|
I meant the politics of not allowing Batman and Superman in the same movie b/c, while they are "owned" by WB, different production studios have the rights to publish the stories. Its the same thing Marvel went through until they got back all of the movie rights.
If WB wanted to do it, they could do it. It would take some doing but something could be worked out along the lines of Orion Pictures which was created to let UA and WB work together on projects that they both wanted to do. Sure Orion ended up as a sub-brand of MGM but it does provide a precedent.
|
The studios wouldn't have to make a edger Superman they just need to get rid of the Christopher Reeve venaration and start over fresh. If they use the Smallville or the John Byrne take on superman you would get refreshing and well thought out ideas to base a new movie on.
The main changes I would like to see in a re-worked Superman are:
1 A much less nebbish Clark Kent. To be a Pulitzer Prize quality reporter their isn't any way you can be as wimpy as Clark Kent is portrayed.
2 Present a better writen 3-way love affair between Lois, Clark and Superman.
3 A differant super villian, one with super powers.
|
the studio needs to realize the issue isnt with how Superman is, but who the villain is. [snip]Toyman...(just kidding ;) )Hey, Toyman can be dark/gritty. Just look at him in "Justice League Unlimited". The puppet-like mask, the lethal toys, the voice. If it wasn't for the fact he couldn't use any of his lethal little gizmos on a person and hurt them in a graphic manner, I'd proboly have nightmares about that creep.
hehe True enough.
It is more whats in the script and who they got to play him that would matter....after all I never thought of Scarecrow as a threat to Batman til the movie.
1 A much less nebbish Clark Kent. To be a Pulitzer Prize quality reporter their isn't any way you can be as wimpy as Clark Kent is portrayed.
I nominate John Cusack. He's got the whole, you know, "cool geek" thing going on.
|
|
1 A much less nebbish Clark Kent. To be a Pulitzer Prize quality reporter their isn't any way you can be as wimpy as Clark Kent is portrayed.I nominate John Cusack. He's got the whole, you know, "cool geek" thing going on.
That would be cool. I still have a soft spot in my heart for Nick Cage as Superman though.
I still have a soft spot in my heart for Nick Cage as Superman though.
I would have totally agreed with that up until Sunday, when I saw the trailer for "Bangkok Dangerous." That 30 seconds of nonsense removed most of my considerable respect for the guy.
I still have a soft spot in my heart for Nick Cage as Superman though.I would have totally agreed with that up until Sunday, when I saw the trailer for "Bangkok Dangerous." That 30 seconds of nonsense removed most of my considerable respect for the guy.
I have to agree with Keith on this, for 2 reasons.
1. Nick Cage is famous enough that you'd see him as superman and go "Look, Nicolas Cage is flying!", and the whole thing would look silly.
2. Once I saw a skit on MadTV that was basically "Leaving Las Vegas", but the main character was Superman, but otherwise the same as the movie. I could never take Nicolas Cage seriously as Superman after seeing that.
You know that sad part of all this is that Superman Returns wasn't a bad movie, but it was 20+ years too late. Moreover the guy the got to play superman had no chance. As superman he was fine, I liked him okay, but as Clark Kent he failed. So Comic timeing that Reeves brought to the character. Seriously before the 79 Superman no even gave Kent much thought, after that great performance however we collectively understood that Superman, him without the mask was the mask, Kent was the real person.
This leads to why a dark superman will not work, in the case of Batman, the Bat is the man, Bruce is the mask. Kent is really just a geeky nerd who happens to have superpowers.
Also can we at last get a new bad guy for him, I love lex, but lets face it in the CGI age, the one superhero who could use CGI bad guys is Superman.
|
|
That would be cool. I still have a soft spot in my heart for Nick Cage as Superman though.1 A much less nebbish Clark Kent. To be a Pulitzer Prize quality reporter their isn't any way you can be as wimpy as Clark Kent is portrayed.I nominate John Cusack. He's got the whole, you know, "cool geek" thing going on.
