Why is making a good Superman movie so hard?

[misslane38]

That's how how all comic book fandoms work, not just the Superman fandom. Every comic fan wants their hero to come out on top, and that's how all the most successful CBMs ultimately end, along with other factors. The most celebrated and popular works for every character depict them as winners and embrace them for who they are.

You are not understanding me at all. I'm not talking about general fandom behavior that centers on wanting to see your favorite character as a winner. I'm talking about the fact that Superman fans are hypocrites who will accept and endorse even the worst out of character behavior from Superman as long as he's contextualized as the best and the story itself is popular.

If Superman can and do anything, they generally want to see him do it and be challenged while doing it, but still come out on top. That's what he was made for, that's what they ALL are made for. We've seen that there is no value in going with the "loser" approach because more than just the Superman purists have rejected it. Taking inspiration and bits and pieces from the most highly regarded stories in the fandom is just common sense. If the same stories end up on similar lists from different people, it's probably for a reason.

This is nonsensical. You can't take bits and pieces from highly regarded stories and expect alchemy as a result. Those bits and pieces work because of the story in which they exist. Storytelling doesn't work like that. Those bits and pieces work because they are working together within a larger narrative. Creating a new story out of your favorite bits by taking them out of context is how to create a Frankenstein's monster version of the character. Writers have to place more emphasis on story and character development. Pick an arc and a theme and create a story that complements those goals.

 

[misslane38]

Said this before but we keep talking about how hard Superman movies are to make as if good film-makers gave it a go and failed. Bryan Singer and Zack Snyder are not very good film-makers, and they made not very good Superman movies. This should surprise no one.

I'm not saying that making a Superman movie is without it's challenges, I don't think making good movies is easy in general, but come on. We're talking about the directors of Jack the Giant Slayer and Sucker Punch, folks.

Said this all before, but it's like having a bad chef cook you a steak. You wouldn't go "wow I guess steak is just so hard to cook", you'd demand a cook who knew what they were doing.

I'm definitely over-simplifying things but I'm not wrong. Give Spielberg or Vaughn or Abrams or any proven film-maker the chance to make a Superman movie and all of this nonsense talk of blaming the fans or the material will go away in an instant.

I disagree completely. I've seen enough high profile writers take on Superman in the comics only for it to go horribly wrong. Plus, it's not like the directors you've listed are infallible. Each of them has had career misfires. There have also been directors with little pedigree to back them up who have astonished audiences and critics when they take on comic book films. There is no silver bullet, and I think there's nothing more indicative of how much that applies to Superman than the fact that for all his talk about wanting to direct a Superman film, Vaughn has never seriously committed to the project. Good directors have to want to tackle Superman, and I don't think they really do. And you have to ask yourself: Why?

 

[FunkMiller]

I disagree completely. I've seen enough high profile writers take on Superman in the comics only for it to go horribly wrong. Plus, it's not like the directors you've listed are infallible. Each of them has had career misfires. There have also been directors with little pedigree to back them up who have astonished audiences and critics when they take on comic book films. There is no silver bullet, and I think there's nothing more indicative of how much that applies to Superman than the fact that for all his talk about wanting to direct a Superman film, Vaughn has never seriously committed to the project. Good directors have to want to tackle Superman, and I don't think they really do. And you have to ask yourself: Why?

 

[Flint Marko]

I disagree completely. I've seen enough high profile writers take on Superman in the comics only for it to go horribly wrong. Plus, it's not like the directors you've listed are infallible. Each of them has had career misfires. There have also been directors with little pedigree to back them up who have astonished audiences and critics when they take on comic book films.

No idea what your point is.

Bad film-makers unsurprisingly made bad movies and now we’re making excuses. I wonder what the excuses would be if Uwe Boll directed the next one?

There is no silver bullet, and I think there's nothing more indicative of how much that applies to Superman than the fact that for all his talk about wanting to direct a Superman film, Vaughn has never seriously committed to the project. Good directors have to want to tackle Superman, and I don't think they really do. And you have to ask yourself: Why?

