Official MAN OF STEEL (Superman) thread (June 14, 2013)

[drc5145]

Well, seeing as how there's no thread for it, we might as well have one, after today's surprising development.

http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/whoa...perman-reboot/

I'm surprised Nolan took such a project but seeing as how it's only in essence, a producer role, it's more understandable.

[Roy Batty]

It makes me wonder if Warner Brothers made a deal with Nolan to produce a Superman Reboot, along with directing a Dark Knight sequel in exchange he gets ultimated funds for any project he wants to do in the future.

I see nothing but good things coming from Nolan being on board as a producer and overseer for this project. Can't wait to see what's to come.

[AspectRatio1986]

After reading all this good news my initial instinct was thinking "April Fool's day isn't for another two months." This is absolutely huge news....I'm really excited.

[Smiert Spionam]

This was shocking, but it totally makes sense. Even though Nolan is my favorite rising director, I'm not sure if his tone or style would be appropriate for a Superman film, but I could see why they'd still want his creative input, obviously, since he's fucking awesome. As much as I'd like to see Supes done justice, I can't help but be more excited at the prospect that Nolan has finally found a good idea for a 3rd Batfilm and is currently fleshing it out.

But I thought they were still having trouble negotiating the rights over the Superman property though?

[AspectRatio1986]

Originally Posted by Smiert Spionam

I can't help but be more excited at the prospect that Nolan has finally found a good idea for a 3rd Batfilm and is currently fleshing it out.

Makes me salivate...just the thought that they might be penning the script right now is just incredible, let the anticipation begin if any of these reports are true!

[BoxManShoes]

Bad news. Superman's a cheesy and outdated franchise and Nolan's too good for this.

[APzombie]

Originally Posted by BoxManShoes

Bad news. Superman's a cheesy and outdated franchise and Nolan's too good for this.

he picked up where Batman & Robin left off, which was the epitome of cheesy and outdated, he might help steer the ship in the right direction.

I wonder if WB/DC wants him to supervise because they expect his Gotham the mesh with the new Metropolis? I know he has stated that he didn't consider a bigger DC world when he made his Batman films but this news does raise the question.

I'm glad. Glad he isn't pulling a Brian Singer and completely jumping to another ship. It's good to hear some Batman news. If anything it means WB will treat him and Jonathan well when it comes to financing more original films like Inception. Jonathon actually has a great parking spot on the WB lot in front of Legendary studios.

[Smiert Spionam]

Wow, it just now dawned on me that Nolan's involvment with Superman definitely puts a "World's Finest" film in the realm of possibility, if not an inevitablity....



Holy fuck!

[jolanar]

As long as they have the balls to make Superman what it SHOULD be... a fucking sci fi ACTION movie... then I am there.

And for the love of god please don't make Lex Luthor the bad guy. I swear Ill boycott it if we get another hammed up version of Lex on the big screen.

[James Bond]

Yeah, I definitely don't want to see Lex Luthor ever again. He is way over used within the Superman franchise.

However, my excite-o-meter is not all that hot for this, though.
Probably because....

1. Superman (Although he is the father of superheroes, is about as generic or cliche of a hero as they come). Unless they do a Doomsday Movie, I am really not all that interested or excited about this.

2. Nolan (Although he is a very talented director, I wasn't wild about the Dark Knight as some folks were) (and I also thought Batman Begins could have had a bit more action sequences in it (while he was Batman).

[Hey Man]

I still think Brandon Routh should play Superman. I think given better material, he would do very well. I actually feel bad for him.

[john_rambo]

Originally Posted by Hey Man

I still think Brandon Routh should play Superman. I think given better material, he would do very well. I actually feel bad for him.

I agree, I thought he was a great Superman, it was just a shit movie. I even liked Spacey as Lex Luthor, but Superbastard, horrible writing, and just an over all shit story ruined it.

[James Bond]

Yeah, Routhe did okay. In fact, he even came off a lot like Christopher Reeve. However, he still seemed a bit off to me, though. Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing an older and or classic looking Superman, instead. Sort of like the guy who played Superman in the Grayson trailer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQyfQ7RMOXs

[James Bond]

Originally Posted by john_rambo

I agree, I thought he was a great Superman, it was just a shit movie. I even liked Spacey as Lex Luthor, but Superbastard, horrible writing, and just an over all shit story ruined it.

