Export thread

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/i...ntor-superman-3-0-while-preparing-3rd-batman/

The studio is looking at Chris Nolan to restart the franchise, forgetting the last movie ever existed. Considering how much trouble they went through to bring us the last movie it's safe to assume this will be shelved. I hope if they do reboot they lose Lex Luthor, at least for the first movie. I've seen him enough. In the comment section of the article someone mentioned setting it in the 30's or 40's. That might be interesting.

What decisions would you make if they consulted you on the Superman movie? I'd be interested in hearing everyone's take.

They've been talking about this since The Dark Knight did so well, talking about making a darker Superman, and even a trilogy written by Mark Miller.

I doubt Chris Nolan's going to have much of anything to do with this. He's busy with his own projects and Batman.

Nolan isn't going to direct it, merely be a producer from what I have heard, kind of guide it into the land of NOT SUCKING.


Sounds great.

Too many reboots these days for my liking, but if they do it well, who am I to complain?

I heard they're going to preemptive reboot the green lantern franchise. Pretend like the Ryan Reynolds one didn't happen and go for a darker feeling one with shia labeouf playing guy gardener.

WTF? Superman is never good on his own movies or animated films or tv series.
The only two possibly good superman films ever were Superman I and II. Leave it at that.

A few ideas:

- For villains, use Lex Luthor (businessman Lex, not mad scientist with real estate plans Lex) and Metallo.
- Tackle the destruction of Krypton quickly. Personally, I'd give some good time to Clark Kent as a teen in Smallville, as I feel that time is pivotal towards his "help out those in need" mentality.
- Major comic book source for story and themes: Superman for All Seasons.

These are just a few ideas. I'm planning on writing a plot summry for my Superman reboot idea over the weekend.

filmfanatic said:

These are just a few ideas. I'm planning on writing a plot summry for my Superman reboot idea over the weekend.

Click to expand...

Looking forward to reading it. I agree about showing him in his youth as it is critical to his development. I hope they steer clear of a darker movie. Don't think it'd work well for Superman.

Couldn't WB just make a animated origins type movie for Superman instead of using live actors?
It worked well for Green Lantern: First Flight and Wonder Woman. Which were both epic btw.

Nolan on Superman: Good. He knows how to write a good story.
Superman going darker: Not good. Not every hero needs to go dark and Superman sure as hell doesn't suit it.
Mark Millar on Superman: Oh, HELL no. If I want the equivilent of a 12-year writing Superman, then we'll just get a 12-year old.

And frankly speaking, BlackCat, as the resident comic book geek and biggest Superman fan? I'm not crazy about Superman I & II as a whole. Yeah, they have some great moments, but the Krypton stuff in the first one go on way too long and is boring as hell. I tend to skip right to when he's getting to Metropolis. Superman II has great moments with the Krytonian criminals, but the final fight scene is stupidly disasterous. Of course, Superman II has my all time favourite movie moment, when he crushes Zod's hand.

Personally, my favourite rendition of Superman in any medium is the Animated Series. It has all the classic looks of characters and has some damn good stories; especially the ones surrounding Darkseid and Apokalips.

Honestly? If I were given similar control like Nolan, here's some of what I'd do:

-Skip the origin and leave it for the opening credits. Everyone and their dog knows it. Screw a full-on reboot. Let's do an origin reboot along the lines of Incredible Hulk.
-Metropolis is the city of the future because Lex Luthor, businessman extraordinaire, uses the city as his platform to test out the latest gadgets in various fields of science. Metropolis has a LOT of scientists; some employed, some unemployed, some sane, some not so sane.
-Part of the main story is an investigative report by Lois & Clark into these science-related activities, many of which they're finding are being tested through Intergang. And Intergang, headed by Morgan Edge (another corporate mogul) is in direct competition with Lex as they have a secret war within the city. Edge's main guy is Corban Dallas, who will be betrayed by Edge, barely rescued by Superman (blaming him for it) and volunteers for an operation at LexCorp to put his brain in a metal body powered by kryptonite.
-Kryptonite poisoning has Superman disappear while the city's crime rate skyrockets. Clark Kent goes home to Smallville, sick as a dog and recovering while Lois, of course, gets in trouble and investigates Lex a little too closely.
-Big finale includes not only Metallo publically going after Morgan Edge, but Lois in trouble at LexCorp.
-So, it wouldn't be a big city-wide threat but whether or not Superman can save the day with two things going on at once: stop gang violence from destroying the city thanks to Metallo...and Lex doing experiments on Lois for snooping. It ends with Luthor getting arrested, thanks to Clark Kent's expose through the Daily Planet.

This is a very rough draft idea and a lot of it just off the top of my head. Basically, I'd bring back the idea of Superman fighting mad scientists and mob bosses and mix it with some investigative reporting that we never really get to see in many Superman stories. Paul Dini and everyone behind the Animated Series said they wanted to treat Superman like a sci-fi action hero. And you know what? That works. Imagine a superhero version of the new Star Trek, with all the bright colours and cool gadgets (except, these ones are all used to kill Superman because he DARED to come to Lex's Metropolis and steal his thunder) Superman saves the day against Metallo, but Clark saves the day against Lex. I'd likely hint at other employees at LexCorp for future movies, such as John Henry Irons (who later becomes Steel), the janitor who becomes The Parasite, The Prankster, etc. Basically, a lot of LexCorp employees could be set up to become future villains.

And at the end of the credits, Lex gets released from jail of course, steps into his office and gets a memo about from his science team that they found a satellite orbitting Earth with strange alien letters. Lex is familiar with Kryptonian language. It reads "Brainiac".

ThatNickGuy said:

Edge's main guy is Corban Dallas

Click to expand...

Wow, Nick guy, I can't believe I'm gonna be the one to correct you on Superman lore, but:

John Corben = Metallo.
Korben Dallas = Bruce Willis in The Fifth Element.

Yeah, that sounded wrong after I wrote it. Too depressed lately to bother looking it up. Thanks.

Nick, your idea seems pretty solid to me. I too loved Superman: TAS and it'd be awesome to see a movie that leaned more toward that interpretation of the character. I'm cautiously optimistic about having Nolan on the project. He does know how to tell a good story and I'm willing to see where he goes with Superman.

I always thought Metallo (stupid name notwithstanding) was a pretty good villain. I'd love to see them use Braniac effectively too. Also, Luthor not getting a hard-on for building evil farms would be nice for once. Where's all that crazy HAHA SUPERJERK HERE'S A ROOM FULL OF RED SUNLIGHT I'M GOING TO EAT BRAINIAC NOW.

If you want to pick a good battle, especially with the world the way it is.....how about Superman's idealism versus Gog's stark black and white view of morality?

I love Metallo's name, honestly. It's got such as Silver Age ring to it. =D

Here's the thing, as far as villains go and their threat levels:

-Metallo: Threat to Superman and anyone nearby.
-Lex: City-wide threat; anything global is honestly above him. Potentially threat to Superman, but usually through other means (like Metallo).
-Brainiac: City-wide threat if going with the "bottling cities" but could easily be a great planet-wide threat. Potential threat to Superman, ESPECIALLY if you use Brainiac's origin from the Animated Series and have him be the Kryptonian council's AI. Goddamn, that was brilliant.
-Darkseid: Planet-wide threat and huge threat to Superman. He's the only villain that can not only go toe-to-toe with Superman but can actually trounce him without breaking a sweat.
-Lobo: He once went toe-to-toe with Superman while drunk out of his gourd. That's gotta be worth something, ain't it? I'd love to see a Superman movie with Lobo. Imagine something where half of it is in space and they get into a brawl in an alien bar. *grin!* Again, it's all about just going nuts with the sci-fi elements.

One of things I did like about the Smallville show, which I think would make an interesting movie: Before Lex knows who Superman actually is (i.e. before Superman actually has come out as Superman), he's seeing all the mysterious goings on around Smallville - mutant freaks, hostile aliens, etc, and honestly believes (justifiably) that there's a huge invasion coming of aliens with unstoppable powers. He develops Luthorcorp into a Mad-Scientist-Company-O'-Superweapons specifically because he thinks its necessary to save the world. He doesn't know that Clark is actually fighting to stop these threats, so he sees him not as savior against the threat but as the most powerful threat of all.

