The Superman Family Message Board >> View Thread

Author
RAB


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,247


Is that it effectively killed Mark Millar's proposal for a Reboot Trilogy.

The story is here.

I remember when he was first trying to drum up support for it after word came out that Bryan Singer was not really involved with WB on a new Superman film... and I didn't like his ideas then and I'm sure as heck happy that WB/DC decided to pass on his and Matthew Vaughn's 'vision' now.

I do disagree with the article's writer on the fact that Superman won't be seen on the screen again. He's too much of a cultural icon to be ignored (and there's that pesky judge ruling on having a Superman film in development by 2011 or the Creator's Estates can sue for damages) and if Batman can be resurrected after the god-awful Batman and Robin (which was much more harmful overall to the Batman film legacy than Superman Returns could ever be) so can Superman.




Ryan Brandt
---
Writer of Ideas
Creator of Stuff

Check out out my Deviantart page!
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.11 on Windows XP
Would be Watcher


Location: Canada
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008



...if they ever do a movie again, I want them to stop clinging to Donner's version once and for all. IMO, the franchise would benefit greatly from a "Superman begin" movie that raise the table and set the foundation right. Hopefully, there will be no kid and no wedding...



Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 4.0; on Windows Vista
omike015 

Mod of Steel

Location: The Bottle City of Kandor
Member Since: Sun Oct 10, 1999
Posts: 4,557



    Quote:
    I do disagree with the article's writer on the fact that Superman won't be seen on the screen again. He's too much of a cultural icon to be ignored

His status as an icon, legal decisions and the success or lack thereof of "Superman Returns" is hardly a factor. There's no question of if, just when, because Superman is still a marketable -- and profitable -- property and as long as he is, those on the receiving end will do everything they can to milk it.




omike015
:-|

kandor.monkeylord.net (10.0.1.245)
using Fortress Kryptonian Browsing Matrix v1.9.38 (0.5 points)
Daveym 

Moderator

Location: Lancashire
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008



I know there were a few extreme/strange story treatments floating around at that time and some of that fed into Superman Returns, it's not got the same 'wow' factor as the original film but neither is it bad, I liked it more than i thought i would but the casting was an issue for me.

Thinking on what the future holds my gut feeling is they need to go for a John Byrne style reboot for it, as in a completley different design & imagery for Krypton for example, much as i love it the Donner version is so familar it's not interesting anymore, it will need a strong actor in the role with the same sort of prescence Chris Reeve had and for the central threat maybe something completely original.

I must say from the point of view of plotting and characterisation i really think they should pick up on Geoff Johns theme of him being an Immigrant, Immigration being a hot issue worldwide now it would be a strong theme to explore if only as an allegory.
For him personally it means being the Last of his kind and a little isolated because of it, till he meets Lois, that sort of thing they can really build on in the same way Marvels films do....














Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows Vista
Fifthchild


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,474




    Quote:
    I do disagree with the article's writer on the fact that Superman won't be seen on the screen again. He's too much of a cultural icon to be ignored (and there's that pesky judge ruling on having a Superman film in development by 2011 or the Creator's Estates can sue for damages) and if Batman can be resurrected after the god-awful Batman and Robin (which was much more harmful overall to the Batman film legacy than Superman Returns could ever be) so can Superman.


WB are in a bad position in terms of Superman. Its hard to reboot something such a short period after a previous film. The status of Superman Returns itself as a reboot or a continuation of a previous seies is already kinda confusing for your average moviegoer. Superman returns also wasnt such an enormous flop that everybody hated it or isnt going to remember it. Also in terms of the marketplace WB sorta got the message that a lot of people can turn up to see a dark film like The Dark Knight. Of course dark and Superman dont always go together that well especially when you are talking about an origin movie. Still it got people talking that the way to do Superman right was to make it dark and gloomy. All in all its understandable that WB are sitting on their hands.
hh





His Holiness The Pope
The Church of Hulk
St Jones Church, New Mexico
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.16, on Linux
omike015 

Mod of Steel

Location: The Bottle City of Kandor
Member Since: Sun Oct 10, 1999
Posts: 4,557



    Quote:
    WB are in a bad position in terms of Superman. Its hard to reboot something such a short period after a previous film.

Hulk? Batman? Punisher?


    Quote:
    you are talking about an origin movie.
Who says it has to be an "origin movie"?




omike015
:-|

kandor.monkeylord.net (10.0.1.245)
using Fortress Kryptonian Browsing Matrix v1.9.38 (0.5 points)
Fifthchild


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,474




    Quote:

      Quote:
      WB are in a bad position in terms of Superman. Its hard to reboot something such a short period after a previous film.



    Quote:
    Hulk? Batman? Punisher?


Well yeah exactly. Hulk and Batman both struggled with the baggage of their previous films. The gap between films was 5 years for Hulk and 8 for Batman Begins. The Hulk reboot ultimately fell in the same middle ground between financial success and failure that Superman Returns did. Batman Begins only really scraped past that line due to the incredible word of mouth and reviews it got because it was a pretty much pitch perfect film. Punisher is hardly worth talking about but a Punisher movie is a cheap film at the end of the day and so there is much less risk. Still Punisher War Zone flopped. If a megabudget film like a Superman movie flops that really hurts.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      you are talking about an origin movie.
    Who says it has to be an "origin movie"?