Rambo:

Yeah, sort of reminds me of this vid I caught a while back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=av6fWfmugds

[Heisenberg]

They got one lastr shot of making Superman right. Even with the brilliant addition of Nolan, I don't think this will be good.

[bigred760]

Originally Posted by APzombie

he picked up where Batman & Robin left off, which was the epitome of cheesy and outdated, he might help steer the ship in the right direction.

I wonder if WB/DC wants him to supervise because they expect his Gotham the mesh with the new Metropolis? I know he has stated that he didn't consider a bigger DC world when he made his Batman films but this news does raise the question.

Good response!

If Nolan is in any way a part of it, I'm encouraged.

[drc5145]

Jon Hamm would make a great older age Superman. Brandon Routh is also a solid choice if they stick with him.

[Smiert Spionam]

lol @ "SuperBastard"

I share the sentiments that Routh had potential. I wouldn't mind seeming him have a go again. I also wouldn't mind seeing Lex as just a secondary character and not the main villain. He is relevant part of Supes' world, so he should have some role or have his reaction to the events of the film shown. Also, James Bond, Doomsday is a fucking boring villain and the Death of Superman story arc is actually pretty weak. The only reason why its so praised is because Big Blue dies. Personally, I'd love to see a full-scale Brianiac, Metallo, or Parasite.

[Roy Batty]

I hope they go for the Batman Begins type of reboot, with his origins being explored through flashbacks, and witnessing the destruction of Krypton.

P.S.

Doomsday is a boring villain, and I think Brainiac is the perfect villain who hasn't gotten his big screen treatment yet.

[James Bond]

Originally Posted by Jig Saw 123

I hope they go for the Batman Begins type of reboot, with his origins being explored through flashbacks, and witnessing the destruction of Krypton.

Jig Saw:

Yeah, if it's a descent reboot it should be an origin story like Batman Begins.

Doomsday is a boring villain, and I think Brainiac is the perfect villain who hasn't gotten his big screen treatment yet.

Are you referring to the Doomsday of the comics or the animated feature?
Cause the Death of Superman Comic Series was pretty kick ass. And I don't even like the character of Superman all that much.

Personally, I never cared for Brainiac.
He never really seemed all that threatening of a villain to me (just like Lex).
Plus, he just bores me as a character, too.

I mean, the Death of Superman by the hands of Doomsday was just monumental.
In fact, I even remember someone showing me the local Newspaper on his death when it happened (back in the day).
Then when I read the issues (later on), it was even more shocking and heart felt.

So if Warner Brothers doesn't ever plan on ever doing a Doomsday movie...
Well, then... they deserve to wallow in shame behind Marvel in the super hero movie department.
Cause a live action movie of the Death of Superman has loads of potential and would be just frigging amazing!

[soda]

Few things:

-have any of you watched "Absolute Justice" the two hour episode of Smallville from Last Friday? That episode, to me, is what the DC universe can and should be. That episode is what watchmen should have been. There are so many cool toys to play with: "Absolute Justice" had Sandman, Hawkman, Stargirl, Dr. Fate, Martian Manhunter, Green Arrow, Amanda Waller, Checkmate, Mr. Terrific, Hawkgirl, Ma Hunkel, Green Lantern, Flash, and Wildcat, and it didn't feel overloaded or boring. That's what happens when you get the great Geoff (Blackest night) Johns to write for you. If I was Nolan, that would be my first move, as Johns has proven to me he can write a long screenplay suitable for a feature length movie. An episode like that proves to me that people who think Superman is boring don't know what the hell they're talking about.

-I'm all for a reboot, and I would love to see the last days of Krypton fleshed out. Everyone knows the planet blows up, but can anyone tell me exactly how or why? I'm a hardcore fan, and even I don't know the answer. I do know it involves such things as brainiac's attack, the shrinking of Kandor, and an attempted coup by general Zod, but that's as far as I go.

-I think Nolan coming onboard is excellent knews, and I'm also chomping at the bit for Batman 3. If Nolan can get an excellent director and writer, there's no reason Superman reboot can't be all kinds of awesome.