Cusack could be good but defiantly not Cage, he's a great actor but he's too damn ugly to be superman.
|
|
You know that sad part of all this is that Superman Returns wasn't a bad movie, but it was 20+ years too late. Moreover the guy the got to play superman had no chance. As superman he was fine, I liked him okay, but as Clark Kent he failed. So Comic timeing that Reeves brought to the character. Seriously before the 79 Superman no even gave Kent much thought, after that great performance however we collectively understood that Superman, him without the mask was the mask, Kent was the real person.
This leads to why a dark superman will not work, in the case of Batman, the Bat is the man, Bruce is the mask. Kent is really just a geeky nerd who happens to have superpowers.
Also can we at last get a new bad guy for him, I love lex, but lets face it in the CGI age, the one superhero who could use CGI bad guys is Superman.
From Kill Bill 2
Bill: As you know, l'm quite keen on comic books. Especially the ones about superheroes. I find the whole mythology surrounding superheroes fascinating. Take my favorite superhero, Superman. Not a great comic book. Not particularly well-drawn. But the mythology... The mythology is not only great, it's unique. Now, a staple of the superhero mythology is, there's the superhero and there's the alter ego. Batman is actually Bruce Wayne, Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker. When that character wakes up in the morning, he's Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man. And it is in that characteristic Superman stands alone. Superman didn't become Superman. Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he's Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red "S", that's the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears - the glasses, the business suit - that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent. He's weak... he's unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race. Sorta like Beatrix Kiddo and Mrs. Tommy Plimpton.Makes you wonder whos the mask, Supperman, Clark Kent or are they both masks for Kal-El
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I think the difference is When Ka-El is Clark, he's Clark. I think he takes some comfort in being normal.
Bruce is never 'not' the Batman. Even when he's doing the playboy thing, it's a means to the end of being the Bat.
To me, on some levels, that's the friction of them. Bruce could, conceviably retire. Just be the millionare, fund the Bat-family and never put on the armour again. I think Clark is jealous in a way. The last episode of Justice League, Superman's comments to Darksied about how he lived in the world, that's the 'true' Superman.
As to Superman Villians...
Brainiac. Obiviously. Toyman done correctly. Bizzaro. You could make a trillogy actually.
Movie 1, reboot, Superman fights Toyman.
Movie 2, Supergirl, Bizarro. Superman finds out someone helped Toyman become who he is, that someone created Bizarro. Ends with death/removal of Supergirl
Movie 3, Superman vs. Bizarro, who's been manipulating his life. Supes wins and frees a strange little man...
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I like Metallo and Parasite too.As to Superman Villians...
Forgot about those. I didn't know about Metallo until the cartoon.
Edit. That should be Superman vs Brainiac in movie 3.
Edit II: Live wire offends me. Primarily because that was my internet nickname long before the character.
Edit. That should be Superman vs Brainiac in movie 3.
Yeah! I demand Brainiac! Shrunken cities! Weird-colored kryptonite varaints!
|
|
Edit. That should be Superman vs Brainiac in movie 3.Yeah! I demand Brainiac! Shrunken cities! Weird-colored kryptonite varaints!
Well, there is the Kevin Smith treatment of just that.
Warner Bros. is looking to reintroduce Superman in a new film. The film will bring a darker, more brooding side of the character. Much like Batman Begins/Dark Knight.
WB also said they will be releasing fewer, but bigger movies int the future. They expect atleast eight movies a year, six which will be comic based.
Movies featuring Green Lantern, Flash, Green Arrow, and Wonder Woman are all in active development. All these movies will get the "Batman" treatment.
Oh, I get it. Dark Knight makes millions, so WB wants all of its future superhero movies to be exactly the same. A Dark Superman movie would suck worse than Superman Returns, because Clark Kent is not a dark character. He is the opposite of Bruce Wayne. Superman is a light, hopeful character. He sees the world for what it could be, instead of what it really is.