I think it'd be cool to have a movie entitled "Luther" that tells a re-imagined origin story from his perspective. We don't know anything about the character of Clark, instead we just see all the other crazy goings on of the DC universe. Have some super menace (as opposed to petty criminals) threatening the world (as opposed to just Metropolis - always bugged me that Superman devotes his incredible power to keeping one city crime free), at the same time that the first superman sightings are happening, without the knowledge that the two are unrelated.

Have events shape up in such a way so that at the end of the movie, when Superman "outs himself" as a public figure and the world loves him, Luther has a reasonable cause for believing it is all an act, sort of like the sinister aliens in "V" who start out offering free health care.

This doesn't mean portraying Luther as an all out good guy. He's still greedy (you have to be to some degree to be that wealthy in the first place) and is somewhat insane. But show us how he ended up the way he did.

Having said all that, I doubt the above movie would actually get made (in particular because Smallville already did it - basically I'm hoping for a condensed version with better acting all around), and the fact is I think that keeping Superman as the bright, fun heroic hero is the way to go. I liked that Superman Returns was deliberately kept in the same vein as the old movies. If I wanted to watch a dark, serious superhero movie I'd watch... pretty much any other superhero movie made in the last decade.

I just wanted to agree that I LOVED TAS reworkings of Braniac's origins.

I always enjoyed the Luthor in the book that was called Lex or something like that. The whole thing paints Luthor as this awesome guy who's out for the good of humanity and Superman is this big evil entity. When Supes finally shows up in the final pages, even while painted as an imposing shadow with red eyes, the final dialogue between the two shows who the villain in all this really is.

hahahahahahaha

---------- Post added at 03:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:58 PM ----------

also:

I really just don't like a lot of his villains all that much, or at least I don't think most of them would really translate all that well to the big screen.

I think maybe if they expanded the first animated series appearance of Bizzaro. Have him appear normal at first, and convinced that he's superman, then gradually have him decompose or whatever and turn into a monster. You could even have the movie start from Bizzaro's perspective for a bit of a twist I guess. At the end, after Bizzaro kills himself in some way we have Lex watching the whole thing on a monitor and then he goes into another room and shuts down a cloning station with a half complete superman clone in it. Then it either ends there, or he goes to a computer and opens a file with a series of calculations and DNA models and stuff and says something about trying to find his mistake.

That would be the only time you see Lex Luther in the film. Maybe in passing like in a news report but Superman and Lex are never in the same room.

What they should do is have Lex make some sort of super being with power gained from the sun, just like supes. The call him "Sun-man" or "Solarguy." We find out during the course of the movie that Solarguy is insane and his powers are unstable to the point where he shuts down when out of direct sunlight. Superman beats him by sealing him in a sunless box (like, say, an elevator) and tossing him onto the dark side of the moon.

It'll be the most awesome movie ever.

General Specific said:

What they should do is have Lex make some sort of super being with power gained from the sun, just like supes. The call him "Sun-man" or "Solarguy." We find out during the course of the movie that Solarguy is insane and his powers are unstable to the point where he shuts down when out of direct sunlight. Superman beats him by sealing him in a sunless box (like, say, an elevator) and tossing him onto the dark side of the moon.

It'll be the most awesome movie ever.

Click to expand...

No no no no no. Superman needs to experience loss to build on his character. What we do is, you see, what we do is kill off Lois Lane. Superman is super sad about it and so what does he do? He flies around the world...get this...in the opposite direction of it's rotation. Now this is where we really get the audience's attention because instead of anything making sense at this point we'll just say that the earth goes backwards and with it, TIME ITSELF. Lois is alive, the stuff that distracted him from saving her in the first place is no longer an issue for some reason and everyone is happy!

I think we can get Liam Neeson to play supes. Then at the end we're all like "superman? OR RA'S AL GHUL?" Because batman is there too.

Dude, let's have Solarguy KILL LOIS!!! Supes traps Sloarguy on the moon and since he's in space, he does the time thingy. We won't even need to explain why Solarguy isn't around to kill Lois this time because he'll be on the moon. IT'S PERFECT! No gaping plot holes or anything.

Yes


We're going to make so much money off of this.

I second Darkseid. I would keep Superman in the shadows at first. Make him an urban legend, even to the viewer. A blur here, a saved dog there. All hell breaks loose, fire from the sky. Proclamations of the approach of DS. Focus on Clark's life at first and his networked effect as Clark on the people around him. Make us care about Clark as much as Superman. Save that for later...

I like the idea of Darkseid, but I say build him up for a few movies. Take the gangwar idea that I have between Lex and Intergang. A lot of Lex's science comes from his own mind or own people, but Intergang's? Apokalips. Maybe have Intergang win at the end of the first movie. Second movie is about Brainiac, but he hints at somewhere that fought even his power successfully.

Then we get full-on war with Apokalips in the third. Parademons in the skies, Kalibak comes first as a herald and first general. Then the big man himself.

I really would like to see some Brainiac on Superman action :}

fade said:

I would keep Superman in the shadows at first. Make him an urban legend, even to the viewer. A blur here, a saved dog there.

Click to expand...

Wasn't this basically the beginning of Kevin Smith's Superman script?

Bowielee;340329][QUOTE=fade said:

I would keep Superman in the shadows at first. Make him an urban legend, even to the viewer. A blur here, a saved dog there.

Click to expand...

Wasn't this basically the beginning of Kevin Smith's Superman script?[/QUOTE]

And then came gay R2-D2 and the giant spider.

Was it? I don't know. I never read it. Wasn't it also the beginning of the animated series and the Byrne reboot, too?

No offense the only Superman I was able to really enjoy was the Superman TAS.Just with who they got the voice actors fit. Storys were well written. I still don't see how they could do it.
They should just leave Supes how he is. He's never been in a film well on by himself.

After hearing for years how bad it COULD have been, I was more than happy with Superman Returns:

ThatNickGuy said:

I like the idea of Darkseid, but I say build him up for a few movies. Take the gangwar idea that I have between Lex and Intergang. A lot of Lex's science comes from his own mind or own people, but Intergang's? Apokalips. Maybe have Intergang win at the end of the first movie. Second movie is about Brainiac, but he hints at somewhere that fought even his power successfully.

Then we get full-on war with Apokalips in the third. Parademons in the skies, Kalibak comes first as a herald and first general. Then the big man himself.

Click to expand...

ThatNickGuy, I like that idea for a trilogy of Superman films. My own idea for a Superman trilogy, though, goes down a bit of a different route in terms of villains.

First Film: Lex Luthor, Metallo
Second Film: Brainiac
Third Film: Doomsday, Bizarro

I'm honestly not a fan of Doomsday. Yeah, I was back when I started collecting comics because Doomsday WAS what got me collecting again (the Death of Superman). But like Venom, I just think he's too "90s" a character to work on the big screen. Besides, we had Superman/Doomsday, which was pretty good for what it was.

Ooh, would it be too loaded if we threw Metallo and Bizarro into the first movie? Bizarro as Lex's weapon and Metallo as Intergang's? And have the finale be a kryptonite poisoned Superman (after beating Metallo) try and fight Bizarro to save Lois? Hrm. That might be too much for one movie, on top of everything else.

ThatNickGuy said:

I'm honestly not a fan of Doomsday. Yeah, I was back when I started collecting comics because Doomsday WAS what got me collecting again (the Death of Superman). But like Venom, I just think he's too "90s" a character to work on the big screen. Besides, we had Superman/Doomsday, which was pretty good for what it was.

Ooh, would it be too loaded if we threw Metallo and Bizarro into the first movie? Bizarro as Lex's weapon and Metallo as Intergang's? And have the finale be a kryptonite poisoned Superman (after beating Metallo) try and fight Bizarro to save Lois? Hrm. That might be too much for one movie, on top of everything else.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's definitly sounding too much for the first film.

I'm not a big fan of Doomsday either. Honestly, I see the guy as a plot device more than anything. I'd use him pretty much how he is used, so I could move into more of a Bizarro plot. Specifically, having a bait and switch wherein it appears Superman is back, but later begins to degenerate into the Bizarro we know. Of course, that's just one possibility for a third film. While I'm devoting my time to writing the rough plot of that first Superman film idea this weekend, I'm still thinking of what route to go with a trilogy. The third film is where I'm a bit stuck. I can tell you, though, what villain I wouldn't use, despite how much he is one of my favorite Superman villains: Mr. Mxyzptlk.

Well, instead of thinking like three films as a trilogy, what if it were thought out more like a longer series, like say 7, ala Harry Potter?