[James Bond]

Well, I stopped watching Smallville at Season 7. I am waiting to do a DVD Marathon over my Mom's house for Season 8 this summer. So I am quite a bit behind.

As for Watchmen:
That is funny you mentioned the movie. I was just reading the Trade Paper Back today. This is my third time at reading the book. The first time, was before the movie and I stopped reading it because it was too dry for my tastes. The second time I tried reading it was after the movie. I got about 8 chapters in and I skipped past the little extra written stuff (such as Under The Hood). However, a week or so ago I started all over again (reading everything) and I really enjoyed the heck out of it because I have seen the film at least 2 or 3 times and absolutely loved it.

In fact, I think the comic is better because of the movie.
Although Watchmen the Comic was a literary masterpiece and has helped define a change within an era of comics... I still think it's major flaw is that it lacks the proper action sequences and doesn't communicate information within various scenes all that well. It jumps around a lot at times and doesn't apologize or explain itself for doing so. Which can be argued that it is what makes this comic series even more unique. However, I grew up with Marvel Comics in the mid 80s to early 90s, though. So in other words: action heavy scenes and a clear sense of panel communication (or artistic story telling) is a really important for me.

[EZM22]

Yet another reboot... this one actually sounds like a good idea, though. I enjoyed SUPERMAN RETURNS, but its main problem was that it tried to copy the original Richard Donner film way too much.

Here's a few things I would do:

- Keep Brandon Routh. The guy didn't do a bad job, he looks the part (and he eerily resembled Christopher Reeve a lot). Any problems the movie had weren't with him, I'd say he deserves it.

- Get rid of Lex Luthor. Superman's archnemesis, yes, but he's too overused. And if you're going to include him, don't make him campy; rather, he should be the complete and utter prick he's in the comics. This ties into...

- No corny sidekicks (Fuck Otis).

- Actually have Superman kick ass for once. The climax of the last movie was Supes lifting a giant rock - give me a break! Actually have him fight someone this time, someone who can give him a real test, people like Darkseid, Doomsday, Metallo, etc.

- Avoid giving too much time to the origin story. 80% of all fans pretty much know it by now.

[James Bond]

My Superman Reboot Requirements:

1. An Unknown New Talented Actor With The Old Style Classic Superman Look
2. Doomsday Story-line with other Superheroes Involved
3. A Director Who has proven that he can do both action and story
4. Poster should just be a bleeding Superman symbol
5. A Film should be full of extensive and jaw dropping action sequences.
6. Should have Heart and Drama.
7. Time should be spent on CGI shots to make them look breathtakingly real and practical effects should be done whenever possible.

In other words...

This could lead up to a two part Justice League Movie (if Warner Brothers was really that smart).
The first JLA movie would be the formation of the JLA because of the Death of Superman in the Superman Reboot.
By the end of the first JLA film we see the hint of Superman's return.
By the second JLA movie we see a full fledged kick you in your ass Justice League film (with the major prime members: Batman, Superman, Wonderwoman, Gleek, Green Lantern, Flash, ECT).

[Smiert Spionam]

I know I can't be the only one who thinks "The Death of Superman" arc is crazy overrated...

[James Bond]

Originally Posted by Smiert Spionam

I know I can't be the only one who thinks "The Death of Superman" arc is crazy overrated...

Smiert:

Would you still say that if Peter Jackson was directing the Death of Superman along with filming the other two following JLA movies back to back like he did with the Lord of the Rings Trilogy?

I don't know man.
That would be like not liking ice cream or something.

Unless of course your lactose intolerant.

[drc5145]

Originally Posted by James Bond

As for Watchmen:
That is funny you mentioned the movie. I was just reading the Trade Paper Back today. This is my third time at reading the book. The first time, was before the movie and I stopped reading it because it was too dry for my tastes. The second time I tried reading it was after the movie. I got about 8 chapters in and I skipped past the little extra written stuff (such as Under The Hood). However, a week or so ago I started all over again (reading everything) and I really enjoyed the heck out of it because I have seen the film at least 2 or 3 times and absolutely loved it.

