Superman Returns Sequel discussion thread - Page 2

Mike.P · 10-29-2006, 01:20 AM

Count me in as someone who loves the Metallo from Richard idea. Would work flawlessly, IMO.

Patrick Sun · 10-29-2006, 01:54 AM

I think they'll just write Richard out by him sacrificing himself for Superman at a crucial spot in the 3rd act. Turning Richard into Metallo would be too much to take, especially if Superman had to dispose of him eventually, and that would create far too much emotional separation between Lois and Superman (regardless if Superman was doing the right thing).

Paul_Scott · 10-29-2006, 02:10 AM

The idea of turning Richard White into some sort of villan seems to me to be about as cheap and cliched an idea as having the kid (or Richard) be a sacrifical lamb in the next film. But thats basically the corner Singer painted this set of characters into. No one is going to settle for stasis in the relationship of these four characters by the end of the next film, and the only ways to move anything forward is to
1) get rid of Richard in some fashion
or
2) get rid of the kid

if they're going to get rid of Richard, I'd vote for just having the relationship break down. Singers Lois is a self absorbed, cold fish anyway, it would be extremely satisfying to see her get 'dumped' - and that would be the probably be the least expected resolution for that situation out of all of them.
Other than killing off Lois, and if shes still being essayed by Bosworth, I'd probably actually be on board for that.

I still think there is only one way to undo the damage wraught by Singer to these characters ( yeah I know I'm in the minority feeling that they are damaged at this point)- and thats to bring in Mytztptlyx .
I'd rather see a whole movie of a cosmic prankster fucking with Supermans head, than more banal nods to Jesus Christ, or a blatant attempt to definitively invalidate the half baked complications of the first film (and have Richard turn villian or killing off the kid would be examples of that).
On the other hand, if those things were done in the context of a hallucination, or mind fuck, then the film could get away it.

Even more importantly though, with Mytzptlyx, you also have the opportunity of starting off the film with a considerably lighter tone (" Whats a pink gorilla doing on top of the Daily Planet globe?!), which washes away some of the bad taste left from the mopey-stalker-deadbeat dad Superman of Returns. But that character wouldn't preculde the story from turning darker or more serious for the second or third acts, as the pranks become more unsettling or deadly.

If not Mytzptlyx, I'd vote for Brainiac. Darkseid would seem to require too much in the way of backstory and supporting characters. My big wish would be that they forget about Luthor entirely, however since there are still a few lines of dialouge from the second film that Singer hasn't boosted yet, I'm sure a reappearance by Spacey is a lock.

Lou Sytsma · 10-29-2006, 06:52 AM

I don't agree with you Paul on the kid aspect. Using him as the catalyst for the next movie provides the opportunity for rich dramatic ground. How would Superman react if his one true link to Earth was taken away from him? That is a story I would be very interested in seeing.

Whatever Singer does in the next movie, it has to be a clean break away from the Reeves movies.

dpippel · 10-29-2006, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Is anyone groaning at the thought of Nolan using Joker in "Dark Knight"? Aww, he's just retreading Burton! Right? nope

Nolan started from scratch with "Batman Begins", as if the other Batman films had never existed so he's not really retreading anything. This is obviously not the case with Singer and "Superman Returns" or the sequel.

Chad R · 10-29-2006, 07:40 AM

Deleted.

Chuck Mayer · 10-29-2006, 07:54 AM

1) Again, I agree with Doug. Singer basically "redid" a lot of Donner's film...Nolan did not. The Joker has appeared in dozens of great Batman stories...Zod in one. A Donner movie. So that's a baseless comparison.

2) Making Richard evil? Might as well make Superman evil. He was a fully developed, noble, GOOD character in Superman Returns, and no friend of Lex. I fail to see a believable way to make Richard a villain (except mind control) that doesn't scream "Get rid of this guy!!!!" by the screenwriter. It's not there. I think Paul S. is correct on Richard.

3) I disagree with Lou (and it's why I have an abiding disagreement with returns). Jason is not Superman's "only" link to Earth and humanity. He has parents (one in the movies), Lois, and a real human connection to ALL of humanity. Jason provides an interesting dynamic, but he is hardly the sole link between Clark and humanity.

Cory S. · 10-29-2006, 08:14 AM

Chuck,

I'd agree with you on your assessment of Superman's connection to Earth but as you say, the dynamic is much different now. As much as he has a connection to Smallville, Marth, Lois, and the whole of humanity, Jason is blood. That runs far deeper than anything. This is why I say the ending of the film, the fly away as its called, is supremely excellent because Superman is as content as he's ever been. His issues with Jor-El and Krypton are gone.

Since he's been there, Earth has been his home but going to Krypton and seeing what he sees and now having Jason, it shows us that he has and can move forward. Earth is really home now and the possibilities to this franchise, in terms of story, are endless.

I, too, don't want Richard to turn evil because it would be a cliche cop out to get Lois and Superman together. Richard can be developed even more but ulitmately something tragic has to happen to him...something that would make Superman question his usefulness. It would be the same situation for Jason as it was for Clark when he lost his adopted father all those years ago...only this time, Superman is there to help Jason, but should he? That would be interesting.

Another aspect I want to see in the series, if it continues, is having Clark introduce Jason to his grandmother of sorts. Something about that idea appeals to me. It may never happen but it would be interesting to see.

Singer has alot of options. One option he shouldn't do is Zod, as much as I like him. And I think Singer wouldn't go that way anyway. He's heard it from everywhere that his film is a remake of sorts. I think he's going to avoid that at all costs in the sequel.

Still, I like the beginning he's at with Superman Returns.

Lou Sytsma · 10-29-2006, 08:25 AM

Fair enough Chuck, my previous post is based on the groundwork laid in SR.

SR, rightly or wrongly, did create a special link between Superman and the boy that has been given precedence that exceeds the other ones you detailed. Since the groundwork has been laid in SR, it would only be logical to pursue a storyline with the boy as the catalyst.