#1) Lex vs. Intergang/Metallo (Kryptonite poisoined Superman has to rescue Lois from Lex)
#2) Lex goes on a rampage against Supes, creating endless biological threats. He gets DNA samples from the fight in the last movie. Starts off with Bizarro, who the audience thinks is Superman but he's acting weird. Supes has been in Smallville, recovering. Movie grows more dangerous, with The Parasite.
#3) Brainiac (introduce Steel, since he's a tech nut)
#4) Mxyzptlk? I love the guy, too, honestly. Maybe make it a semi-comedy with a lot of the hokier villains (Toyman, Prankster). Imagine Superman versus an army of flying toys!
#5) Cadmus. Not the JLU Cadmus, but the original Cadmus, which was a big underground cloning facility. Maybe introduce Superboy here? And end it with Doomsday, who is also a clone of Superman, but gone very, very wrong?
#6) Zod. Because Zod effing rules. I remember when Zod was being considered for one of the movie productions, Jude Law's name was being thrown around, which I'd be down for. Maybe use a similar story that was done to introduce Zod properly by Geoff Johns a few years back? Army of Kryptonian criminals all escape from the Phantom Zone, etc.
#7) The previously mentioned Darkseid.

Doomsday as a clone is worse then his comics origin (what was the point of making him from Krypton?).

i don't know about having darkseid as the main villain for the film works straight off the bat.

having the new gods appear near the end as part of a sequel hook? fuck YES. i'd love to see the fourth world on screen.

I just wanted to post this video, and din't felt like creating a new thread.

@Li3n said:

Doomsday as a clone is worse then his comics origin (what was the point of making him from Krypton?).

Click to expand...

It worked okay for JLU.

I generally dislike doomsday, I really don't know how could he possible be "fixed", I would rather watch a movie with Bizarro as a villain.

also, I forgot to mention, the idea of lex as a "heroic mankind defender" is good, but I don't think I would like to actually see in live action, mostly because, DC only makes 2 or 3 moves each decade and I would rather get a nice full dose of Kryptonian Paragon

that said, I actually think that story would work somehow better if it wasn't a story about superman (not saying that isn't good, it is), but because I think it would make a better deconstruction/reconstruction of the concept if it was with *new* characters, much like Josh and Imp (found here http://www.jinxville.com/joshnimp/comic.htm )

edit:

Just had a idea for a "Better" origin for Doomsday, making essencially not just a clone of Superman like in DCAU but a combined cloned of several of his enemies, most noticeable would be the Parasite, and Superman death would be cause Doomsday slowly and subtly leeched super's powers.

I am just happy we never got the Tim Burton Superman. Black costume with detachable S-shield... that was MAGICAL... and the source of his powers.

Didn't Nick Cage want to do a washed up version of Superman too?

Green_Lantern said:

I just wanted to post this video, and din't felt like creating a new thread.

Click to expand...

Too bad that girl is such a terrible actor. And it went out on a weak joke.

fade;340575][QUOTE=Green_Lantern said:

I just wanted to post this video, and din't felt like creating a new thread.

Click to expand...

Too bad that girl is such a terrible actor. And it went out on a weak joke.[/QUOTE]

I know, but I sort of view as the character being... well a Idiot.

Step 1: Hire Mark Waid and Geoff Johns to write the screenplay.
Step 2: Hire Gary Frank, and John Byrnes for art direction
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit.

Covar said:

Step 1: Hire Mark Waid and Geoff Johns to write the screenplay.
Step 2: Hire Gary Frank, and John Byrnes for art direction
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit.

Click to expand...

Step 3: Dress underwear outside your pants, so gnomes don't steal it?

ThatNickGuy said:

Here's the thing, as far as villains go and their threat levels:

-Lex: City-wide threat; anything global is honestly above him. Potentially threat to Superman, but usually through other means (like Metallo).

Click to expand...

Lex Luthor, who managed to become President of the United States in the comics can't be a global threat? Seriously? Oh well, I've never been a big fan of Lex as anything but an instigator of trouble, and I don't think we need another Superman movie with him as the villain.

-Brainiac: City-wide threat if going with the \"bottling cities\" but could easily be a great planet-wide threat. Potential threat to Superman, ESPECIALLY if you use Brainiac's origin from the Animated Series and have him be the Kryptonian council's AI. Goddamn, that was brilliant.

Click to expand...

Planet-wide threat if it's a version of Brainiac where he destroys whole planets after analyzing them.


Personally, I say forget a Superman movie, and go with the Justice League versus Vandal Savage. No origin story, either. I don't want the Justice League forming to take down a surprised Vandal Savage. There have been how many blockbuster superhero movies in the last decade? After a half-dozen franchises, I think audiences can handle the concept of "there are heroes with amazing powers who fight bad guys" without having to spell it all out. I want Savage to have been planning the destruction of a well-established League for a long time. Let the take-down of each member of the League tell the audience what they need to know about who they are.


Though, if we are going with a Superman movie. My Top 5 Villains Who Shouldn't be in the Movie:
1. Conduit
2. Hank Henshaw / Cyborg Superman
3. Momentus
4. Solaris
5. Mammoth


I'm trying to think who I would want to see.
- Mongul is a great villain, but taking the action to War World for a reboot kind of removes the Superman as Earth's protector angle, which is pretty important.
- Darkseid is, possibly, too powerful. While I think that an origin story is unecessary for a reboot, I think it's still necessary to establish Superman's power level before having him trounced by a demi-god. That was a problem in season one of the Justice League animated series. They tried to establish how powerful the villains were by having them take out Superman, and ended up making Supes look weak, instead.

Maybe if Superman really feels on top of things before Darkseid starts an invasion in earnest... Hmm, that could work. Darkseid is, as ever, searching for the anti-life equation, and has really only sent a scouting party to Earth. Superman is taking some blows, but is still prevailing against some pretty titanic forces sent by Darkseid. Then Darkseid has reason to believe that what's he's looking for actually is on earth, and the flood of troops begins. Overwhelming odds make Superman question his tactics, and then Darkseid shows up in person to make Superman question himself. Then we get:



Or something really close, when Superman realizes he can cut loose. Instead of Darkseid's strength making Superman look weak, the challenge of Darkseid shows just how vast Superman's limits are.

Man. I feel for all those poor people who died when he hit Darkseid through those buildings. Some of them probably collapsed too. Supes musta killed upwards of 3 or 4 hundred people with that punch.

Everyone knows Darksied only attacks earth on weekends and holidays, just to make the heroes go to work on THEIR ONE GOD DAMN DAY OFF THIS WHOLE WEEK. FUCK THAT GUY.


Also, even if it is a weekday, if you're dumb enough to both live in Metropolis and work at the top of a skyscraper, you just have it coming to you. I mean if it's not Darksied being punched through your building it's Superman himself, or maybe Metallo...and god help you if Bizzaro is doin' some hoodrat shit.

Also, I want to see 1:15-1:17 of that, where Darksied is going up and up and up with a dub of "Team rocket is blasting off agaaaaaaaiiiiinnnn"

I still say Gog/Magog could make a great villain, possibly reworked to be set up as being empowered by Darkseid for a sequel.

Imagine the movie begins with Superman apprehending one of his throw-away rogues, Toyman or somesuch. He's being taken to court for murdering a great deal of people, but manages to get off on a insanity plea. As he's laughing and being escorted from the courthouse....BLAM! He falls, smoking meat to the ground. Above him stands Magog, his staff still smoking, his face blank. "The Justice of the Weak is over. No longer will evil go unpunished...they will burn in God's Fire."

I don't see a lot of these ideas as realistic theatrical films. As Bruce Tim direct to DVD animated movies, yes (even though some of the ground has been covered), but I can't see them doing a lot of these ideas for a multi-million dollar theatrical Superman film, simply because it gets into comic book elements general audiences aren't familiar with.

cough cough. Matrix Revolutions fight. cough cough.

Seriously though if they made a trilogy I could see Darkseid as the main villain in the 3rd one not the first two.
Metallo would be an optimum villain choice. If they made Lex president though it would just be ripping off of Batman/Superman: Public Enemies.

escushion said:

I don't see a lot of these ideas as realistic theatrical films. As Bruce Tim direct to DVD animated movies, yes (even though some of the ground has been covered), but I can't see them doing a lot of these ideas for a multi-million dollar theatrical Superman film, simply because it gets into comic book elements general audiences aren't familiar with.