In fact, I think the comic is better because of the movie.
Although Watchmen the Comic was a literary masterpiece and has helped define a change within an era of comics... I still think it's major flaw is that it lacks the proper action sequences and doesn't communicate information within various scenes all that well. It jumps around a lot at times and doesn't apologize or explain itself for doing so. Which can be argued that it is what makes this comic series even more unique. However, I grew up with Marvel Comics in the mid 80s to early 90s, though. So in other words: action heavy scenes and a clear sense of panel communication (or artistic story telling) is a really important for me.

Good for you but I would urge you when you re-read it again to read the extra stuff after each chapter. Those passages are loaded to the brim with extra information that help flesh out the book's universe and characters a whole lot more. They really will give lines and the art in the book a whole new meaning when you go back to re-read them.

I loved for the most part, the film we got in the end (especially when you consider the other directions the film could have gone in development) but it's still not better than the book. No question.

[James Bond]

Originally Posted by drc5145

Good for you

DRC:

Geez, now you make me feel like I deserve a Scooby snack or something.

*Stomach Rumbles*

but I would urge you when you re-read it again to read the extra stuff after each chapter. Those passages are loaded to the brim with extra information that help flesh out the book's universe and characters a whole lot more. They really will give lines and the art in the book a whole new meaning when you go back to re-read them.

Anyways, just to be clear: I did read all the extra little passages by my third reading of the book.

I loved for the most part, the film we got in the end (especially when you consider the other directions the film could have gone in development) but it's still not better than the book. No question.

I don't know. For me, the book was a very dry read before I seen the movie. So when the movie came out, it really helped me flesh out the action, the characters, and the universe in more tactile and vivid way that the comic never did for me before.

Sure the comic is a defining literary graphic piece within comics. But in my opinion, I think they could have improved the book in other areas dramatically, though. However, I still enjoyed the heck out of it. Even the little written pieces in-between each chapter. But if it wasn't for the movie, I doubt I would have enjoyed the book as much.

In my opinion, the comic to me is simply a more detailed extension of the Watchmen Universe (although it was an interesting and fun read, the added stuff within the book really was unnecessary in getting the major plot point across to me). In fact, the extra tid bits simply was their to add another layer or depth to it. I mean, I suppose it would sort of be like adding a heap load of frosting onto a cake. Sure it might taste good because of all that sugar. But a cake can still taste just as good with just light covering frosting, as well.

[Smiert Spionam]

Originally Posted by James Bond

Smiert:

Would you still say that if Peter Jackson was directing the Death of Superman along with filming the other two following JLA movies back to back like he did with the Lord of the Rings Trilogy?

I don't know man.
That would be like not liking ice cream or something.

Unless of course your lactose intolerant.

Actually, I'm not a Jackson fan at all, so I'd prefer he stay far, far away from my superheroes.

[James Bond]

Originally Posted by Smiert Spionam

Actually, I'm not a Jackson fan at all, so I'd prefer he stay far, far away from my superheroes.

Smiert:

Well, everyone has their own tastes.
So it's all good, man.

BTW~ Your Avatar of Ben Linus (Which is cool) sort of looks like the android called "Data" at a quick glance.

[drc5145]

Originally Posted by James Bond

DRC:

Geez, now you make me feel like I deserve a Scooby snack or something

*Stomach Rumbles*

Anyways, just to be clear: I did read all the extra little passages by my third reading of the book.




I don't know. For me, the book was a very dry read before I seen the movie. So when the movie came out, it really helped me flesh out the action, the characters, and the universe in more tactile and vivid way that the comic never did for me before.

Sure the comic is a defining literary graphic piece within comics. But in my opinion, I think they could have improved the book in other areas dramatically, though. However, I still enjoyed the heck out of it. Even the little written pieces in-between each chapter. But if it wasn't for the movie, I doubt I would have enjoyed the book as much.

In my opinion, the comic to me is simply a more detailed extension of the Watchmen Universe (although it was an interesting and fun read, it really was unnecessary in getting the major plot point across to me). The extra tid bits simply was their to add another layer or depth to it. I mean, it's sort of like adding a heap load of frosting onto a cake. Sure it might taste good because of all that sugar. But a cake can still taste good with just light covering frosting, as well.

