Superman Returns Would You Prefer Confirmed Sequel OR Confirmed Restart

[dpm07]

I would definitely prefer a reboot. I think nothing short of that will save the franchise, after the debacle that Singer and his whack pack gave us with giving us Singerman and Superson.

 

[The Watchman]

At this point, sadly I think reboot, even though I liked the cast - the script and art direction were terrible. I want an origin, seeing a new krypton - one that's not an ice planet, pa kent, the whole deal...

 

[Super Kal]

wow... even across the board.

 

[The Sage]

If you had a choice between a Singer MOS sequel guaranteed to be made or a restart (reboot) of the franchise also guaranteed and in a close time frame... Which would you choose and why?

One or the other works for me.

Wait, did I already answer this question?

 

[I Am The Knight]

Continue the SR franchise, course.

 

[Gmanofsteel]

I'm all for a reboot. SR kinda dug itself into a hole and having a sequel would just be a film about pulling themselves out of said hole. I'd like a complete reboot, no singer & co and it should be fine. BR? Only if the new crew want him, but I don't think so, not for another reboot.

 

[Kahoot]

You know if you get rid of Singer & co you'll end up with a huge spider in the third act, or something equally as crap...

 

[mego joe]

You know if you get rid of Singer & co you'll end up with a huge spider in the third act, or something equally as crap...

Sounds a whole lot better than the crap that was in SR.

 

[Kahoot]

Sounds a whole lot better than the crap that was in SR.

You've gotta be kidding me...

 

[Gmanofsteel]

You know if you get rid of Singer & co you'll end up with a huge spider in the third act, or something equally as crap...

maybe if the year was 1998, then yes, but it is not.

 

[mego joe]

You've gotta be kidding me...

If you think that SR with SUperman as 'baby daddy' was anything remotely good or had anything to do with the essence of SUperman's character, it's obvious you have no idea who Superman is.

 

[Kahoot]

If you think that SR with SUperman as 'baby daddy' was anything remotely good or had anything to do with the essence of SUperman's character, it's obvious you have no idea who Superman is.

If you take out the kid it's exactly a Superman movie. With the kid it's Superman movie for people that don't care that Superman never had a kid comic, people who are more mature and can take changes.It wouldn't kill him but it'd hurt... I've seen a lot of Superman with Grean K and it hurts but he always live.

 

[BareKnucklez]

If you take out the kid it's exactly a Superman movie. With the kid it's Superman movie for people that don't care that Superman never had a kid comic, people who are more mature and can take changes.It wouldn't kill him but it'd hurt... I've seen a lot of Superman with Grean K and it hurts but he always live.

While yes the kid was a BAD idea! It wasn't the reason why the movie failed... Yes it was part of the reason but it wasn't 100% alone.

Other reasons the movie flopped would be the bad writing, bad cast, bad acting, bad directing, and bad looking Superman suit... Then the whole kid was the icing on the cake.

You fix all those things, and you would get a kickass Superman movie that will bring in Spiderman/Shrek/Star Wars money.

There was just way to many problems with this movie for it to be liked, and especially liked enough to make more money.

 

[Kahoot]

I have a good take on Superman for the reboot... Have Nathan Fillion as superman! Clark did grow up on a farm after all so he should be a cowboy! Nathan Fillion does Cowboy talk really good and was in the Justice Leauge cartoons (as someone else) as The Vigilante.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Reboot with Brandon Routh as Superman and a script by Paul Dini or Jeph Loeb.

 

[mego joe]

If you take out the kid it's exactly a Superman movie. With the kid it's Superman movie for people that don't care that Superman never had a kid comic, people who are more mature and can take changes.

It's not the fact that Superman has a child, it's the circumstances in which he became a parent. As a father of 2, I can tell you that maturity is measured by one's actions and motivations. Superman becoming a father is inconsequential to the character unless the circumstances fit.

The circumstances as decribed in SR are those of an immature teenager, not Superman.

By the way, there have been a number of stories over the years in which Superman has become a father. WHile they may have not been in standard continuity NOne of them rely on him being a jerk towards Lois or being irresponsible like in SR.

It wouldn't kill him but it'd hurt... I've seen a lot of Superman with Grean K and it hurts but he always live.

 

[Kahoot]

It's not the fact that Superman has a child, it's the circumstances in which he became a parent. As a father of 2, I can tell you that maturity is measured by one's actions and motivations. Superman becoming a father is inconsequential to the character unless the circumstances fit.