Click to expand...

While I would agree that the New Gods are a comic book element that audiences won't accept, Darkseid by himself isn't too big a leap. He's an evil warlord seeking to rule the galaxy. It's pretty simple.

I also like WolfOfOdin's idea for Gog/Magog. It doesn't matter who the guy is in comic books (heck, I've read Kingdom Come and I don't know who he is other than name and appearance). All that matters is that he kills, Superman doesn't, and the world can't decide what sort of justice it wants.

I'm not sure what plots, specifically, you think are too comic book to make a feature film.

BlackCat said:

cough cough. Matrix Revolutions fight. cough cough.

Seriously though if they made a trilogy I could see Darkseid as the main villain in the 3rd one not the first two.
Metallo would be an optimum villain choice. If they made Lex president though it would just be ripping off of Batman/Superman: Public Enemies.

Click to expand...

Okay, you have a point. People could probably accept things better if they were eased into it rather than pushed with it right at the start.

Figment: Stuff with Lobo, Apokolips, the JLU, a Superman movie not about Superman... It's not going to work for a major mainstream movie.

It'd be good for this day and age too...topical.

Here's my idea, that after Gog/Magog offs the guy at the courthouse, he becomes a media darling. We have news shows saying "At last we have someone who will REALLY protect us from monsters like X!" Rallies with superman being called a coward and an idealist for not offing dangerous villains and instead turning into the police. More or less paint society as so paralyzed by fear of these threats that they're willing to give a madman the reigns if they think it'll protect them. Interpserse this with scenes of Gog's growing insanity and superman's dejection and heartbreak at what the world's willing to put up with for safety. Eventually Superman returns, triumphantly as Gog goes fully off the deep end, murdering people for even minor criminal infractions. After the fight, while Gog lays broken and smoldering, he hisses up at Supes "Life...is CHAOS....I am...Order...a heavy hand to guide these apes...and my God is a jealous one, O Titan of Krypton" His eyes burn red and his body burns to ash, as superman sees a flash in his head of a stone face with the same burning red eyes

escushion said:

Figment: Stuff with Lobo, Apokolips, the JLU, a Superman movie not about Superman... It's not going to work for a major mainstream movie.

Click to expand...

I'll agree that Lobo would just be a little to out-there. I can't really imagine a plot that would connect the audience to the character. Same with a Superman movie not about Superman. The audience isn't going to connect with any other protagonist if Superman is the title character.

I'm not sure what you mean about Apokolips or the JLU. Having Superman go to Apokolips would be stupid, but just having it exist as the planet Darkseid comes from doesn't seem to be to far out there (other characters from Apokalips, though, like Granny Goodness, should never even be considered.) I'm not sure why you don't think the Justice League would work in a movie. Admittedly it would be possible to get too caught up in "Who are these individuals, why are they here, what are their motivations, etc." but that didn't stop Oceans 11 from barreling on with the plot. Why would audiences be able to accept a group of criminals with varied skills coming together for a purpose, with little or no character development for most, but be unable to accept a group of heroes?

I would pay good money just to see a movie where Supes is hooked on snorting krytopnite. It would give him some sick boost and decrease his powers. He becomes an addict and then other heros try to provide an intervention. Meanwhile villians are supplying supes with what he needs so that it will take its toll and try to make an overdose happen. The heros try to save him while the villians are trying to kill him. And then the big finish would be Supes going on some drugged up rampage.

Just think of the mayhem.

What?

Why are you all looking at me like that?

I like to see things outside the box.

LordRavage said:

I would pay good money just to see a movie where Supes is hooked on snorting krytopnite. It would give him some sick boost and decrease his powers. He becomes an addict and then other heros try to provide an intervention. Meanwhile villians are supplying supes with what he needs so that it will take its toll and try to make an overdose happen. The heros try to save him while the villians are trying to kill him. And then the big finish would be Supes going on some drugged up rampage.

Just think of the mayhem.

What?

Why are you all looking at me like that?

I like to see things outside the box.

Click to expand...

heretic.

ThatNickGuy;340547][QUOTE=@Li3n said:

Doomsday as a clone is worse then his comics origin (what was the point of making him from Krypton?).

Click to expand...

It worked okay for JLU.[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't say that it so much worked as JLU was s awesome that it didn't matter that much. But i preferred the original JL version where he was just some brutish alien looking for a fight... it kept it simple in keeping with Doomsday's

Or something really close, when Superman realizes he can cut loose. Instead of Darkseid's strength making Superman look weak, the challenge of Darkseid shows just how vast Superman's limits are.

Click to expand...

This is what was always annoying with Supes... what, someone is putting up a real fight against him?! Oh, he's just been holding back and now he's easilydominating. It only ever works (as anything else but fanboi pandering) for the intermediate villains, it always just feels cheap for the Big Bad (unless the hero is being kicked around easily and then he only matches the villains power and they have a real fight).

- Mongul is a great villain, but taking the action to War World for a reboot kind of removes the Superman as Earth's protector angle, which is pretty important.

Click to expand...

Obvious solution is bring Warworld to Earth instead...

And Make Mogul have more strenght the Supes like he did in his original appearances... forcing Supes to use his brains for once.

- Darkseid is, possibly, too powerful. While I think that an origin story is unecessary for a reboot, I think it's still necessary to establish Superman's power level before having him trounced by a demi-god. That was a problem in season one of the Justice League animated series. They tried to establish how powerful the villains were by having them take out Superman, and ended up making Supes look weak, instead.

Click to expand...

IMO it could easily work if they have Supes start out being so unused to being hurt by actual physical forces that at the start he's mostly taken out by the shock, and then you show him slowly learning to take the punishement and at the end barely overcoming the Big Bad by force of will alone...

And Darkseid isn't a demi-god... he's a god.

not only a god, but a new god, unlike those old modes like zeus or thor

@Li3n;340798][QUOTE=ThatNickGuy said:

Or something really close, when Superman realizes he can cut loose. Instead of Darkseid's strength making Superman look weak, the challenge of Darkseid shows just how vast Superman's limits are.

Click to expand...

This is what was always annoying with Supes... what, someone is putting up a real fight against him?! Oh, he's just been holding back and now he's easilydominating. It only ever works (as anything else but fanboi pandering) for the intermediate villains, it always just feels cheap for the Big Bad (unless the hero is being kicked around easily and then he only matches the villains power and they have a real fight).

IMO it could easily work if they have Supes start out being so unused to being hurt by actual physical forces that at the start he's mostly taken out by the shock, and then you show him slowly learning to take the punishement and at the end barely overcoming the Big Bad by force of will alone... [/quote]

You bring up some excellent points. I've never liked the whole "let me show you my true power" thing in general, because usually it's done in such a smug way (especially in a lot of anime), and Superman usually ends up looking dumb as a brick because of it. That was one thing that really bugged me about the death of Superman versus Doomsday. A raging brute of a monster managed to think more than Superman did during that fight. Actually, that fight in JLU against Darkseid kind of made superman look like a fool as well, since Darkseid pulled a gadget out of his pocket and brought Superman to his knees. Really, I'd like to see Superman's strengths shown to not merely be in his speed, strength and other powers, but in who Ma and Pa Kent raised him to be, as well. Winning against might equal or greater than his own, because he's brave, determined and maybe just a little bit smart.

In the end, if the battle is an easy win for Superman just because of his super-powers, it looses out on his connection to humanity. I think that Superman's best victories have been when he's won because of his convictions, or in spite of them. i.e. he's won by being the shining hero who leads others to victory, by sheer determination to do what's right or winning despite making the more difficult choice (not killing, saving innocents first, etc.).

- Mongul is a great villain, but taking the action to War World for a reboot kind of removes the Superman as Earth's protector angle, which is pretty important.

Click to expand...

Obvious solution is bring Warworld to Earth instead...

And Make Mogul have more strenght the Supes like he did in his original appearances... forcing Supes to use his brains for once.

Click to expand...

Now that is a good idea. Maybe for once we can get Superman to do some actual training, maybe do some super-powered martial arts sparring with an underground resistance movement of alien gladiators. In pretty much all the comics I've read Superman is written like he has no clue how to win except by overpowering his opponents. No finesse in his powers like the Flash, who has frequently fought other speedsters. It would be nice to see Superman written as an intelligent hero again.

You bring up some excellent points. I've never liked the whole "let me show you my true power" thing in general,

Click to expand...