Scooby Snack doesn't sound bad right now...

Anyhoo...I'm not sure how else it could be improved. Granted, it may just be a case of different tastes. I enjoyed the cuts to different eras in the timeline. It was the reverse effect on me in that, I enjoyed the film even more because of the book.

[James Bond]

Originally Posted by drc5145

Scooby Snack doesn't sound bad right now.

DRC:

Yeah, as long as it isn't a Doobie Snack. I am too wise and cultured for that kind of thing, now.

http://www.tubechop.com/watch/50216

Alright....
Now back to our regularly scheduled talk of the Superman Reboot.

[hYPE]

Originally Posted by EZM22

Yet another reboot... this one actually sounds like a good idea, though. I enjoyed SUPERMAN RETURNS, but its main problem was that it tried to copy the original Richard Donner film way too much.

Here's a few things I would do:

- Keep Brandon Routh. The guy didn't do a bad job, he looks the part (and he eerily resembled Christopher Reeve a lot). Any problems the movie had weren't with him, I'd say he deserves it.

- Get rid of Lex Luthor. Superman's archnemesis, yes, but he's too overused. And if you're going to include him, don't make him campy; rather, he should be the complete and utter prick he's in the comics. This ties into...

- No corny sidekicks (Fuck Otis).

- Actually have Superman kick ass for once. The climax of the last movie was Supes lifting a giant rock - give me a break! Actually have him fight someone this time, someone who can give him a real test, people like Darkseid, Doomsday, Metallo, etc.

- Avoid giving too much time to the origin story. 80% of all fans pretty much know it by now.

Dang, brotha. You have everything down! Christopher Nolan/WB's needs to peep this thread and read what you wrote cause your spot on the money.

[adamjohnson]

Superman is his own worst enemy. He is too powerful for a conventional villain to be any threat and any action sequences have to be earth shattering affairs.

However if you make his opponents equal to him, you can trick the audience into believing that flying around and doing crazy shit would even out. So you can be left with hand-to hand bare knuckle fights.

If you subtly ratchet down the strength of Superman's powers the audience wont really know. Make him FEEL artillery fire and explosions. Make him struggle to lift things like the Daily Planet globe. Limit his speed and ignore some of the other powers - ice breath, x-ray vision, maybe even heat vision and leave him with flying and super strength. And you have a character who can have DRAMA in their fight scenes.

Make death a real threat every time he goes against the supervillain. If your character is invincible, there is not story.

[Monotreme]

Boo.

Nolan or not, I totally agree with the sentiment that Superman is just not that interesting a superhero. He might have worked in WWII-era United States, but nowadays, audiences are looking for a lot more depth in their superheroes, not some invincible guy who can fly around, do anything and has only ONE weakness. I don't even think there is any way of making a more "gritty and realistic" version of Superman without taking away everything that identifies him as a superhero, including the bright tights, and so, although adamjohnson is in the right direction, I think that they should just give up on the Superman franchise and focus on the more interesting superheroes.

[ilovemovies]

I disagree that Superman isn't an interesting character. I think he is. To borrow the title of an infamous episode of Lost, he's a stranger in a strange land. He's the only one of his kind. He should feel isolated and lonely. Knows very little about where he came from and who his birth parents are. I think all of this is great stuff.

Plus, while Superman has very little weaknesses, his friends don't. Lois Lane and everyone else Supes cares about can be killed. Make them be the ones in danger. And make it so that Superman can not always be there to rescue them. That way you can real danger and there is room for real suspense.

I agree that they should make Lex Luthor more menacing. And I thought they did that actually in Superman Returns. Infact, as much as I love Gene Hackman, I thought Spacey's Luthor was better because he was a more believable threat to Superman. I mean, he actually kicked Superman's ass briefly near the end of the movie. Luthor is a great character too because while physically, he's not a threat to Superman, intellectually he is.

[James Bond]

Originally Posted by ilovemovies

I disagree that Superman isn't an interesting character. I think he is. To borrow the title of an infamous episode of Lost, he's a stranger in a strange land. He's the only one of his kind. He should feel isolated and lonely. Knows very little about where he came from and who his birth parents are. I think all of this is great stuff.

