What is the main reason WB don't proceed with MOS 2?

[JOE]

It’s the money, it’s always about the money.

 

[GreenKToo]

Yup, if WB could get an abrams or Spielberg as director, and have someone cast like a Denzel or DDL as Lex, they would fall all over themselves to make it.

 

[BH/HHH]

Well ultimately it's always about money, cause if they don't make money they won't make the film's.

But with Superman there's more to it, the biggest reason is they don't know what to do with him and tbf they haven't ever since the Reeve series ended. The 90s was filled with them trying to adapt the Death of Superman but without actually giving a toss about the source material, the early 2000s was them trying to get Superman to fit some trend, be it Crouching Tiger, Star Wars or the Matrix. Then Singer did Superman Returns and they fell in live with his nostalgia pitch (which I still maintain doing a nostalgia take isn't a bad idea it just wasn't executed properly), the pat film left Superman back in limbo as WB didn't know where to take the character post that film. Then ultimately we got Man of Steel (a film I live) but again jumping on a trend this time Nolan's style. They could have launched a sequel from that film much like the Dark Knight was to Batman Begins but they panicked and decided to launch a DC Universe. The rest as they say is history...

So here we are now, Superman back in limbo, what he needs is a filmmaker like they had with Richard Donner back in 1978 who loves and understands the character. I personally would get Donner back on board as a producer, much like John Carpenter did with Halloween. No I'm not saying go back to Donner's version, but having Donner there helping to make decisions could really benefit the next Superman film.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Then ultimately we got Man of Steel (a film I live)

What is with you people, the word is love or live, please use it correctly in film titles

 

[Iceman]

That's got to be autocorrect.

 

[BH/HHH]

What is with you people, the word is love or live, please use it correctly in film titles

I'm embracing the wrong vowels hahaha

That's got to be autocorrect.

It was actually haha

Auto correct on iPad's and iPhones is terrible

 

[Mandon Knight]

Never take an IOU out people.

 

[gerrym51]

money-how much to make-how much it will make-how much Cavill wants

 

[Ita-KalEl]

Because they don't know how to make it the success they want. They tried twice with Superman Returns and MOS/BvS with two different approaches and now they don't know what to do.
Of course they know that Superman is still a gold mine, but they have no idea how to proceed. And I understand them because it is not esasy.
It happened the same thing with Spiderman, and then they used The Avengers and Iron Man to relaunch it in some way. Unfortunately Superman has not any Avengers movie to use to take new energy.

My opinion is that doing a successful SH movie is an alchemy between right budget and expectations, right release date, a good script epic and light in the same way, tradition and innovation. They used some good ideas in Superman Returns and other in MOS, buth both movies are flawed and they don't transmit to the public the soul of the character as the Donner's movie did 40 years ago.
Oh yes the Donner/Lester movies. It's really paradoxical that in 2018, after various ruinous attempts, Superman The Movie and Superman II have been the only successful movies about the most iconic superhero.

My advice to WB is to not be scared about the risk of another failure. Superman must be used. Simple and clean. Come on, Aquaman is going to do 1 billion.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

WB is probably fearful that the public views Superman as a superhero that doesn't have much unique going on anymore.

Yes, Aquaman made a lot despite its DCEU baggage, but it's also providing a fresh experience. So, if WB can find that fresh angle on Superman, or fresh experience, I imagine they'll give the green light.

If they don't want to reboot the Superman stuff, I at least think they need to take a break from Lois and Martha. Let's give some more fun side characters for Superman to play off.

 

[Marz69]

They don't know what to do. If they did MOS2 after MOS with the personality of JL's superman, they would be fine. But they changed Superman's tone to fit BvS and killed Clark and now they're not sure how to course correct. The audience is forgiving. But WB doesn't know where to go.

And this might be a problem overall. WW is set in the past. AQM is underwater (in its own world). So it's easier to come up with stand alone stories. GL will be in space. You can always send Cyborg to another world. Batman (with no powers) can easily have his battles with human enemies in Gotham

It might be harder for them to think of stories for Superman that don't involve the end of the world and thereby doesn't involve other characters to join (since it's a shared universe now). I actually don't have problems with another DC hero showing up in a superman movie.

But they can have parasite... Bring in Lobo.... or other stories that don't involve end of the world scenarios. Like Toyman. How about the intergang? We'll need clark back. Make up any reason. Say clark was in the witness protection program... who cares what the excuse is. The audience will forgive. Make whoever the villains are FUN.

 

[Flash525]

Auto correct on iPad's and iPhones is terrible

The number of times I've wrote duck instead of something else is highly amusing.

 

[BH/HHH]

The number of times I've wrote duck instead of something else is highly amusing.

 

[Vaibow]

I feel like theya re not sure of how to move forward as they probably are torn between a couple of ways to do it.

Aquaman is solid proof that a good director, vision and cast that believe in the project goes a long way.

With Superman, it really is so simple - give the people what they know and like about superman.

A decent country farm guy that has better than average manners, values and positivity. Give him super powers, that eh can literally do anything with them. Then, put him in the city where he wants to work and make a difference to society - spreading truth, justice.. the old fashioned way.

Then, having to hold himself back, be more incognito in the office for the greater good - due to his alter ego - larger than life superman who he uses as a means to achieve more than what his day job allows him.

That's his core... it always has been and that's why he has been a success for so long in pop culture - a human that can sneak off and be a hero.

 

[2kt09]

That's his core... it always has been and that's why he has been a success for so long in pop culture - a human that can sneak off and be a hero.

He has so many people playing him, so many adaptations, so many spinoffs...even his dog got a cartoon.