Worked great in Princess Bride... i had no idea what the film was called coz i saw it when i was very young, but i remembered that scene when they switch sword hands. Brilliant.

It can be done right, but man is it rare...

maybe do some super-powered martial arts sparring with an underground resistance movement of alien gladiators.

Click to expand...

If it's a JLA movie i'd like to see Batman train him in a red sun room... heck, i'd like to see that in the comics or wherever.

Btw, while we're at it, there was this wuxia film about a guy that had a meteor weapon (it was basically a staff with 2 maces on each side) that made him invincible... what i liked about it is that he only used it twice, and not on guys that where beating him, but on guy he was drawing with... another one i had and still have no idea what it was called. Anyone have any ideas?

If you want to bring supes down a notch, the perfect villain may be a more feral, insane version of The Parasite

WolfOfOdin said:

If you want to bring supes down a notch, the perfect villain may be a more feral, insane version of The Parasite

Click to expand...

The Parasite coud make for some good material as a villain for a Superman movie, but I wonder how you'd choose to carry out his origin.

ThatNickGuy said:

#4) Mxyzptlk? I love the guy, too, honestly. Maybe make it a semi-comedy with a lot of the hokier villains (Toyman, Prankster). Imagine Superman versus an army of flying toys!

Click to expand...

I could potentially see that. Maybe start the film off setting it up to seem like Toyman (who I'd model personality-wise after his STAS version) is the main villain, then have ome weird things start happening in Meropolis followed by Mxzptlk introducing himself.

For this day and age? The Parasite was a creation of CADMUS, a government BLACK OPs organization for combating meta humans world-wide. He was horrifically mutated via advanced technology, becoming a deformed, insane leech-like monster that absorbs the DNA of those he attacks, gaining their shape and abilities via muscle memory.

Or keeping with that, he could be described as a living bio-weapon made of stem-cells (Hollywood science!) that spontaneously absorbs and mimics the DNA of anything it consumes. It could go hay-wire when he's accidently introduced to some of Supe's genetic material via CADMUS, causing his body to go haywire and make him obsessed with being 'perfect'

Orrrrrrrrrrr Dracula vs. Superman dun dun dunnnnnnnn

I wonder if a good Superman movie could ever be made. I think there's a general disconnect with the audience as he really has no inner struggles. Unlike Bruce Wayne or Peter Parker, Superman has no inner turmoil. So he becomes a one dimensional character. If the audience can't connect on an emotional level all that's left is a slugfest between him and a villian. Does anyone really care about Clark Kent? Why would he ever need to be Clark anyway? Just be Superman 24/7. Unfortunately there's no way around this without completely rewriting his origin. In the article I posted someone mentioned setting the movie back in the 30's. Scale down his power where he is a little more vunerable. I would go with an origin story (I know everyone knows Supes origin) because the story could be Clark, a naive farmboy, entering a big city and trying to adjust and being a bit overwhelmed by it all. The struggle could be keeping his powers secret versus using them. His parents know his history and they could have pounded in "don't let anyone know what you can do. You'll be considered a freak and the government will take you away." I wouldn't have Lois Lane in the first movie. Why? Because I'd set the sequel in our time. The back story would be Superman doesn't age (or very slowly) and he struggles with watching those around him pass away and because of the pain he's caused by the loss he keeps a wall up and doesn't want to get close to anyone. Enter Lois.

Apparently you never saw Superman: The Movie starring Christopher Reeves.

The common idea is not that we're supposed to identify with the human failings of Batman (Heartbreak and obsessive madness) Spider-man (Perpetual bad luck, loathed by people he helps), it's that Superman is supposed to be the ideal we strive for, a person who uses all their great and many gifts to help others with no regard to their own safety. Someone we SHOULD be, not someone we COULD be.

WolfOfOdin said:

The common idea is not that we're supposed to identify with the human failings of Batman (Heartbreak and obsessive madness) Spider-man (Perpetual bad luck, loathed by people he helps), it's that Superman is supposed to be the ideal we strive for, a person who uses all their great and many gifts to help others with no regard to their own safety. Someone we SHOULD be, not someone we COULD be.

Click to expand...

So the struggle becomes a physical struggle with his opponent ala Doomsday versus Superman. Think "The Increbile Hulk" minus Ed Norton's Bruce Banner. Two brutes slugging it out. That will connect with fans of the comic but I don't see it having wide base appeal. There have been some great ideas for a Superman movie in this thread and I hope they keep coming. Hats off to whoever is going to write the movie because it doesn't look like it's going to be easy to make. Neo in the Matrix was the best Superman for a non Superman movie. They should just drop the alter ego. Have him Superman. Not only when he's in tights. Have him Superman when he's in his jeans and t shirt shopping for groceries. If you are not putting a mask over your face you are not hiding your identity. Clark's disguise is laughable and nobody buys it. In fact, it takes you out of the movie.

That said my idea for a Superman movie would actually be Bizarro. I'd go with the same origin as Superman, he's sent to Earth via rocket from Krypton. He's found by a family who raise them as their own. The only problem is a lot of kryptonite landed in the area so while Bizarro is growing up he's constantly being exposed and poisoned by the kryptonite. He has Superman's powers but is sickly. Set up the first half of the movie with the assumption that you are watching a young Clark Kent and you find out it's not Clark when Bizarro is an adult and reads a story about Superman. He goes to the city to emulate his hero only to be manipulated by Lex. Lex could use kryptonite to weaken Superman but Bizarro has built up a resistance since he's been exposed for most of his life.

The disguise wouldn't be an issue if the movies didn't keep drawing attention to it. It's one thing for Clark to act all clumsy and weak, and with the glasses, throw off any presumption that he's Superman. However, this is thrown out the window when a character even considers that Clark might be Superman.

Your movie idea would be an interesting stand-alone graphic novel, but I don't think it'd be much of a film. It is a cool idea though.

Steve said:

Does anyone really care about Clark Kent?

Click to expand...

All the people that watch Smallville, or who watched Lois & Clark.

Why would he ever need to be Clark anyway?

Click to expand...

To be treated as an equal by people besides Batman and Wonder Woman. Even most of the heroes in the DC universe usually put Superman on a pedestal and don't really connect with him as a person.

Also, Clark's the real persona. He's what Supes is actually like mentally. The Big Blue Boyscout is more or less Clark's selflessness and goodness amplified. He's the reverse of Batman, who wears bruce wayne as a mask.

One of my favorite stories is Horton Hears a Who. The protagonist has no particular skills. The only thing that makes him interesting is the sheer magnitude of his goodness. He's the only one who believes and cares about the little people on a speck of dust who are completely helpless against the outside world, and he doesn't stop trying to help them no matter how futile it seems. Superman somehow needs to embody that, except unlike Horton, Superman has so much power that it's hard for his goodness to feel like it means anything. When you barely have to lift a finger to save the day, why does your goodness matter? Superman Returns actually did a decent job of this, with him lifting an entire continent of Kryptonite out the ground and nearly dying in the process. But the magnitude of that leaves you little room to expand in future movies.

If we're doing an intro movie, I think it needs to make his goodness what is at stake. Metropolis needs to be introduced somewhat similar to how Gotham is introduced in Batman Begins: a city that is rotting from within. But whereas Gotham is rotting with corruption, and it takes Batman to inspire fear in that corruption, Metropolis should be rotting in despair, and a feeling that being good doesn't matter. Superman is needed to inspire hope against that despair.

Clark Kent enters, fresh from the farm, having been raised to believe in all the human good things that his adoptive parents taught him - but also reeling from the fact that despite his powers, his dad still died. They mention this in the original film, but it's never really milked for drama. Make it a focal point and combine it with the fact that the world he's entering is bitter and cynical and full of people who aren't exactly bad, but are out to make a quick buck and not worried about helping each other. This further threatens to disillusion Clark. (It's important that the people in the city aren't actually BAD, at least not most of them, so that we can see them as redeemable)

I like the idea of setting the first movie in the past, and end with Clark succeeding at retaining his own faith in humanity and inspiring Metropolis to do the same, but at the same time feeling like he can't interact with humanity on a personal level. It would end kinda like an inverse of The Dark Knight. Clark believes he's more useful as a symbol of power and goodness than as an actual human, leaving us with room for more growth in the next film. (One thing I did like about Superman Returns is that we get a sense of his otherworldliness and Luther's xenophobia being part of his motivation. Set that up to be a major plot point in the second film).