ILM:

Completely relating to the character of Superman would be possible...
if some of us here on Earth were actually aliens from another planet. Now, I am not saying there is no way for us to identify with him. Heck, his entire life was spent here on Earth. However, the fact that he is sooo powerful and has only one weakness alienates us from him a bit. We as normal flesh and blood human beings have many weaknesses and many short comings.

Plus, while Superman has very little weaknesses, his friends don't. Lois Lane and everyone else Supes cares about can be killed. Make them be the ones in danger. And make it so that Superman can not always be there to rescue them. That way you can real danger and there is room for real suspense.

See, that's just the thing. That formula has been done a thousand times already in the movies and the many television shows that have cropped up over the years. It's sort of like... "Okay, here we go again." "Superman is going to save them or maybe he won't." Well, if they die, he simply moves on with his life (Like Clark had done on Smallville when his father died).

Personally, I want to see something different on a huge scale.
In other words, I want to see Superman get his ass kicked big time and then have him die (for real). Now that would be emotional (if done right).

I agree that they should make Lex Luthor more menacing. And I thought they did that actually in Superman Returns. Infact, as much as I love Gene Hackman, I thought Spacey's Luthor was better because he was a more believable threat to Superman.

I don't know, Kevin Spacey just felt like a cartoon version of Lex Luthor to me. But thats just me. He did an okay job, but I just didn't really feel that he was all that real or menacing. He just came off a little too goofy for my tastes. Which was of course was one of the many problems I had with Superman Returns.

However, that doesn't mean I can't turn my brain off (like I do with Smallville) and enjoy Superman Returns on a pure popcorn level, though. It is just that if we are going to see another Superman movie... it has to be epic and something new. It has to raise the bar and feel more real. Otherwise why bother doing it? Especially if it is going to be something we seen a million times before.

I mean, he actually kicked Superman's ass briefly near the end of the movie. Luthor is a great character too because while physically, he's not a threat to Superman, intellectually he is.

Yeah, a lot of folks like myself were let down in seeing a villain they have seen countless times before. They wanted to see a villain who he could go toe to toe with. Thus making it more dramatic. We didn't want to see the same old boring formula of... "Lex traps Superman with Kryptonite and hurts him and his friends" again.

Besides... if they are going to make this Superman reboot: They are more than likely to repeat a lot of the same boring elements in Superman Returns. Like Lex Luthor, Clarke's origin, the Ice Fortress, saving the world from every day troubles, Clark wanting to hook up with Lois, ECT.

In other words, we are going to have two reboots back to back, now.
And to me... that is just absolutely retarded.

Unless of course they don't follow all the predictable rules or expectations of a traditional reboot that is.

I mean, personally, I think they could retell his Origins and then show us his Death by the hands of Doomsday in one movie. Granted, it would just be a very long movie (Like Lord of the Rings Long). But I think it would totally be worth it, though. On the other hand: they also could set it up at the end of the first movie that Doomsday has arrived or something. Thus, giving us something to look forward to.

I don't know. I just have zero interest in seeing this movie (until DVD) if they don't do something truly epic and or life changing with this character.

[soda]

Few things:

-Quick thing about Watchmen. When it came out, in 1985, it was truly revolutionary, but its one of those things that doesn't seem so much now, because its been copied to death the last twenty five years. Watchmen invented the superhero as more than just kid's stuff, for those of us who read silver age comics, and golden age comics, you know what I mean. I recently replayed Final Fantasy seven, and, compared to stuff that's out right now, it was okay, but at the time it came out, it wasa a landmark leap forward for video games, same idea. If you watch Batman, the brave and the bold, on cartoon network on Friday nights, you'll also get what I mean, as that show has a distinctly silver age flavor to it (its really more of an amalgamation of different ages, but its mostly silver age). Watchmen was the book that made comics grow-up, that's its influence. FWIW, I also don't rank it as the greatest comic book of all time, for my money, that's Kingdome Come, but I can't dispute its importance or relevance as a milestone for comics.