You’re acting like WB is trying to make a Superman movie and failing to do so.

Ant-man is a billion dollar property, so the idea that no director wants to touch the most recognizable superhero of all time is absurd. It’s on WB. If WB wanted to they’d have done so by now. But they’ll probably just wait until the film rights are about to expire like last time.

 

[FunkMiller]

It’s ludicrous to blame a fictional character for the failure of the movies depicting him. Any fictional character can be handled well or poorly. It’s down to the quality and talent of the writers and filmmakers. And Superman has had bad writers and filmmakers. End of story.

 

[misslane38]

It’s ludicrous to blame a fictional character for the failure of the movies depicting him. Any fictional character can be handled well or poorly. It’s down to the quality and talent of the writers and filmmakers. And Superman has had bad writers and filmmakers. End of story.

Some fictional characters are harder to handle well, though, it seems, and some seem to have a harder time attracting filmmakers with the right mindset and talent to do it well. I think you're vastly oversimplifying the situation.

 

[Flint Marko]

Yup, it's those blasted filmmakers fault. Poor old WB is knocking on everyone's door desperately trying to get that Superman movie off the ground but those darn directors just aren't interested!

 

[MaceB]

It’s ludicrous to blame a fictional character for the failure of the movies depicting him. Any fictional character can be handled well or poorly. It’s down to the quality and talent of the writers and filmmakers. And Superman has had bad writers and filmmakers. End of story.

Yes and no. There's no good substitute for quality writers and a quality story.. but each character has their own unique pitfalls and difficulties. Some moreso than others. Superman is a hard character to get right. He just is.

That doesn't mean it can't be done. It's just harder to write him than it is Batman or Spiderman.

 

[misslane38]

No idea what your point is.

The point is that you're wrong to blame Superman's lack of success on the lack of talented filmmakers to have worked on the character. It is a point that makes no sense. Donner wasn't exactly on the level of Spielberg when he made Superman in 1978, and it's not as if Bryan Singer hadn't made some quality films before he made Superman Returns. It's not even as if good filmmakers can't make duds now and then. Ridley Scott comes to mind. So, I think you're mistaken to argue, as you did earlier, that it was poor filmmakers like Singer and Snyder who, due to their alleged lack of talent, were doomed to make poor Superman films.

You’re acting like WB is trying to make a Superman movie and failing to do so.

No, that's not what I meant. Plenty of people have suggested that WB tends to only pursue a film if a director comes to them with a vision. It sounds like they will have meetings with directors and characters are offered to them, and if they show interest or a good pitch, work moves forward. Whedon, for example, said he visited them, saw Batgirl, and said it was his jam. If Vaughn was truly interested and had a good idea, I don't think things would be as stymied right now as they are.

Ant-man is a billion dollar property, so the idea that no director wants to touch the most recognizable superhero of all time is absurd. It’s on WB. If WB wanted to they’d have done so by now. But they’ll probably just wait until the film rights are about to expire like last time.

Being recognizable doesn't make a character automatically appealing. It can be a detterent. It means more pressure and more prior material to compare your new work against. It means potentially lots of studio interference. Also, since the character has struggled in the past, that can be discouraging to directors who might see it as cursed in a way. At the moment, WB is probably waiting to get their other big heroes' films made and to get a director, like Matt Reeves is for Batman, for Superman with a passion and a vision, who can tackle Superman after possibly using Supergirl to test the waters or something of the sort.

 

[Iceman]

Some fictional characters are harder to handle well, though, it seems, and some seem to have a harder time attracting filmmakers with the right mindset and talent to do it well. I think you're vastly oversimplifying the situation.

They got it right first time (where other characters like GL and the F4 didn't) with Superman and Reeve so it can certainly be done. And it's not like the recent films have been train wrecks. I think Man of Steel could have been a masterpiece if Zack had had someone to advise on certain aspects. He at least managed one of my favorite trailers for any CBM. And surely something like Guardians is harder to make a good film out of than Superman.

