Why are so many people deadset against showing the origin?

well that might be true for some but their their is others who might have loved the characters in the show, and started watching other takes, reading the comics, etc....
 
More different than that....I'm talking using it later to tie into the plots and perhaps even the villains as we move through the story...even in a second film....not just how/why/when baby Kal-El/Clark became Superman.
I get what you mean, though i dont want to see the smallville/krypton stuff totally dropped or not used at all cause like i and others have said you are are losing using those characters, and other stuff.
 
well that might be true for some but their their is others who might have loved the characters in the show, and started watching other takes, reading the comics, etc....
Well anyone involved with the comics would hope for this to be true. You always hope that the other media bring new readers into comics. I was just countering the argument that people know the origin or we don't need the origin, because they've seen Smallville. That's just not the case.
 
Yea i see what you are saying kal, but like i said in a few posts if we are getting a new start at things we need to have some origin stuff shown and not cut it out entirely.
 
Even though the majority of a new Superman movie audience probably won't be familiar with either the Donner film or Smallville, the filmmakers will be (definitely STM and at least conceptually re: Smallville). I can't imagine any director or writer would want to put something on film related to the origins unless they find a way to do something unique or different with it. You could come up with a million cute variations on how Clark discovers his powers growing up, but in the end, they are all variations on the same gag. I would think the director would say, "if you want to see those stories, watch the tv show." Otherwise, there is no artistic challenge.

The only reason to show something from Krypton or the Smallville years is if there is a story payoff later in the film (e.g., a villain like Brainiac was involved in Krypton's destruction or if they decide to go the Luthor-Smallville connection). Otherwise, they can easily establish Clark's upbringing by showing his present-day interactions with Ma and Pa Kent (hire actors with great pathos) and some cut-away shots to broken cribs or other evidence of his unique childhood.

This is precisely why the infamous first draft of the Abrams script from the early 2000s took such liberties with the story. Why would they want to do something that's already been done? A good question might be, what elements of the origin are sacrosanct and what aren't?
 
Yup though i still would like to at least still see some things u know and not have it not used at all.
 
Smallville's a tv show and people over estimate its impact. Besides, by the time this movie rolls around it will be off the air.

Besides that, Smallville is hardly "9 years of origin." It's an overembelishment of one period of Clark's pre-Superman life. That doesn't mean that the movie has to cover the same ground that Smallville did for 9 seasons. That's like saying that the Superboy comics count as several hundred issues of origin in the comic series.
 
Isn't it more challanging to come up with a new way to show SM/Clark's origin insted of not showing it at all? I think maybe more and more of his detailed origin should be shown in say the second and third movies. Like show Jor-El and the Krypton events if it does relate to the story. Just showing it to show it to me would be a waist of money. So if it's gonna be included why not have it tie into the story like S:TAS does? This is more like TIH but what if they did the origin in the first movie like they do it in All Star Superman and flesh it out in the other movies.
 
Besides that, Smallville is hardly "9 years of origin." It's an overembelishment of one period of Clark's pre-Superman life. That doesn't mean that the movie has to cover the same ground that Smallville did for 9 seasons. That's like saying that the Superboy comics count as several hundred issues of origin in the comic series.

So just skip the parts on the farm, or at his school.
 
867-5309 Jenny


I don't mind seeing the origin, as long as it's used as something other than just the origin.

Don't you forget about me

I totally agree. I'd show a different aspects of his origin that hasn't been seen such as his world travel's.
 
Don't you forget about me

I totally agree. I'd show a different aspects of his origin that hasn't been seen such as his world travel's.

