What is DC Entertainment doing? What is their plan?

[Lord]

It was, when it was released a lot of people talked about it and by seasons 2 and 3 it was a very popular show, and before i even became a superman fan i knew his origin, and i didn't even watch the cartoons, the movies or read the comics to know, his origin,his symbol, Lois Lane and Lex Luthor are all part of popular culture.

 

[HighFivingMF]

The symbol and the names Lois Lane and Lex Luthor are well known pieces of pop culture. But if you walk up to someone and ask "What's Superman's origin?" you're more likely to get a shrug than a "His planet blew up and his parents sent him to a farm."

 

[Lord]

Most people know that he comes from a dying planet and that he's the last survivor, things like him being raised by the Kents could be told during the course of the movie but it doesn't have to be an origin, in fact, he's probably the easier hero to start a movie without an origin.

 

[Tobias]

Well the thing that worries me about MOS is it's almost like SR where it's a remake of the previous Superman series. SR picked up basically where Superman 2 left off and now once again they are using Zod. I'm not saying MOS won't perform well but I honestly don't believe it will make more than Thor did.

I think it will do better than Thor. The Nolan name should help. If MOS only does like Thor then it will not have done as well as SR. In that case I guess Singer would get the last laugh.

 

[Lord]

Christopher Nolan's name will make Man of Steel successful

 

[OsGom]

I think it's funny that no one feels a need to say why we need new villains, or suggest any that will make for a better movie/story than Zod.

IMHO when rebooting a franchise a goal should be to set your world apart from previous incarnations. We saw it with BB and now with Amazing Spiderman. I'm not sure if it is a conscious decision to relaunch using villains not previously portrayed on screen but I believe it helped the new Batman establish an identity apart from the Burton/Schumacher franchise.

I am not saying that MOS can't accomplish this with Zod, I'm saying it makes more sense and seems like it would be easier to set this franchise apart from the Donnor/Singer franchise if they utilized a different villain from Superman’s extensive rogues gallery. Using Zod will invite even more comparisons Donnor’s interpretation whereas BB was able to distinguish itself with a villain and perspective not previously seen in film.

Now the filmmakers are in the position where the story will need to be the device that sets this film apart from SMII. The good news is the cast and writing is VERY strong. The bad news is you have Zack Snyder directing. I am hopeful they can pull this off but I remain leery that WB will have the nuts to go outside the formula established by previous interpretations. Nolan’s involvement could be the X Factor here. However, while his darker and grittier vision of Batman worked for that character, I think he needs to use a softer brighter hand for MOS.

 

[HighFivingMF]

I think it will do better than Thor. The Nolan name should help. If MOS only does like Thor then it will not have done as well as SR. In that case I guess Singer would get the last laugh.

I do believe he meant worldwide. Thor made 448 million, Returns made 391 million.

 

[Raiden]

The symbol and the names Lois Lane and Lex Luthor are well known pieces of pop culture. But if you walk up to someone and ask "What's Superman's origin?" you're more likely to get a shrug than a "His planet blew up and his parents sent him to a farm."

I found that hard to believe, especially since they have had a series called Smallville that ran for 10 seasons that dealt specifically with Clark Kent's origin. Also, there isn't another superhero who's origin has as much retelling as Superman's.

 

[HighFivingMF]

I found that hard to believe, especially since they have had a series called Smallville that ran for 10 seasons that dealt specifically with Clark Kent's origin. Also, there isn't another superhero who's origin has as much retelling as Superman's.

I've addressed my thoughts on the matter of Smallville in previous posts and you can tell a story a million times in a million comics, but people who don't read comics still won't know it.

 

[Tobias]

I do believe he meant worldwide. Thor made 448 million, Returns made 391 million.

Got it. I was thinking domestic and Thor made around 185 million domestic which I think MOS can beat.

Worldwide 448 million sounds about right for MOS.

 

[The Sage]

I agree. Doing another origin film is rehashing stuff that's been done to death. I think the complaints stem from a desire by fans to see something totally new and fresh in a Superman film.

And yet fans were saying for years they wanted to see Superman's origin on film again.