Setting it slightly after World War II is probably the best bet, because otherwise it begs the question "why the hell didn't Superman just END WWII?" The Holocaust and Nukes also let us begin with a real sense that humanity needs to be redeemed.

Steve said:

That said my idea for a Superman movie would actually be Bizarro. I'd go with the same origin as Superman, he's sent to Earth via rocket from Krypton. He's found by a family who raise them as their own. The only problem is a lot of kryptonite landed in the area so while Bizarro is growing up he's constantly being exposed and poisoned by the kryptonite. He has Superman's powers but is sickly. Set up the first half of the movie with the assumption that you are watching a young Clark Kent and you find out it's not Clark when Bizarro is an adult and reads a story about Superman. He goes to the city to emulate his hero only to be manipulated by Lex. Lex could use kryptonite to weaken Superman but Bizarro has built up a resistance since he's been exposed for most of his life.

Click to expand...

This is a very intersting idea, but isn't it more like a Bizarro movie than a Superman movie?

Clark is his way of connecting with humanity so he won't loose (hi Chaz) himself in his god like powers.


And the reason why Lex is Supes main villain is because he challenges him in a way that can't be easily overcome with his powers. No need to depower him, just add another dimension to the threat besides a physical one even if the villain is a match in powers for him (or even stronger like Mogul)...

WolfOfOdin said:

Also, Clark's the real persona. He's what Supes is actually like mentally. The Big Blue Boyscout is more or less Clark's selflessness and goodness amplified.

Click to expand...

Hello post-crisis Supes...

But i don't agree that Superman and the real Clark should really be different at all, he should just maybe be more reserved about what he says as Supes as it has more of an impact, which he can't control, but that should be about it.

He's the reverse of Batman, who wears bruce wayne as a mask.

Click to expand...

I see it being more subtle, with Bruce seeing himself as The Batman, while Clark sees himself as Ma and Pa's kid with a kryptonian ancestry, the superhero thing being something he must do because of his powers, essentially falling into it, unlike Bats who trained for it most of his life.

Also, it would be cool to see in a shared universe how Bruce was beating up criminals before Supes shows up, but get the idea of a suit from the Big Boyscout (and has the Bat through window moment while pondering what the suit should be).

BlackCat said:

Orrrrrrrrrrr Dracula vs. Superman dun dun dunnnnnnnn

Click to expand...

I like the way you think BlackCat. Since Dracula is mystical in origin, maybe his fangs can bite through Supe's skin and gain Superman's power.

Sorry I haven't got my rough plot synosis up. I've been geting a lot of work as of late here in film school, so it will take a while longer to get a chance to write the whole thing out. If you guys are interested in any particular points of it, though, I should be able tohave the time to put up more of isolated moments and character ideas rather than the whole plot.

Silver Jelly my idea is more of a Bizarro movie. Actually, it's a gimmick movie leading the viewer to believe they are watching Clark Kent all along only to be duped into finding out it's actually Bizarro. Problem with that is once you know it's not Clark the movie is ruined. So we can scrap that idea.

Filmfanatic I'm looking forward to your rendition. Whenever you get it laid out please post it.

Raemon777 said:

Setting it slightly after World War II is probably the best bet, because otherwise it begs the question "why the hell didn't Superman just END WWII?" The Holocaust and Nukes also let us begin with a real sense that humanity needs to be redeemed.

Click to expand...

Watched the movie "9" this weekend. After that I was thinking how cool it would be to set it during WWII and give the Nazi's advanced technology like some of the machines in 9. Considering Metropolis doesn't really exist you could "alter" history a bit to satisfy the movie. I was even thinking it'd be cool to do the Superman movie in animation like 9 instead of live action. I really enjoy the old Superman cartoons. The visuals are stunning. Think that's the reason I'm stuck in the 30's.

I've also always like the Superman angle of not fitting in. Something that's actually quite well put in a guilty pleasure song of mine:



Yes, yes, the song maybe sucks... but it's the thought behind it that I quite like. Superman was raised by a human couple, on a human world, living and loving among humans, learning human history, human values.... always knowing he is NOT human. He could sneeze and snap someone's neck. He's literally the last of his species and has no one to completely relate with. Imagine living your entire life watching everything through a peephole, not being able to really interact, hiding your true self. Superman's origin could frankly be a super villain's. Hell, how his relationship with Lois works is still something that irks me... how do they spend naked time together, kryptonite condoms?

I know it's an angle that has been tackled before, but never quite like it could be. I want to see or read something with Superman's struggle with being completely and utterly alone, watching over an entire species as it destroys the planet and itself and not really being able to do anything about it without literally becoming an all powerful tyrant. Which he could very well be if he wanted to. I mean, how do you even decide what's ok to change and what isn't?

Bank robbery? ok, let's foil THAT. War crimes? No, no, those are human matters. The threat of a mad scientist to level an entire city? Job for Superman. Threat of a country blitzkrieging an enemy city? Oh, humans and their wars, what are you gonna do about it?

y'know?

I like the Five for Fighting song just fine - I don't think you need to consider that a "guilty" pleasure at all.

As bad as the acting got, I was always intrigued by the effort that Smallville (the show) put into showing how Clark struggled with his alien identity. When he first meets the Jor-El hologram thing, he's really freaked out by how otherworldly and inhuman his biological father is.

Watched the movie "9" this weekend. After that I was thinking how cool it would be to set it during WWII and give the Nazi's advanced technology like some of the machines in 9. Considering Metropolis doesn't really exist you could "alter" history a bit to satisfy the movie. I was even thinking it'd be cool to do the Superman movie in animation like 9 instead of live action. I really enjoy the old Superman cartoons. The visuals are stunning. Think that's the reason I'm stuck in the 30's.

Click to expand...

Come to think of it, is there a canonical explanation for what Superman was doing during WWII? Presumably there were evil Nazi supervillains doing stuff. If we were going to following from the 30s to today, it could be fun to do a movie that shows the crazy supervillains and Kryptonite-powered technology he had to deal with at the time.

Raemon777 said:

Come to think of it, is there a canonical explanation for what Superman was doing during WWII? Presumably there were evil Nazi supervillains doing stuff. If we were going to following from the 30s to today, it could be fun to do a movie that shows the crazy supervillains and Kryptonite-powered technology he had to deal with at the time.

Click to expand...

Hitler like had the Spear of Destiny and could control the mind of any super within conquered territory or some such bs.

Hell, how his relationship with Lois works is still something that irks me... how do they spend naked time together, kryptonite condoms?

Click to expand...

Well he can control himself enough to not tear down a building when leaning on it, and only the end is involuntary, so i'm guessing pulling out is the preferred method. (or you know, red sunlight)

Steve said:

Silver Jelly my idea is more of a Bizarro movie. Actually, it's a gimmick movie leading the viewer to believe they are watching Clark Kent all along only to be duped into finding out it's actually Bizarro. Problem with that is once you know it's not Clark the movie is ruined. So we can scrap that idea.

Click to expand...

¿Ruined? ¡Maybe not! I think this may have potential as an interesting movie with superman, even if not about him. Of course, it's difficult some studio may want to do it but... who knows!

Silver Jelly;341876][QUOTE=Steve said:

Silver Jelly my idea is more of a Bizarro movie. Actually, it's a gimmick movie leading the viewer to believe they are watching Clark Kent all along only to be duped into finding out it's actually Bizarro. Problem with that is once you know it's not Clark the movie is ruined. So we can scrap that idea.

Click to expand...

¿Ruined? ¡Maybe not! I think this may have potential as an interesting movie with superman, even if not about him. Of course, it's difficult some studio may want to do it but... who knows![/QUOTE]
To me, that idea sounds like it could potentially work as an Elseworlds story.

Come to think of it, J.J. Abrams' superman script, which I think would be terrible as a film, could make for an interesting Elseworlds. For those who have not heard about it, Superman finds out that Krypton is still around, there is a civil war on Krypton and Lex Luthr is a Kryptonian.

UGH. Worst Tarantino dialogue ever. I hate that scene because it's just plain wrong. He treats Superman like the special case, and he's not. This dialogue describes ALL Golden Age characters. The secret identity was the mask for almost all of them, including Batman. That was the norm, not the unusual. It was the Silver Age that reversed the situation. You might even say it was what made Spider-Man so unique. If FF started the silver age, they had no secret identities. It was Spidey who was the reverse of the Golden Age. He was the anomaly, not Superman. He was Peter Parker in reality, and he masqueraded as Spider-Man.