Fine it doesnt have to be. But then you have a new Superman movie where Superman doesnt have a kid like the last film which confuses people who did see Superman Returns etc. Its a lot of baggage that an expensive film really doesnt need. Nobody wants to promote a film by telling people to ignore everything that happened in the last film cos it sucked but this time they got it right.
hh





His Holiness The Pope
The Church of Hulk
St Jones Church, New Mexico
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.16, on Linux
Kaiser The Great




Just call is SUPERMAN BEGINS, get a whole new set of cast and creators and I think people would catch on. No more homages, no more crystals, no more land obsessed villains, no more Reeves impersonations. A fresh take is what's needed. Burton didn't keep the Bat-Shark-Repellent and Nolan didn't keep the camp. We need new and continuity free for the next generation, because "oh well this takes place after the Donner films from the 70s and 80s, but really after part II because we don't like part III and IV and we're going to ignore that" is more confusing than a SUPERMAN BEGINS film could ever be.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.12 on Windows XP
ttk




I agree. I think they could easily do a Superman Begins reboot in the next few years and people would accept it pretty easily. Marvel did it with the Hulk franchise and no one batted an eyelash.

I would love to see a Superman Begins movie that totally got away from the Donnerverse. The Donner films were great for their time, but it's time for something new.

ttk


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.5.1 on MacOS X
RAB


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,247


My only problem with that is the fact that, pound for pound, Superman: The Movie is tonally pitch-perfect for the first half (Krypton/Kansas) that I'm not really sure what you could do to improve it other than for the sake of doing things different... which is not a good enough reason to change things around when the Public recognizes Krypton/The Fortress being made out of crystals.

With Batman, you at least had the fact that the 60's Batman never showed his origin, the Burton Films never really did focus on Bruce's rise to Batman all that much (aside from the flashback where his Parents are killed and the fact he has a lot of money, how/when did Bruce acquire the knowledge and tech to become Batman?) and Nolan had a perfect reason to go forth and examine how a rich kid from Gotham became a rooftop vigilante.

But is it really worth trying to repeat and compete with an origin that virtually everyone and their Mother knows, which was more than successfully translated to the screen?

With virtually everything else that has been mentioned, the earlier films were either not creatively successful with their characters (Hulk, Punisher) or had something left out that COULD be fleshed out (how Bruce trained and became Batman). Superman already has a great origin film that everyone is familiar with. Be much better and easier to run with the ball. Just, as you said, tone down the homages (lines lifted from the film, thematic re-creations of scenes) but keep the aesthetic and don't set it up as a direct sequel and things should be fine. I like to think that audiences aren't morons and will be able to figure out that this is a follow-up on the Donner vision but yet not tied to it. Certainly be easier than what Returns tried to do, which was say that it takes after Superman 1 and 2, but not certain portions of 1 and 2. Just establish that Superman came from a planet based on crystal manipulation, raised by kind farmers with the Husband dying of a heart-attack, went to the big city to be a Reporter, fell in love with Lois Lane and has foiled one plot by Lex Luthor. What's so hard about that and then jumping forward? You could recap that like in The Incredible Hulk or Spider-Man 2 and NO ONE should get confused.

This isn't even addressing the newly revealed factoid that DC is now following Marvel's lead and having their comic writers oversee certain film properties (Geoff Johns on the Flash, for example)... so since Donner's vision has finally been implanted into the comics (ever since Bryne tried and failed back in the 80's) AND it's the version virtually everyone in America is familiar with (with help from shows like Smallville using the aesthetic), I highly doubt we'll see a different version of Krypton. As skeptical as I am that a full-on origin reboot could happen, even if it does I just don't see a different version of Krypton being used.





Ryan Brandt
---
Writer of Ideas
Creator of Stuff

Check out out my Deviantart page!
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.11 on Windows XP
Kaiser The Great





    Quote:
    My only problem with that is the fact that, pound for pound, Superman: The Movie is tonally pitch-perfect for the first half (Krypton/Kansas) that I'm not really sure what you could do to improve it other than for the sake of doing things different... which is not a good enough reason to change things around when the Public recognizes Krypton/The Fortress being made out of crystals.


Yeah that's probably true. On the other hand, it was a 1978 movie, so is it cool to retell it after 31 years? I would argue yes, especially if they're so hung up on catching the new generation's interest. And if not, do the Burton/Returns/Man of Steel/Birthright approach, and don't really harp on his growing up stage, just touch on it here and there. If everyone knows Krypton blows up, and don't want to see it again (and again, I would argue that - 31 years) then don't spend 30 minutes on it, just blow it up.


    Quote:
    This isn't even addressing the newly revealed factoid that DC is now following Marvel's lead and having their comic writers oversee certain film properties (Geoff Johns on the Flash, for example)... so since Donner's vision has finally been implanted into the comics (ever since Bryne tried and failed back in the 80's) AND it's the version virtually everyone in America is familiar with (with help from shows like Smallville using the aesthetic), I highly doubt we'll see a different version of Krypton. As skeptical as I am that a full-on origin reboot could happen, even if it does I just don't see a different version of Krypton being used.


I would like to see them depart from the crystals, as I've gotten a bit bored with them. And I love the motion picture, and the earlier years of SMALLVILLE. But I'd like to see more of a silver-age-y Krypton, a Birthright or All-Star Superman type Krypton, where they look more like superheroes and give an excuse for Clark to wear tights. I'd like to see a Krypton and Fortress of Solitude that isn't drab, dark and depressing. Actually, that really has nothing to do with crystal technology. They could still use it and achieve my wants. So whatever.




Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.12 on Windows XP

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software