I agree that attracting the right filmmakers right now might be a bit difficult because of recent history but the passage of time and success in other comic book properties will sort that out. I'm sure there are many talented filmmakers who were inspired by Supes in their younger days.

 

[MaceB]

I think Man of Steel could have been a masterpiece if Zack had had someone to advise on certain aspects. He at least managed one of my favorite trailers for any CBM.

That MOS trailer was so good!!

And surely something like Guardians is harder to make a good film out of than Superman.

I'm not so sure of that. No one expected anything from Guardians, so it benefits from low expectations. Also, they have lots of characters to bounce off one another and keep it lively. Superman really has to carry a film on his own, which is tougher IMO.

 

[Iceman]

That MOS trailer was so good!!

One of my all-time favourites but I used to love trailers for Snyder films. One of the Watchmen ones is great and I love the 300 ones too.

I'm not so sure of that. No one expected anything from Guardians, so it benefits from low expectations. Also, they have lots of characters to bounce off one another and keep it lively. Superman really has to carry a film on his own, which is tougher IMO.

Expectations were relevant to the initial reception. Now years later we can still assess how good or not a film it is excluding the effect of expectations, while also assessing how large that particular task (which has been made to look easy) was. And most comic films, and films in general, are about solo protagonists (even if they have super-powered allies), which should be easier. Something like Infinity War would be impossible for an average director IMO.

 

[FunkMiller]

Some fictional characters are harder to handle well, though, it seems, and some seem to have a harder time attracting filmmakers with the right mindset and talent to do it well. I think you're vastly oversimplifying the situation.

Again... your blaming the character of Superman for being unable to attract filmmakers, when the truth is that the likes of Snyder have made him a poison chalice that nobody wants go near... just like Batman was for seven years after Schumacher got done with him. But somebody will come along with the right vision and the right take, just like Nolan did. I just hope it doesn’t take as long. Whether WB have the sense to hire that right person or not is doubtful though. They certainly haven’t hired the right man for Superman since 1977.

 

[2kt09]

And surely something like Guardians is harder to make a good film out of than Superman.

Definitely not. We've had more than enough examples of rag-time quirky space adventurers before Guardians came along.
You might have even already watched those stories to those flicks on something as old as Futurama.

 

[misslane38]

Again... your blaming the character of Superman for being unable to attract filmmakers, when the truth is that the likes of Snyder have made him a poison chalice that nobody wants go near... just like Batman was for seven years after Schumacher got done with him. But somebody will come along with the right vision and the right take, just like Nolan did. I just hope it doesn’t take as long. Whether WB have the sense to hire that right person or not is doubtful though. They certainly haven’t hired the right man for Superman since 1977.

WB hired Snyder because the company couldn't attract other filmmakers. The difficulty in getting top shelf talent on Superman predates Singer and Snyder, which you seem to acknowledge by citing 1977 as the last time a good director helmed a Superman project. So let's not make this about how poisonous Snyder has been to the character when Snyder only had a chance to do his version of Superman because no one with the "right vision" or the "right take" who could be the "right" fit for the character came forward after his debut on film in 1978. I am not blaming the character at all. That's a ridiculous strawman. I'm blaming the lack of creativity and passion behind Superman because no one wants to touch Donner's masterpiece. It's like Jay Gatsby trying to recreate his love affair with Daisy in The Great Gatsby. Until fans and filmmakers alike let go, the character will never move forward.

 

[misslane38]

They got it right first time (where other characters like GL and the F4 didn't) with Superman and Reeve so it can certainly be done. And it's not like the recent films have been train wrecks. I think Man of Steel could have been a masterpiece if Zack had had someone to advise on certain aspects. He at least managed one of my favorite trailers for any CBM. And surely something like Guardians is harder to make a good film out of than Superman.