I think the reason that I dislike this scene so much is because well before Kill Bill was released, I was known to go off on exactly the opposite rant...about how Supes et al were the real guys, while the identity was fake, etc...

What if that was the norm in the Golden Age? We're not in the Golden Age! Spider-Man changed things enough that the dialogue is spot on TODAY. He's not talking about the "leaps buildings, doesn't really fly" Superman nor the "strength to move planets easily" Superman. He's talking about modern Superman in the modern mythology surrounded by modern heroes, so his point is valid.

How is his point on Clark Kent being Superman's critique on the human race "wrong"!?

Because this is the internet.

First, that's not what I'm calling wrong, though I do think the whole premise is a bit thin. Second, the thing that's wrong is the very premise that Superman is the only one who wears a mask as his secret identity. That's my point. Someone else tried to argue that way with me before, but the problem with arguing that with me is that it's not the thing I'm disagreeing. Though I do disagree with the point about norms. I don't think that matters. Nor is it magically no longer true. It's still true of most of the heroes that originated then.

It *is* magically no longer true, it's called a retcon. People today don't even REMEMBER that Superman didn't even fly at first or that he used to be 100x as powerful as he is now, or that most heroes of the age had the same "blending in with the normies" premise. Hell, no one remembers that Batman and even Captain America actually used guns at the beginning. Cause that's against the characters now.

The point Tarantino makes is valid because TODAY Superman's case *is* unique. He's the only one who has either survived as a character since the golden age or remained almost unchanged since. What you're arguing is akin to someone saying that it's WRONG that kryptonite is Superman's weakness because krytptonite was invented for the radio show and shouldn't be considered canon. It *is* canon because they've MADE it canon.

We could, validly, argue that Batman is almost on the same boat because Wayne is a deranged wacko whose "real" persona is now Batman and Bruce Wayne is the disguise. But it's not quite the same because Wayne *is* a human being, born a human being, raised as a human being.

Who else are you saying is in the same boat as Superman TODAY? That's a world-known character, of course, don't go mentioning obscure characters only we geeks would recognize. Tarantino's speech wouldn't have worked very well if he had written it about a character a regular movie goer wouldn't recognize.

Not that any of it matters; Bill wasn't making a speech about Superman, he was using Superman as a metaphor for Beatrix, in truth an assassin, but would've been pretending to be a happy homemaker. I don't think it's really a big deal about Superman.

It is! From the moment he uses a comic book concept for his speech, we can discuss it and hold him accountable for its flaws. He should come here and defend it! Oh, he can't, he's dead.
Why? BECAUSE HIS SUPERMAN LOGIC IS WRONG

I looked at the video with a different set of eyes. I think Tarantino is saying the only way a comic book nerd could keep a woman around long enough to talk comics is to drug her and render her immobile. Trust me, I should know.

fade said:

First, that's not what I'm calling wrong, though I do think the whole premise is a bit thin. Second, the thing that's wrong is the very premise that Superman is the only one who wears a mask as his secret identity. That's my point. Someone else tried to argue that way with me before, but the problem with arguing that with me is that it's not the thing I'm disagreeing. Though I do disagree with the point about norms. I don't think that matters. Nor is it magically no longer true. It's still true of most of the heroes that originated then.

Click to expand...

Actually i still works if lets say you only read Action Comics #1, where there was no mention of any Kents, but an orphanage, and for all we know the name Clark Kent is just something he came up with. Don't know how long that lasted.

But it also works in that Clark Kent is an adopted identity, him being Kal-L, an alien from Krypton (who humans call Superman). Sure, others pretended to be foolish in their public personas, but they did have real human identities, while Supes was Kal-L from the get go.

Tarantino is right. It is the comic book writers that have it wrong. In the same vein that Lucas is wrong about his comments on Star Wars. They both make it up as they go along. If you look at most heroes (as an outsider,) they are people that gain power when they put on their costumes. Only Superman hides behind a human form. And that chosen form is weakness.

Well Batman doesn't even have any powers and he's more Batman the Bruce Wayne, even if it's because he's traumatized. But for Supes Clark Kent is an assumed identity, no such person was born etc. (well until Byrne if the internet is to be believed)

Of course Martian Manhunter is the same with John Jones being even more of a smoke screen.

No, the mask causes fear in his adversaries, he is playing on their superstitions and fears. Also the liberating aspect of wearing a mask, that he will do things in a mask that he can not do as Bruce Wayne. That is where his power lies. Didn't you read Batman Year One?

Not to mention his utility belt, and his cape that now can become a jet pack.

I'm no talking about the mask, i'm talking about the crazy guy beating up people in the dim moonlight...

fade said:

UGH. Worst Tarantino dialogue ever. I hate that scene because it's just plain wrong. He treats Superman like the special case, and he's not. This dialogue describes ALL Golden Age characters. The secret identity was the mask for almost all of them, including Batman. That was the norm, not the unusual. It was the Silver Age that reversed the situation. You might even say it was what made Spider-Man so unique. If FF started the silver age, they had no secret identities. It was Spidey who was the reverse of the Golden Age. He was the anomaly, not Superman. He was Peter Parker in reality, and he masqueraded as Spider-Man.

I think the reason that I dislike this scene so much is because well before Kill Bill was released, I was known to go off on exactly the opposite rant...about how Supes et al were the real guys, while the identity was fake, etc...

Click to expand...

With the exception of Martian Manhunter, Superman IS unique in that he was born an alien, living in a world that's not his. Regardless of whether Batman's mask is Bruce Wayne, he was still born Bruce Wayne. He knows how to act normal, because at one point in time he was normal. The whole point of the Kill Bill dialogue is that Superman was never human, so he really does have no idea how to be human, really.

And MM was just Supes coloured green... he even has Martian Vision...

Bowielee;342296][QUOTE=fade said:

UGH. Worst Tarantino dialogue ever. I hate that scene because it's just plain wrong. He treats Superman like the special case, and he's not. This dialogue describes ALL Golden Age characters. The secret identity was the mask for almost all of them, including Batman. That was the norm, not the unusual. It was the Silver Age that reversed the situation. You might even say it was what made Spider-Man so unique. If FF started the silver age, they had no secret identities. It was Spidey who was the reverse of the Golden Age. He was the anomaly, not Superman. He was Peter Parker in reality, and he masqueraded as Spider-Man.

I think the reason that I dislike this scene so much is because well before Kill Bill was released, I was known to go off on exactly the opposite rant...about how Supes et al were the real guys, while the identity was fake, etc...

Click to expand...

With the exception of Martian Manhunter, Superman IS unique in that he was born an alien, living in a world that's not his. Regardless of whether Batman's mask is Bruce Wayne, he was still born Bruce Wayne. He knows how to act normal, because at one point in time he was normal. The whole point of the Kill Bill dialogue is that Superman was never human, so he really does have no idea how to be human, really.[/QUOTE]

I have to call Bullshit with this. Superman was sent to earth as an infant, not a young adult. By this logic a child whose family immigrates to America when they were a baby will never be an American, or know what it means to be an American. Superman does what he does because of the morals and values that were instilled to him by his parents. Not Jor-El and Lara, Jonathan and Martha Kent.

Then why is Clark Kent a Milquetoast, and Superman brave and bold? So he was raised to cower in fear by the Kents? Or was he raised to stand up for those weaker than himself. Sounds more like he was raised to be the Uber-mensch thatprotects Metropolis.

Clark is still the disguise.

Maybe, but he wasn't answering to that...
And I too think that with that reasonement Bruce Wayne is the disguise (he's not really a millionare playboy, he actually lives to fight crime as Batman)

Covar said:

I have to call Bullshit with this. Superman was sent to earth as an infant, not a young adult. By this logic a child whose family immigrates to America when they were a baby will never be an American, or know what it means to be an American. Superman does what he does because of the morals and values that were instilled to him by his parents. Not Jor-El and Lara, Jonathan and Martha Kent.

Click to expand...

If the kid had super-strength and was with the awareness that he's different then sure.

Sure, he was raised by the Kents, but he always had to be keenly aware that he's more then human (originally his powers where there even when he was a baby). And his kryptonian cultural heritage (and Jor-El and Lara) has always played a big part in most of his life in almost all incarnations.