To be honest, though, I'm not really interested in his world travels and such in terms of character profile....and again, it's not so much what is shown and how that's done different than ever before...but how it's used in the storytelling. I don't want those aspects to just build the character/backstory of Superman or what have you....I'd like them to be pieces of a bigger puzzle that has to be worked out and fought over, or something that adds depth or levity, or contrast, to what's happening in the plot here and now. If he's trying to figure out how to defeat Braniac, for example, and it'll take more than just his immense power...what could he remember about his past that would help him do that? That's the kind of significance that I'd like to see backstory and origin used for...something that's vital to the plot's resolution....and that's why I think the origins can be used in different ways than just introducing/deepening Superman himself.
 
well, if you do an origin, you need to have Lex and a love story with Lois, UnionJack.

every superman movie will have some love story with Lois, and Lex involved in some way. At least this time they can do it right and actually have Lex become a business man rather than a petty thief and have Lois actually show some interest in Clark rather than completely ignoring him like they had her do in SR
 
Totally, yea folks dont like lex since he been used in 4 of the 5 superman films. But that was silver age/petty crook lex. We have yet to see corp/political lex on the big screen. And like i was saying before not having any origin stuff on a restart/new begining is silly. How do you then show the folks the reasons why things are different and they are no long set to be like how things were before.
 
Totally, yea folks dont like lex since he been used in 4 of the 5 superman films. But that was silver age/petty crook lex. We have yet to see corp/political lex on the big screen. And like i was saying before not having any origin stuff on a restart/new begining is silly. How do you then show the folks the reasons why things are different and they are no long set to be like how things were before.

By making the experience of Superman being Superman different and no longer how it was before. They'll get that it's new/different soon enough if they enjoy it.
 
Yeah, if the audience see the modern day Lex on the big screen, I think they're like this version well enough not to be bothered by the 'crook' version of the past movies.

BTW, I've read For All Seasons finally. Great book but I didn't like this particular version of Lex for some odd reason. Maybe because he reminds me of a more serious Gene Hackman Lex, who remade himself into a powerful businessman.
 
Yeah, if the audience see the modern day Lex on the big screen, I think they're like this version well enough not to be bothered by the 'crook' version of the past movies.

BTW, I've read For All Seasons finally. Great book but I didn't like this particular version of Lex for some odd reason. Maybe because he reminds me of a more serious Gene Hackman Lex, who remade himself into a powerful businessman.
I agree, that Lex didn't click with me either.
 
I'm just tickled that SUPERMAN STARTS caught on, at least with Showtime.

I understand that people have their preferences, but there's far too much "It has to be this or that to work right" going on here. Pre-Crisis over Post-Crisis, and vice versa, who is the man/disguise stuff, mad scientist/corporate Luthor...I think a lot of that misses the point of the mythology.

A lot of things could work.

The whole "Superman is a mystery" thing, that's all well and good, but in the real world, that becomes somewhat irrelevant. Because yes, people know who Superman is. Maybe HE doesn't know "who" he is, but audiences do, and will, you know? There's no point in pretending he didn't come from Krypton, wasn't raised by the Kents, etc. Because that's what Superman is. Now, that doesn't absolutely have to be SHOWN. But that's still what Superman is.

I agree that we should see Superman's origins in some capacity. This includes where the idea to become "Superman" came from, his past, present and future ties to Smallville, Krypton, Metropolis, and the Earth. Heck, I'd even like to see where Clark Kent's personality and morality came from in terms of psychology. We do not, mind you, need to see it all at once, or in any kind of standard origin format. I.E, a new structure for the origin needs to be found. Something like BATMAN BEGINS could work, and so, I think, could something like V FOR VENDETTA.

A straight origin film could definitely work, and we could very much still see the real Superman in that context. A movie that starts out with Superman existing that touches on the origin could work as well.

People say Superman deserves a "complete" story. Fair enough. I look at stuff like BATMAN BEGINS, and I do not feel Batman's origin was done much justice at all. The ideas behind it were, but the actual details of it? Not so much.

Myself, I went and saw SUPERMAN RETURNS, despite only snippets of origin, and enjoyed it. I'd go see any Superman movie, just...because.