The Aquaman approach means more is more. Being Super and everyday any ol' shenanigans is not enough.
Get weird. Make the world feel vast.

 

[Greenlite]

They have the perfect opportunity to do something different - Henry and Amy have a little baby/toddler and they try to cope with mother in law headaches, work stress, fighting enemies while keeping the family safe, and the little one happy.

They could even have Jack Jack moments and freak out the nanny, mainstreams would love that

 

[B]

The current situation with Superman on the big screen makes me sad, I honestly hope that they aren't trying to scrub this iteration of Superman, I hope it's simply down to they've not found a director/script/story that their keen on giving the green light to.

Just give Superman the Thor treatment that he received in Ragnarok, he was given somewhat of a soft reboot within the MCU, they ignored/wrote out story elements from the first 2 films that they didn't like & got on with the film without getting overly bogged down with details of who, what, where & why.

 

[Ita-KalEl]

They don't know what to do. If they did MOS2 after MOS with the personality of JL's superman, they would be fine. But they changed Superman's tone to fit BvS and killed Clark and now they're not sure how to course correct. The audience is forgiving. But WB doesn't know where to go.

And this might be a problem overall. WW is set in the past. AQM is underwater (in its own world). So it's easier to come up with stand alone stories. GL will be in space. You can always send Cyborg to another world. Batman (with no powers) can easily have his battles with human enemies in Gotham

It might be harder for them to think of stories for Superman that don't involve the end of the world and thereby doesn't involve other characters to join (since it's a shared universe now). I actually don't have problems with another DC hero showing up in a superman movie.

But they can have parasite... Bring in Lobo.... or other stories that don't involve end of the world scenarios. Like Toyman. How about the intergang? We'll need clark back. Make up any reason. Say clark was in the witness protection program... who cares what the excuse is. The audience will forgive. Make whoever the villains are FUN.

I agree.
They showed to be partially disappointed about MOS results and they tried to make big money using Batman (in theory their gold mine).
Unfortunately they destroyed two franchises with one stone, About Batman they still has the "fresh" memory of Nolan's movies, so they think "The fault it is clearly of Ben Affleck and Snyder, let's change them and everything will be fine", with Superman they think about two "disappointments" in line: Superman Returns and MOS. Yes they were profitable, Superman is still great, but they did not work as expected, the production was not easy so, what to do now? How to relaunch the character? Going with a recast? And who? Every time is a challenge.
Better to invest in something easier.

But they are wrong. Superman is Superman. You can not do movies based on your comic books properties and pretend that Superman can be ignored. Superman is there,
he is a bulky presence that you can not ignore. it's not your problem, it's your bigger resource. It's a problem only because there were people not able to use it properly.

Batman is not better than Superman. After Batman and Robin and the mild Batman Begins box office debut, there were a lot of people ready to consider it a franchise not able to compete neither with Fantastic Four. Spider-man was a champion in 2002, in 2014 was considered "almost dead". But it remained Spider-man. How you can continue to build a Marvel Cinematic Universe without Spidey. Come on. Use your brain. It's the same for Supes. Create a team able to relaunch the character.

My advice? Look to the Superman of the animated series of Timm and Dini. Was perfect in balancing and included the "Superman" of Byrne, Rude, Stern, Donner...wash bright and mature at the sime time.
I don't say "give it to Timm and Dini", no, it should be useless, but look at their work. It's easy to understand what makes a portrait of Superman successful. It's easy.

For example. I still can not understand how it was possible that Singer wanted to repeat the magic of Donner's movie, getting rid of its light and bright atmosphere/colors. Any one could have understood that there was something wrong. It's simple. It needs only the right approach and the right people. So, Wb, please do it.

 

[Mandon Knight]

The number of times I've wrote duck instead of something else is highly amusing.

Don't ducking duck with me you ducking duck.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

25% option 2, 25% option 3 and 50% option 4

 

[Vaibow]

He has so many people playing him, so many adaptations, so many spinoffs...even his dog got a cartoon.

The Aquaman approach means more is more. Being Super and everyday any ol' shenanigans is not enough.
Get weird. Make the world feel vast.

Don’t agree

 

[Vaibow]

The current situation with Superman on the big screen makes me sad, I honestly hope that they aren't trying to scrub this iteration of Superman, I hope it's simply down to they've not found a director/script/story that their keen on giving the green light to.

Just give Superman the Thor treatment that he received in Ragnarok, he was given somewhat of a soft reboot within the MCU, they ignored/wrote out story elements from the first 2 films that they didn't like & got on with the film without getting overly bogged down with details of who, what, where & why.

I agree - just move forward in a way that doesn’t retcon events.. but just changes the tone, dynamics

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

I agree - just move forward in a way that doesn’t retcon events.. but just changes the tone, dynamics

Exactly. Then fans of MoS/BvS can still include those movies, others can just ignore them.

 

[-Arya-]

I think they can’t find a good director to tackle Superman. Even in the days prior to MOS they went through what? 4 directors before Snyder got the job? Nobody wants to live in Donner’s shadow and even try anymore. I hope I’m proven wrong.

 

[Vaibow]

Exactly. Then fans of MoS/BvS can still include those movies, others can just ignore them.

I still like the idea of a couple of sequels set in the 18 months between MOS & BvS. That allows us to use MOS as a spring board and continue the relationship of Lois and Clark & we see how Clark adapts to life in the city! MOS2 doesn’t even need to think about BvS. As it’s a year away in time line! And when you think about it, BvS gave us very little of anything - Office, relationships, etc so then a MOS3 picks up after BvS but can just carry on tonally from MOS2. So you can have a MOS trilogy that on its own works and isn’t at all apologizing for BvS just as WW 1 & 2 and AM aren’t.