See, I'm of the belief that the best version of Superman is where his powers don't develop until his teenage years. With that in mind, then it works great for the idea that he thinks of himself as Clark first, Superman second. And that's the way I like to see him, personally. That's the way that they portrayed him in my favourite rendition of his mythos, The Animated Series.

Now, if he's referring more to the pre-Crisis Superman, where we see pictures of a baby Kal-El lifting cribs and trucks and such, then sure, that works.

And I do agree with parts of what Bill says. A lot of the comics are poorly written but the mythology is fantastic. That's the same for most superhero comes.

The most important thing to realize, though, is who is speaking about this belief: the bad guy. Bill is a villain. He's the Lex Luthor of the movies and therefore, has a different outlook on life than others. He's insane in many ways. So of course, much similar to how Luthor would percieve it, dressing up in a civilian identity who is clumsy, wears glasses, etc, is a sign of weakness. But that's part of the identity that he holds. It's not just a pair of glasses that trick people; it's his entire performance. It's not about how he percieves the ordinary human, it's that he is essentially the total opposite of Superman: weak, cowardly, quiet, clumsy, etc. No one would suspect Clark not because he looks similar to Superman, but because he acts entirely different from him.

That is my point, Kal'el is not weak and clumsy, but Clark is. Clark is the costume he wears to fit in and hide in broad daylight. Does he need glasses to read? no. It is a disguise.

But the glasses and weakness aren't the entirety of Clark Kent. He's also a Pullitzer Prize winning writer and a valued friend. Personally I think the Clark in the Justice League episode "Comfort and Joy" is more his identity than most of the Superman in any other episode. Also, I don't think that he has to be completely one or the other. It's not an issue of which one is the false front, because he's both. The glasses and the clumsiness aren't what make Clark, they're just a boundary between man and Superman.

Right, but he didn't grow up thinking of himself as Kal-El or Superman. He grew up as Clark, first. It's like in the Animated Series, where he accidentally rips off the wing of a crashing plane. He doesn't say "Nice one, Kal" or "Nice one, Superman". He says to himself, "Nice one, Clark".

It's the argument of nature vs. nurture. He doesn't see himself as a superior alien being because he wasn't raised that way. He was raised as a humble, small town, honest, hard working farmboy. The only thing that matters about where he comes from is that's how he got his powers, but it's not how he is as a person.

The thing is, Superman is his disguise. He puts on a strong face for everyone around him, but he tends to doubt himself because deep down, he still has those humble beginnings. He still thinks of himself as Clark, the kid in Smallville who always felt a little different. He would much rather lead a normal life, have a family with Lois, maybe own a farm of his own. But because of who he is and what he can do, he only feels responsible to put on the costume and do what's right. Because that's what he was raised to do. You take away his powers and he's still the same person underneath.

Personally, I see the Clark identity as his true identity. However, he plays THREE different roles: the one of Superman, Metropolis Clark Kent and Smallville Clark Kent. Smallville Clark Kent is who he really is; humble, honest, hard-working, a bit of a mama's boy, total boy scout, a little shy because he feels different from everyone else (something a lot of human beings can relate to). Metropolis Clark is kind of like a pro-wrestler. Some have said that most successful characters, such as Steve Austin, are the ones who take their real personality and just push it a little furhter in the extreme. And that's Metropolis Clark Kent. He's still a good, hard-working guy, but he's also shy, unsure of himself, etc. But all three are always the kind of guy who you can go to for help.

---------- Post added at 03:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:50 PM ----------

Also, can I just say for a moment that it's discussions like this that make me glad that I came back? I love you guys so much. You know, in that platonic fellow-Halforumite kinda way.

Goddammit, now I need to watch justice league...

should i start from the beginning or just go straight to JLU? Or skip JLU and just watch JU? Or just watch S:TAS instead? Or should I just shut up and watch Superman with Mr. Reeve?

---------- Post added at 04:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:33 PM ----------

Also, Nick, I don't really see Metropolis Clark and Smallville Clarks as different personas... it's the same guy in a different setting, home vs work. Any guy that comes from a small town and moves to the big city is gonna act a bit differently, but it doesn't mean it's a different persona.

100% agree with the rest of your post, though.

Really, any of the DCAU (DC Animated Universe) is great to watch. Batman: THe Animated Series (not THE Batman, which sucks), Superman, Batman Beyond, JL and JLU. I would say you'd be best off to watch 'em all right from Batman through to the end of JLU to fully appreciate everything, but you don't necessarily HAVE to.

And yeah, that's a good point about work vs. home. He acts different at home with Lois, for example. And I'd say in the last 5-10 years, most writers have portrayed Clark just as capable, winner Pulitzers and such. I love how Mark Waid writes him in Birthright. It's not so much that he's cowardly and shy, it's that he's near unnoticeable at the Daily Planet. He avoids fratenizing for the most part, works during the parties, etc. He's like that quiet guy at work that's a good guy, but just really quiet and anti-social. As Perry White said to him, "How the hell did a mousey guy like you get a Pulitzer winning interview with *some famous leader*!?!" That's paraphrasing, since I don't have the book in front of me.

Bill's also very old, older then Dave even... like i told JCM, for someone his age pre-crisis Supes was around way longer, so it's easy to see why he would consider that the definitive version.

And you all are talking about the Byrne reboot...

Goddammit, now I need to watch justice league...

should i start from the beginning or just go straight to JLU? Or skip JLU and just watch JU? Or just watch S:TAS instead? Or should I just shut up and watch Superman with Mr. Reeve?

Click to expand...

Well the first 2 films you should see anyhow, and if you're gonna start the DCAU Batman: TAS is a must see, it's still one of teh best cartoons ever.

I just think that Tarantino dialogue scene sucks because it's long and drawn out without any tension, since Beatrix is drugged and we know that nothing's going to happen in that scene besides a barely-interesting lecture.

Tarantino's most effective dialogue scenes involve a crapload of tension. For instance, the dialogue between Bill and Beatrix at the wedding rehearsal in Kill Bill Vol. 2 is very effective because we know that Bill is going to kill everyone at the end of it, giving everything that's said a sadistic twist. The dialogue between Vincent and Mia is effective because there's a clear sexual tension that we know could end very badly if Vincent gives in. Pretty much every dialogue scene in Inglourious Basterds works because they all involve Nazis that would kill the people they're talking to if they knew who they were (save the dialogue scenes at the beginning and end, which have tension for other reasons).

But the superman lecture? We know nothing's going to happen during the scene, and we know something awesome is going to happen after the scene, so the only thing I felt while watching it can be summed up thusly:

If you're going to dive fully into the DCAU, you have to start with Batman: TAS, then Superman: TAS, then Justice League, then JLU. Definately don't jump right to JLU as there are things from the first series that are alluded to strongly in JLU.

You guys keep skipping the Batman/Superman Adventures and the Batman and Robin one...

They're both part of their respective series.

I just don't think any live action movie of Superman would do well in my opinion.
Now an animated one with a decent enough budget could pull it off though.

Does anyone know where someone could watch such a thing without much of a wait? ...online aranoid:

Not the best choice, but try www.Seriesyonkis.com

Sometimes, the shows are just in spanish (American or from Spain) but you may find them in english with awful subtitles, wich I usually cover with a small browser window.

At least it will allow you to "try" a few episodes of a series before deciding if you want to watch it or not. It worked for me and LOST. I saw the first episode, loved it, and got the first season for christmas on DVD. And I'm completely hooked.

Calleja said:

Does anyone know where someone could watch such a thing without much of a wait? ...online aranoid:

Click to expand...

No local trackers in your country?!

I'm so tempted to try to write a short film with this "You don't know this is Bizarro" idea... I don't think I can make it work, but, damn! I want to!

Silver Jelly said:

I'm so tempted to try to write a short film with this "You don't know this is Bizarro" idea... I don't think I can make it work, but, damn! I want to!

Click to expand...

Write it anyway. Worst thing that could happen is everyone calling you a hack. I would read it.

Doesn't Kurtz have the sole right to being calle d a hack here?! I thought that was official.

@Li3n said:

Doesn't Kurtz have the sole right to being calle d a hack here?! I thought that was official.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm both fat and a hack. And I'm killing neswpapers by not reading any. So I guess I'm some kind of mini-Kurtz?

If you're only fat you'd be a micro-Kurtz. Mini-Kurtz would be obese.












.....I'm sorry. I don't really mean that Kurt.