It can be done, or at least it was done once. But then doing it well a first time is part of the problem. Nostalgia is a hard thing to crack, and since Superman (1978) has been homaged and replayed so many times, it starts to become difficult to do anything that won't pale in comparison to it or be in its shadow. Even the sequels to the first film struggled to repeat the original's success. Guardians is easier in a way because it's not dealing with idealistic, perfect characters—in Superman's case it's just one character—with almost god-like power. It also takes place in a context that is so different than the real world you and I live in with characters that mostly aren't human that the escapism and fantasy are more accessible.

Superman's fantasy, meanwhile, used to come in a form that isn't as viable now. Before, it was exciting to see the rural overlooked nerd get to blossom into someone who the whole world loves and celebrates; it's like a Cinderella story where the underdog gets to become the quarterback and get the cheerleader when he's Superman. The Clark facade is less credible now and people's tolerance for his lying to Lois is lower now. He also could do everything, fix everything, because the narrative never challenged him in a serious way. Nerds are more accepted now, while white males with privilege are having their status questioned. I'm not sure that things are as simple as they used to be.

 

[SiegePerilous]

I have to wonder how many talented filmmakers are out there who would be eager to take on Superman, but also don't want to deal with WB specifically. He's a difficult character to nail down, but we've seen the formula of the original Superman replicated and modernized with other characters to great success, it shouldn't be THAT hard to do with the damn character himself.

You are not understanding me at all. I'm not talking about general fandom behavior that centers on wanting to see your favorite character as a winner. I'm talking about the fact that Superman fans are hypocrites who will accept and endorse even the worst out of character behavior from Superman as long as he's contextualized as the best and the story itself is popular.

Please provide some examples of Superman fans being worse hypocrites than others. Because you claiming they endorse OOC behavior as long as their character comes out on top hinges on the idea that said behavior is objectively OOC. With characters as big as this one, there are general traits the entire fandom can agree on, but they seldom agree on everything. A fan who embraces that behavior from Superman is not going to see it as OOC just because you do, nor does it make them a hypocrite. Fans like what they like, it's as simple as that. If it doesn't line up with what they like, they won't be eager to embrace it.

In those popular stories, what behaviors is Superman exhibiting that you deem OOC? And do you think people only like them because they are considered popular, and not because they genuinely like them?

This is nonsensical. You can't take bits and pieces from highly regarded stories and expect alchemy as a result. Those bits and pieces work because of the story in which they exist. Storytelling doesn't work like that. Those bits and pieces work because they are working together within a larger narrative. Creating a new story out of your favorite bits by taking them out of context is how to create a Frankenstein's monster version of the character. Writers have to place more emphasis on story and character development. Pick an arc and a theme and create a story that complements those goals.

I really don't understand your point here. CBM adaptations take bits and pieces from the best source material and put their own spin on it within their own original framework ALL THE TIME. Nobody is asking for a direct panel-for-panel recreation of several popular Superman stories rolled into one, but taking inspiration from them in terms of characterizations and themes is absolutely something they need to do, because not doing it hasn't yielded worthwhile results.

Winter Soldiers is a highly regarded Captain America story, and it inspired one of the MCU's strongest films without being a direct adaptation. That's all people are asking for for Superman and some of his stories, it shouldn't be deemed an impossible task.

 

[Flint Marko]

Definitely not. We've had more than enough examples of rag-time quirky space adventurers before Guardians came along.
You might have even already watched those stories to those flicks on something as old as Futurama.

Wait.....you seriously think Guardians is easier to pull off than superman? Good lord, there’s no way you’re being serious.

 

[Iceman]

It can be done, or at least it was done once. But then doing it well a first time is part of the problem. Nostalgia is a hard thing to crack, and since Superman (1978) has been homaged and replayed so many times, it starts to become difficult to do anything that won't pale in comparison to it or be in its shadow. Even the sequels to the first film struggled to repeat the original's success. Guardians is easier in a way because it's not dealing with idealistic, perfect characters—in Superman's case it's just one character—with almost god-like power. It also takes place in a context that is so different than the real world you and I live in with characters that mostly aren't human that the escapism and fantasy are more accessible.