 

[DrCosmic]

Yeah but Batman has had like 10 movies out. You can't help but reuse his villians, especially Joker who is just as big as Batman. The thing that messes up Superman is that SR basically was a sequel which Singer admitted himself and wanted to use Zod for his sequel to SR. Now we just happen to have Zod once again the villian for the new Superman movie. I'm just saying, a lot of people have complained about this and I feel their pain because I could relate. We've really only had 2 Superman villians on the big screen that were actually used in the comics. Eh, I'll think about this at work and try to get back later and explain it better.

But they did manage not to reuse villains, and Batman has such an expansive gallery that they could have gone further, had they so chosen. But they didn't, cuz it wasn't a huge deal. I really don't see how Singer's plans for a non-existent sequel have any bearing whatsoever on MOS.

Brainiac because he could pratically serve the same porpose Zod is serving, conection to krypton, he could even be Kal-El's trainer until there's a twist where he isn't kryptonian and they are all extinct, and it would add to Superman being the last survivor of Krypton, something that could be contradicted with Zod's appearance in a sequel instead of just reusing him.
In fact you don't even need a complete origin, Grant Morrinson's Action comics 1 was actually very interesting and that take could work well with a superman movie

CGI villains don't have chemistry with other actors.

IMHO when rebooting a franchise a goal should be to set your world apart from previous incarnations. We saw it with BB and now with Amazing Spiderman. I'm not sure if it is a conscious decision to relaunch using villains not previously portrayed on screen but I believe it helped the new Batman establish an identity apart from the Burton/Schumacher franchise.

I am not saying that MOS can't accomplish this with Zod, I'm saying it makes more sense and seems like it would be easier to set this franchise apart from the Donnor/Singer franchise if they utilized a different villain from Superman’s extensive rogues gallery. Using Zod will invite even more comparisons Donnor’s interpretation whereas BB was able to distinguish itself with a villain and perspective not previously seen in film.

Now the filmmakers are in the position where the story will need to be the device that sets this film apart from SMII. The good news is the cast and writing is VERY strong. The bad news is you have Zack Snyder directing. I am hopeful they can pull this off but I remain leery that WB will have the nuts to go outside the formula established by previous interpretations. Nolan’s involvement could be the X Factor here. However, while his darker and grittier vision of Batman worked for that character, I think he needs to use a softer brighter hand for MOS.

Now, THAT is a good point. A "new" villain does drive home the freshness. That said... who would serve the story better than Zod? Why drive home freshness at the expense of story.

Keep in mind, the ONLY thing making it like SM2 is Zod's appearance. We won't see Ursa or Non. The characters involved, aside from Superman, are all different. They're already well, well outside the formulas of previous interpretations with a red haired soft spoken Lois, a black collected Perry White a military presence, which is sure to be antagonistic and more that hasn't been leaked yet. Again, the *only* similarity is Zod himself, and even then, the character is now Superman's peer instead of an elder statesman. It really is dramatically different on several levels, beyond just the story. That's Nolan's influence. Change a bunch of stuff from the comics, but as long as it's good, fans will still love it.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I think that what i liked to call the revamped trio: Swamp Thing, Sandman and Animal Man could be great movies

This. I've said it before, but I don't think DC should be trying to play catch-up with Marvel by trying to build an interconnected superhero universe. Instead, exploit the advantage they've always had over Marvel, which is a more diverse roster of characters and properties covering different genres and storytelling approaches.

 

[Airwings]

What makes you say we won't have TDK-level themes in MOS?

A possible MOS 2 should be to MOS what TDK is to BB. That's what I mean.

 

[Raiden]

I've addressed my thoughts on the matter of Smallville in previous posts and you can tell a story a million times in a million comics, but people who don't read comics still won't know it.

People don't need to read comics to know Superman's origin; they can watch TV (Lois & Clark, Smallville) or movies (Superman).

 

[HighFivingMF]

People don't need to read comics to know Superman's origin; they can watch TV (Lois & Clark, Smallville) or movies (Superman).

But most of them didn't. I've gone through all of this. If 60% of the people going to see the movie know the origin, there's still the 40% that don't.

 

[Kyle Rayner]

Let's just move on, DC/WB will do what they want when the want to. For now lets just enjoy the fact that they're at least making a Supeman Film and Nolan's Batman will go with a bang. It's time to figure out who should play what with the hope that someone at WB/DC will notice this post:

Jonathan Rhys Meyer play King Henry the VIII in the Tudors for a long time. Put an orange shirt, green pants, die his hair blonde and Aquaman is born!