Here's the thing. The reason Superman does what he does is not a one time thing. It's something he should be reaffirming to himself constantly. Therefore, if you want to see what makes Superman tick, it doesn't neccessarily have to be in the sense of "How Superman began".

That said, I really do think most people who care on any level DO know the relevant Superman's origin. Obviously, everyone doesn't. But I also agree that you cannot assume they do, and you cannot ignore the compelling elements of the mythology.

More and more, I like the idea of Superman's origins being revealed bit by bit, film by film, but not in the sense that if you don't get past one film, the basics wouldn't still be there. I am also convinced that Jor-El's story needs to be seen. But bit by bit, over subsequent films, not a one shot deal and then nothing but echoes.

I want to write this, damn it. I've already written it, and I want to write it again. I think we should just have a random "ideas" thread. Not story ideas, just bits and pieces of ideas for people to pick and choose from and craft something amazing.


why is it always guard who has the only post that dosen't amount to biased drivel?

"You absolutely HAVE to do it my way!"

"You obviously lack imagination if you dont want to see an origin movie"

"The ONLY reason people dont want an origin movie is because they still want donner"

With half the cockiness that goes on with these boards, with everyone thinking that they're bruce timm when they're spending their time typing pitches on a message board, I'd probably get a severe case of Schadenfreude if the next superman movie were purely based off pre crisis with a crazy scientist lex luthor
 
Rock me Amadeus.

Lex could be interesting if they would take him seriously. I'd like to see him be a brilliant, extremely wealthy, inventive, arrogant a$$ of a man who is just slighty older than Superman. He HATES people, but tolerates them because they're a means to an end.

Lex would be comfortable in his own skin. He pretty much rules metropolis from Lex-corp. He has taken over numerous corporations through questionable means.
He has successfully avoided several criminal investigations. ( money talks)
Beautiful women throw themselves at him left and right. Lifes good, but something is missing.

Then Superman arrives and turns Lex's world upside down, but gives him what it was that is missing, Someone that can challenge him.
 
Last edited:
Ahh The Batman comes in and again makes a post about how dumb the people who disagree with him and The Guard are.

Is there anyother The Batman post?

I haven't the faintest idea why I haven't put him on ignore yet???

How about this:

Screw pre-crisis and Donner's Superman. I've disliked every single Superman movie so I want something that I will like now, other people be damned.

My idea is the best way to go about it to me because thats what I want to see in a Superman movie. I don't want a mixture of the two.

I do think Business man Lex is the best and only version that I care to see

I do think that the next movie should be a mostly hardcore orgin and post-crisis movie...like 99%

If WB comes out with another Donner-lite movie and I like it I wouldn't deny liking it but it's not what I want. I doubt I'm going to get things exactly how I want them but I still want them that way.

I'm not going to pretend to be f**king diplomat when it comes to this subject. End of Story.
 
Last edited:
I'd love an origin movie!

Lots of people say they want a new take on the character to get away from S:TM and the Donnerverse, then they'll say "We don't need an origin movie, it's been done before. If you want an origin, watch S:TM"

At least an origin "Batman Begins" type movie would cement the fact that the two are in no way connected.
 
Isn't it more challanging to come up with a new way to show SM/Clark's origin insted of not showing it at all? I think maybe more and more of his detailed origin should be shown in say the second and third movies. Like show Jor-El and the Krypton events if it does relate to the story. Just showing it to show it to me would be a waist of money. So if it's gonna be included why not have it tie into the story like S:TAS does? This is more like TIH but what if they did the origin in the first movie like they do it in All Star Superman and flesh it out in the other movies.

I agree that Jor El and stuff should be saved for a sequel. I think it's enough just to show Krypton explode, and then we see a single ship rocketing away from it. Clark should be fairly in the dark about where he comes from other than that he's an alien, unlike in STM where he has a magical plot device that explains everything (and also sucks up a bunch of screen time). The Fortress of Solitude shouldn't appear until the sequel, either.
 
what if this new origin is worse than SR? That's the worry I have
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"