Quote:
I dont know about this. Most superheroes have a pretty compelling, definitive origin story. After that theres a bunch of random storylines that to be brutally honest probably arent worthy of the big screen treatment. The alternative is that the filmmakers create something from scratch which is a real crapshoot. And to be honest i cant think of amny superhero sequels that were notably superior to the original movie. I certainly dont think its a general rule. The only problem with origin movies is that they tend to hit the same notes such that when you have a lot of superhero movies being made at the same time they can all blend into one in the casual viewers mind.
I didn't mean that superhero origins weren't great. I only said that the origns don't make for great movies. They just don't too long to set up the character. This is why I said Dark Night, Spidey 2, Inc. Hulk, and X2 were better than the originals. Regardless, it's probably a moot point for Superman because so many people already know his origin that it would make for a boring movie.
In regards to a villain, I agree that a common origin makes the most sense for a movie. However, a Kryptonian-derived villain doesn't necessarily have to be Zod. I'd be happy with Brainiac.
