois/Clark or, like in 3, with a Lana Lang. Without a key love interest that is explored with Clark/Superman, there’s no chance at showing his humanity, and subsequently, we lose the most essential element that makes Superman movies interesting. Action will always be there, but without the relationship interaction, a Superman movie is never going to get very far.

 

[mjbull23]

Rome,

excellent point on number 1, and something i never contemplated before until now, yet it's true. There really are no memorable one liners in the movie. I too felt the dialogue could have been stronger.

Just the same, Im excited to see what the sequel will bring.

 

[Steelsheen]

Would anyone mind if Mongul is the villian?

Mongul would be a good villain


but Brainiac would be a better villain

 

[bunk]

Rome,

excellent point on number 1, and something i never contemplated before until now, yet it's true. There really are no memorable one liners in the movie. I too felt the dialogue could have been stronger.

Just the same, Im excited to see what the sequel will bring.

Superman should be able to be able to articulate better. He's too quiet in SR. He doesn't say a whole lot to the people he randomly saves but with Lois its different. He should be able to say all the right things to her and it never be stupid or cheesy. As far as the one liners go, I'll watch Spiderman for that, Superman doesn't need to be funny.

 

[Super Kal]

Mongul would be a good villain


but Brainiac would be a better villain

 

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

No..lets see superman see the boy die..releasing his anger..pushing him further away form lois..having Richard swear revenge on superman...asking lex for his help in killing the man of steel...but Brainiac arrives on earth..

so there is a bigger threat.


said this in another thread.. my idea for the sequel story.