 

[Kyle Rayner]

Last weekend I talked about Gina Carano playing Wonder Woman. Lots of negative replies came up, that's good. Has anyone watched Sons Of Anarchy? There is a beautiful woman by the name of Maggie Siff, I think she could be a great contender for Wonder Woman. Any thoughts anyone?

 

[Kyle Rayner]

Barry Allen has been around for a long time as the Flash. John Wesley Ship played him in the early 90's The Flash tv show. A Flash movie should be in the works for him, is just trying to find the right fit. Barry is the soft spoken, man of a few words, always calm in every scenario presented to him.

Ryan Hurst has been seen in Sons of Anarchy, he plays Opie in the show and really think if you take the beard, tattoos and long hair somewhere in there Barry Allen can be found.

 

[Kyle Rayner]

Many believe that Xmen II was a great sequel movie. Me personally, I didn't like the fact that Cyclops was mostly missing in the film. Nor that in Xmen III he was "killed" off. James Mardsen needs to be vindicated by playing the complete opposite of Scott Summers. Let him run his mouth and kickass with a bow and arrow. How about Oliver Queen?

 

[Tobias]

Given the high profile trajectory SONY is setting for The Amazing Spiderman - the date for the sequel has already been set for summer 2014 and a thrid Spiderman will likely debut in 2016, where does WB go with Batman?

Assuming both TDKR and The Amazing Spiderman do upwards of a billion next year how does WB keep it's flagship character going at a high momentum?

I think they have to quickly do a reboot to capitalize on the huge success TDKR will be. The reboot probably needs to be out in 2014 with a sequel set for 2016.

WB could focus on JL or try another solo a la WW but I think the focus has to be Batman's reboot over the next several years. Batman is the elephant in the china shop and WB should focus on nurturing the franchise in a transition to a new set of director/actors and producers that can set the studio up for a string of 3 more uber-successful films after TDKR.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I wouldn't rush into a Batman reboot. Yes, it's inevitable the character will eventually be rebooted and they'll want to do more Batman films in the future, but after Nolan's trilogy comes to a close, I'd say the character deserves a rest. Even The Amazing Spider-Man, which has been criticised by some as being a total rush-job reboot when the corpse of the last franchise is barely cold, allowed for a 5 year grace period for memories of the last franchise to fade a little. The idea of a new Batman franchise being prepped for release 2 years after The Dark Knight Rises is far too soon. The only way they could get away with it - and even this is tenuous - is if the new franchise took a "loose sequel" approach in following the Nolan films instead of going back and retelling Batman's origin story.

 

[Tobias]

I wouldn't rush into a Batman reboot. Yes, it's inevitable the character will eventually be rebooted and they'll want to do more Batman films in the future, but after Nolan's trilogy comes to a close, I'd say the character deserves a rest. Even The Amazing Spider-Man, which has been criticised by some as being a total rush-job reboot when the corpse of the last franchise is barely cold, allowed for a 5 year grace period for memories of the last franchise to fade a little. The idea of a new Batman franchise being prepped for release 2 years after The Dark Knight Rises is far too soon. The only way they could get away with it - and even this is tenuous - is if the new franchise took a "loose sequel" approach in following the Nolan films instead of going back and retelling Batman's origin story.

I don't think the 5 year wait for the Spiderman reboot was at all rushed. Two years for the Batman reboot after TDKR - that would be rushed. But WB may have no choice.

If The Amazing Spideramn does 600 million or more as is expected then WB I think will move quickly ahead with the Batman reboot.

WB has had no luck with solo franchises other than Batman. If they don't focus on a quick reboot of Batman then I'd guess they will go ahead with JL as their fast-tracked project. Out as early as 2014 maybe and especially if Avengers breaks the billion dollar mark.

As I see it WB has just 2 ways to go now with TDKR being Nolan and Bales last Bat project. Either a quick reboot of Batman or a fast-tracked JL film series. I think we will see one or the other in 2014 or 2015.

 

[DrCosmic]

A possible MOS 2 should be to MOS what TDK is to BB. That's what I mean.

I feel you, and I used to think that too, but if that were really the case, why not name the movie Superman Something?

 

[Airwings]

DrCosmic: I don't mean the title. I mean what's IN the film