Superman's fantasy, meanwhile, used to come in a form that isn't as viable now. Before, it was exciting to see the rural overlooked nerd get to blossom into someone who the whole world loves and celebrates; it's like a Cinderella story where the underdog gets to become the quarterback and get the cheerleader when he's Superman. The Clark facade is less credible now and people's tolerance for his lying to Lois is lower now. He also could do everything, fix everything, because the narrative never challenged him in a serious way. Nerds are more accepted now, while white males with privilege are having their status questioned. I'm not sure that things are as simple as they used to be.

Oh right, I didn't realise the thread was more of a why is it hard to make a Superman film right now rather than at all. Thanks for your answer though, some interesting Superman-specific points that make sense and that I might not have considered. I think in spite of those, there are creators out there who are capable of making a really good Superman film that glosses over or adapts to take account of some of those issues as appropriate, while keeping the most important qualities of Superman that should remain timeless. We'll have to wait and see if one of those with sufficient talent signs on or at least expresses an interest any time soon.

Superman is in a bad place right now. Batman has been in a bad place twice and managed to attract Nolan and Matt Reeves. Maybe Batman is an easier prospect to attract top guys, but they have still both come at troubled times for the character so I think there's hope for Superman at least in terms of attracting talent during troubled times. Some have suggested Abrams, and he's not my pick for half of the things he gets suggested for, but he took on the even bigger pressure of bringing back Star Wars after the prequels and another high pressure work in rebooting Star Trek. That shows that a director that many rate highly can be up for high pressure projects with a long history and the potential of a huge fan backlash, and come in and make a success of them.

And even if one doesn't rate Abrams that highly, I don't think having even greater skills would have prevented him taking on these projects. It's more of that he just fancied those challenges and projects so we just need one of the other top guys to have a similar feeling for Superman. And that is at least within the realm of possibility given that he was one of the biggest heroes of all while many of the top creators of today were growing up.

 

[2kt09]

Wait.....you seriously think Guardians is easier to pull off than superman? Good lord, there’s no way you’re being serious.

There are far more writers and directors that come to mind for a Guardians flick. When Orci & Kurtzman already met that standard...you already know, fam.

 

[Iceman]

Definitely not. We've had more than enough examples of rag-time quirky space adventurers before Guardians came along.
You might have even already watched those stories to those flicks on something as old as Futurama.

I never hear these kinds of comments before the film comes out and proves it. I'm not saying you didn't have these opinions back then but there were many times more naysayers for Guardians than for any Superman film, no way around that one. Even as a massive MCU fan I was pretty sure (and said as much) that they wouldn't be able to make a live raccoon work in the same universe as Captain America and Iron Man. They totally proved me wrong.

 

[Flint Marko]

There are far more writers and directors that come to mind for a Guardians flick. When Orci & Kurtzman already met that standard...you already know fam.

Just so we’re all clear 2KT09 is trying to argue that a Guardians of the Galaxy movie is an easier sell than a Superman movie. Drink that one in, folks.

 

[2kt09]

I never hear these kinds of comments before the film comes out and proves it. I'm not saying you didn't have these opinions back then but there were many times more naysayers for Guardians than for any Superman film, no way around that one. Even as a massive MCU fan I was pretty sure (and said as much) that they wouldn't be able to make a live raccoon work in the same universe as Captain America and Iron Man. They totally proved me wrong.

"Fake fans" y'know. jk.
You know what the highest grossing movie of all time is? We also live in a post-Transformers world, so it's sort of like...I don't know why nerds & geeks could be so...dumb.

Just so we’re all clear 2KT09 is trying to argue that a Guardians of the Galaxy movie is an easier sell than a Superman movie. Drink that one in, folks.

As as easy as Fast & the Furious in Space.
I love Vaughn, but even he isn't the right glove for Supes.

 

[Flint Marko]

My mind really is blown right now. You’re being totally serious.

I don’t know how someone manages to be so wrong so often but hats off to you.

 

[2kt09]

We live in a fascinating bubble that's for sure.