-I've posted this many times on this forum, but I HATE the idea of a Doomsday movie. Here's the problem with it: its one dimensional. People look at Doomsday as the "guy who killed Superman" and they think that story is important, but its not, not to a fan anyway. Are any of you guys fans of Dragonball Z? A superman-Doomsday movie would be just like an extended episode of Dragonball Z, cool it your into action, and nice for unwinding, but not something that I'd pay 10 bucks to see in a theatre (maybe that's just me). Superman actually has more interesting villians, and I tell you what, about five years after Death of Superman came out, DC published a Superman story that nobody has read called Emperor Joker, it was not only a great action book, it was drop dead hysterical.

Point being? There are better Superman Stories out there, than death of, and I could easily name ten of the top of my head, but that's just me. For villians, my all-time favorite is Darkseid, as he has what Doomsday doesn't have: an army of evil, immortal, minions, who will do his bidding in every way imaginable. Darkseid is the master strategist, he has both the brains and the brawn to match up with supes. Heck, I'd even prefer to use Mongul and do a "whatever happened to the man of tomorrow" film than to do one with Doomsday.

-Also, concerning the origin story, here's what I think about that, I do agree that "everyone" knows the story, but does everyone really know the story? The planet blows up, and the rocket ship launches, that's what everyone knows, the kents find him in a cornfield, and raise him as their kid, everyone knows, but what about before the rocketship launches? To me, that is interesting, as it must have taken something quite dramatic for a planet, that was one of the most technologically advanced civilizations in the known universe, to blow up. Braniac's attack on Candor, and the fight of the Kryptonian military guild to stop him is interesting. General Zod's change of heart, from the great hero of Kyrpton, to a traitor, and his exile to the phantom zone, is interesting. The fact that here we have one of the great civilizations of the universe imploding on itself, and there weren't other interests in the universe that would meddle (of course someone like Darkseid, or the guardians of the universe, would have their hands in that cookie jar) is interesting.

That's just my two cents, because, of course, no one consults me.

[JoeChar4321]

Originally Posted by soda

-have any of you watched "Absolute Justice" the two hour episode of Smallville from Last Friday? That episode, to me, is what the DC universe can and should be. That episode is what watchmen should have been. There are so many cool toys to play with: "Absolute Justice" had Sandman, Hawkman, Stargirl, Dr. Fate, Martian Manhunter, Green Arrow, Amanda Waller, Checkmate, Mr. Terrific, Hawkgirl, Ma Hunkel, Green Lantern, Flash, and Wildcat, and it didn't feel overloaded or boring. That's what happens when you get the great Geoff (Blackest night) Johns to write for you. If I was Nolan, that would be my first move, as Johns has proven to me he can write a long screenplay suitable for a feature length movie. An episode like that proves to me that people who think Superman is boring don't know what the hell they're talking about.

I'm definitely more of a Marvel fan but I like all comic based stuff and I really enjoyed the "Absolute Justice" Smallville. Growing up, Hawkman was always a favorite of mine! If that comes out by itself on DVD with extras, I'm going to buy it. Smallville started out good but faded. Too much high school BS. Now, I'm in to the show again and think they've done a great job getting Clark and Lois in to place as their iconic characters.

[James Bond]

Originally Posted by soda

-Quick thing about Watchmen. When it came out, in 1985, it was truly revolutionary,

Soda:

Yes, Watchmen was revolutionary. It helped defined the Modern Age (or Iron Age) of comic books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Age_of_Comic_Books

However, it is not every comic fan's cup of tea, though (as you pointed out).

If you watch Batman, the brave and the bold, on cartoon network on Friday nights, you'll also get what I mean, as that show has a distinctly silver age flavor to it. (its really more of an amalgamation of different ages, but its mostly silver age).

Yeah, no offense, but the Brave and the Bold Cartoon seems a lot like that Teen Titans junk to me. I mean, it just screams... this is for kids and not for adults.

greatest comic book of all time, for my money, that's Kingdome Come

Hmmmm... I will have to check Kingdom Come out sometime.

-I've posted this many times on this forum, but I HATE the idea of a Doomsday movie. Here's the problem with it: its one dimensional. People look at Doomsday as the "guy who killed Superman" and they think that story is important, but its not, not to a fan anyway.