The circumstances as decribed in SR are those of an immature teenager, not Superman.

By the way, there have been a number of stories over the years in which Superman has become a father. WHile they may have not been in standard continuity NOne of them rely on him being a jerk towards Lois or being irresponsible like in SR.

I don't see how he was being irresponsible or a jerk. As soon as he learns that it's his kid he's there to help it grow, he sees the kid like Jor-El saw him.

 

[mego joe]

I don't see how he was being irresponsible or a jerk. As soon as he learns that it's his kid he's there to help it grow, he sees the kid like Jor-El saw him.

Well, he was an irresponsible jerk to begin with to get himself, LOis and Jason into the situation in the first place.

Second, he's NOT raising Jason and being a full-time father to his son. THat's Richard. THerefore, he is not fulfilling his moral and ethical responsiblities as a parent.

THird, it's not like Jor-El. Jor-El sent Kal-El off as the only way of saving his son.

Jason's mother was abandonned by his biological father without a word.

If you see these two situations as 'the same' you are clearly not grasping the ethical and moral obligations of being in a sexual relationship.

 

[superbaby]

Reboot with Brandon Routh as Superman and a script by Paul Dini or Jeph Loeb.

very good option indeed. but very unlike to happen. too bad.

 

[Kahoot]

Well, he was an irresponsible jerk to begin with to get himself, LOis and Jason into the situation in the first place.

It's Lois, short of killing her himself Superman can't stop her getting into situations.

Second, he's NOT raising Jason and being a full-time father to his son. THat's Richard. THerefore, he is not fulfilling his moral and ethical responsiblities as a parent.

Richard saw Clark was Superman before, don't you think he'd work it out if Clark and Superman move in with Lois to look after some kid that as far as the world knows is Richards?

THird, it's not like Jor-El. Jor-El sent Kal-El off as the only way of saving his son.

As soon as he lerns he has a kid he quotes Jor-El as a sign that he'll be there for Jason. We'll never know for sure but my bet is if the world was about to esplode/inplode Supes would send him away.

Jason's mother was abandonned by his biological father without a word.

It's not like he did a runner as soon as he found out he was going to be a dad, he left to find out if there was anything life of his whole world. Now he's back and happy to be a dad.

If you see these two situations as 'the same' you are clearly not grasping the ethical and moral obligations of being in a sexual relationship.

I'm going to ignore your insult of me there...

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

You know if you get rid of Singer & co you'll end up with a huge spider in the third act, or something equally as crap...

Exactly, if Singer goes, i guarantee we will get a commercial director who know's NOTHING of substance but can do "teh cool ACTION sequEnses!"

At least Singer will address the criticisms of SR like he with X2 and X1.

 

[cundog]

i actually wanna see what direction the SR franchise can take now...quite interested to see how singer can try an' rectify some of the mistakes that he made with the first film.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

i actually wanna see what direction the SR franchise can take now...quite interested to see how singer can try an' rectify some of the mistakes that he made with the first film.

I wanna see what direction he takes it because i loved SR. The only he needs to do with a sequel IMO is add more action and a supervillain to satisfy the general movie goers.

 

[shuut]

I agree that SR was a flawed, boring and ultimately underwhelming return, but to reboot now with a completely different cast would be asking alot for the general audience to accept. Oh christ, it's another one, take a chance or wait for video? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Singer is far from a hack as evidenced by previous endeavors, we know this, let him make his sequel, but ensure that it is in fact an exciting superhero movie...when my five year old is falling asleep ina theatre...thats a bad sign...you can't change the charactor or the purists will revolt, so find a way to make superman FUN. Donner did it after all, make it FUN, not a second rate soap opera with better effects.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I agree that SR was a flawed, boring and ultimately underwhelming return, but to reboot now with a completely different cast would be asking alot for the general audience to accept. Oh christ, it's another one, take a chance or wait for video? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Singer is far from a hack as evidenced by previous endeavors, we know this, let him make his sequel, but ensure that it is in fact an exciting superhero movie...when my five year old is falling asleep ina theatre...thats a bad sign...you can't change the charactor or the purists will revolt, so find a way to make superman FUN. Donner did it after all, make it FUN, not a second rate soap opera with better effects.

Singer didnt change the character though, a lot anyway, he just put him in a situation were his superpowers couldnt help him. And its not really a movie for 5 years olds anyway.

Whether it should be or not is a different debate.