A Superman movie should be filled with color, action, adventure, humor and some romance (with a super-hot Lois Lane...aka Megan Fox). Don't get greedy, WB. Giving all of your superhero movies the "Batman" treatment will lead to box office failure. Damn it!
I read somewhere that the approach would be to make Superman an "angry God". That sounds more like Thor to me.
Except more monotheistic. Superman = Christ, after all.
I read somewhere that the approach would be to make Superman an "angry God". That sounds more like Thor to me.Except more monotheistic. Superman = Christ, after all.
Closer to Moses. The original creators, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, were Jewish.
Closer to Moses.
Not really seeing the parallels there.
We have a Godlike being who comes down from heaven to live as a man and be our savior.Maybe Siegel and Schuster were poking fun at the goyim?
Closer to Moses.Not really seeing the parallels there.
We have a Godlike being who comes down from heaven to live as a man and be our savior.
We have a Kryptonian(Hebrew) who is sent away in a space ship(basket) by his parents to escape destruction(death). His basket is found by his Earthling(Egyption) foster-parents(foster-mother) and raised as a Human(Egyption).
As a youth he discovers his true origin by finding his ship(swadling cloth) and begins a long journey to discover his true self.
Yes, at this point the story does diverge, since he is trying to lead humanity by example and miraculous deeds, rather then gathering the remaining survivors of Krypton to find a promised land.
We have a Kryptonian (Hebrew) who is sent away in a space ship (basket) by his parents to escape destruction (death). His basket is found by his Earthling (Egyption) foster-parents (foster-mother) and raised as a Human (Egyption). As a youth he discovers his true origin by finding his ship(swadling cloth) and begins a long journey to discover his true self.
Ooh.... those are good ones. The whole "immortal savior" aspect (as opposed to a "human guide" one) is what threw me. Maybe something of a composite?
|
|
We have a Kryptonian (Hebrew) who is sent away in a space ship (basket) by his parents to escape destruction (death). His basket is found by his Earthling (Egyption) foster-parents (foster-mother) and raised as a Human (Egyption). As a youth he discovers his true origin by finding his ship(swadling cloth) and begins a long journey to discover his true self.Ooh.... those are good ones. The whole "immortal savior" aspect (as opposed to a "human guide" one) is what threw me. Maybe something of a composite?
I loved the scene in Superman Returns where he identifies himself as the savior. "You wrote that the world doesn't need a savior, But I can hear them calling out for one, calling out to me," he tells Lois. I might be a little off on the wording, it has been a long time, but that's the jist of the line. Compare that to the line in the Watchmen "The world will call out for me to save them, and I will whisper no." That still sends chills down my spine.
We have a Kryptonian (Hebrew) who is sent away in a space ship (basket) by his parents to escape destruction (death). His basket is found by his Earthling (Egyption) foster-parents (foster-mother) and raised as a Human (Egyption). As a youth he discovers his true origin by finding his ship(swadling cloth) and begins a long journey to discover his true self.Ooh.... those are good ones. The whole "immortal savior" aspect (as opposed to a "human guide" one) is what threw me. Maybe something of a composite?
But "Superman" is not immortal. True, he ages more slowly then a Human (since gravity bothers him less), but we see in "Kingdom Come" that he does age.
(Not to be confused with "The Dark Knight Returns," where it is quite clear that he does not age. :( )
But "Superman" is not immortal. True, he ages more slowly then a Human (since gravity bothers him less), but we see in "Kingdom Come" that he does age.
Sorry, I'll have to bow to your knowledge there; I'm not a comics expert. The only Superman I've seen is the old Steve Reeves show, the Christopher Reeve movies, and the "Challenge of the Superfriends" cartoon. With the exception of kryptonite exposure or voluntary de-superfication, he's certainly pretty much omnipotent in all of those examples.