Well, obviously not everyone liked the Death of Superman. In fact, Chuck Rozanksi, owner of retailer Mile High Comics said that his death was a contributing factor to the decline of comic book sales in the late 90s. However, despite some criticism: the Death of Superman brought in millions of readers to DC Comics. Comic-book fans that had never previously read a Superman title snatched up the issue en masse.

Now, diehard Superman fans had bought the Death issue on the expectation that that the book itself would become a prized collectible, and felt 'cheated' when he was suddenly revived (which made the book nearly worthless as a collectible).

So yeah, it makes sense that some die hard fans didn't like the Death of Superman. Their fanaticism over collecting comic books for profit out weighed their enjoyment of the actual story itself.

I mean, honestly, if the Death of Superman was so mindlessly one dimensional as you say... I doubt the sales of the book wouldn't have done as well as they did.

In fact, the Death of Superman (reprinted in an all in one volume for fans) would become one of the biggest selling graphic novels of all-time with over 14 reprints currently in release.

In fact, the trade paper back still has generally favorable reviews at Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/Death-Superman.../dp/1563890976

Again, as for the story being one dimensional: I suppose that would depend on your perspective of it. Yes, the story had no subtext and it is a simply bare-bones, knock-down fist fight that goes on for several issues. However, here is a man that was a symbol of hope to the people. Here was a man that saved the day when no else could do it. He was a Superman and he died. I know for a fact, as simple as the story was, it was very emotional for a lot of folks to read. And a lot of them were not even Superman fans either.

I mean, not every story has to have this amazing plot with multiple layers and subtext to be effective or enjoyable. Not every villain has to have an elaborate back story or reason to kill. Sometimes murder and death have no rhyme or reason (even in the real world).

However, this argument that the story is one dimensional is a mute point, though. Obviously they would adapt the story of the Death of Superman into a script (if they were to ever do it). So the final written word from comic to screen literally has limitless possibilities.

Superman actually has more interesting villians, and I tell you what, about five years after Death of Superman came out, DC published a Superman story that nobody has read called Emperor Joker, it was not only a great action book, it was drop dead hysterical.

Yes, but Emperor Joker wouldn't be a good idea for a Superman movie, though. That's the whole point. Sure, the Death of Superman may not be the most mind blowing literary graphic piece of work in history... but the potential in it being a big budgeted film is endless. It could be written to be more emotional, intelligent, and or clever.

For villians, my all-time favorite is Darkseid, as he has what Doomsday doesn't have: an army of evil, immortal, minions, who will do his bidding in every way imaginable. Darkseid is the master strategist, he has both the brains and the brawn to match up with supes. Heck, I'd even prefer to use Mongul and do a "whatever happened to the man of tomorrow" film than to do one with Doomsday.

Although most of my exposure of Darkseid's character comes from the animated stuff, I just don't find Darkseid all that cool or impressive. Besides, it would be harder to do a Darkseid movie than it would be to do a Doomsday one. Unless of course you were to cut corners and just have Darkseid just showing up on Earth by himself or something. Which would be even more boring if you ask me. I mean, really, he just doesn't come off all that menacing to me at all.

-Also, concerning the origin story, here's what I think about that, I do agree that "everyone" knows the story, but does everyone really know the story? The planet blows up, and the rocket ship launches, that's what everyone knows, the kents find him in a cornfield, and raise him as their kid, everyone knows, but what about before the rocketship launches? To me, that is interesting, as it must have taken something quite dramatic for a planet, that was one of the most technologically advanced civilizations in the known universe, to blow up. Braniac's attack on Candor, and the fight of the Kryptonian military guild to stop him is interesting. General Zod's change of heart, from the great hero of Kyrpton, to a traitor, and his exile to the phantom zone, is interesting. The fact that here we have one of the great civilizations of the universe imploding on itself, and there weren't other interests in the universe that would meddle (of course someone like Darkseid, or the guardians of the universe, would have their hands in that cookie jar) is interesting.

Honestly, I doubt general movie audiences would really care to see that. They really are not die hard fans of the comics. Actually, all they really want to see is an emotional story line with Clark putting on his Superman tights and kicking some damn ass for a change.

Furthermore, I also think audiences would like to know how Superman is able to fool everyone by him simply putting on a pair of glasses, too. But that's just me.



Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dea...media_response
http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Death_of_Superman