Superman Rebooted (1 Viewer)

[mattCR]

First, though, as I said, there are two that I think are "great" productions, "Doomsday" doesn't live up to the comics, but it has a better feel for it's content then any of the Superman films (IMHO).

I mean, I'm sorry, but SupermanII (non-Donner) was an almost Don-Knotts adventure. Superman III/IV.. do I need to discuss Richard Pryor and a killer computer? Etc.

"Batman Mask of the Phantasm" was the perfect comic book to film adaptation. It got it on every level. "Doomsday" wasn't as good as the comics, but maintained a heirarchy you could follow with characters that were more complex, bitter and when needed truly evil in comparison to any of the live action films.

Sometimes we think because something has adult situations, like an abandoned kid or whatever, that it makes it a more adult film. That's not true at all. What helps make a film more complex is when the characters themselves have deeper motives and where they are more then two dimensional sounding boards.

Just me though. Yes, Doomsday wasn't as good as it could have been, but it's still better per content then almost anything in the live action versions.

 

[TerryRL]

Word around the campfire is that WB is seriously considering giving Bryan Singer a second shot at Superman in some capacity (as director and/or producer). The director has been quietly talking to the powers-that-be at WB (who have also had chats with Brandon Routh about returning as Clark Kent/Superman). "Valkyrie" turning into a big hit for UA will really help Singer's cause. From what I've heard, WB hasn't been that thrilled with many of the reboot pitches they've heard.

At the end of the day, they could decide to play it safe and give Singer a chance at "redeeming" himself with a far more action oriented follow-up to "Superman Returns" (Singer says he's going to go 'Wrath of Khan' with the sequel). Both Singer and the studio realize the mistakes they made with 'Returns' and if Singer is indeed coming back, expect him to deliver a film more in line with what he did with 'X2'.

Again, if Singer were to return, the studio would bring back everyone from the first film. With Frank Langella (Perry White) likely to receive an Oscar nod for his work in "Frost/Nixon", Kevin Spacey and Kate Bosworth coming off the surprise hit "21" ($81.2 million), and the possibility of "Valkyrie" putting both Singer and star Tom Cruise (following his Golden Globe nominated performance from last summer's "Tropic Thunder") back in the winner's circle at the box office, most of the key players from 'Returns' are hot commodities at the box office and WB isn't going to ignore that. At this point, it would still be a surprise if Bosworth returned.

The studio is playing this one close to the vest right now, but rumors suggest that they may end up bringing Singer and company back. They may end up opting to dump everyone and go another direction, but that is starting to seem more and more unlikely as time goes by. Like what Sony did by bringing back the principle players for a fourth and fifth Spidey flick, WB may do the same by allowing Singer to complete his trilogy.

Stay tuned...

 

[Sam Favate]

Well, I hope that's true, Terry. I'm in favor of putting Singer back in charge.

However, this item from IMDb via Filmonic.com says otherwise:

Bryan Singer being left out of Superman sequel talk

Bryan Singer being left out of Superman sequel talk | Filmonic

 

[Andy Sheets]

Not to get off-topic but I can't see Valkyrie being a hit with ads proclaiming "COURAGE HAS A NAME...TOM CRUISE!!!" and then cutting to Cruise wearing a Nazi costume. It's very funny in an unintended way.

 

[David Forbes]

I think Valkyrie looks interesting but I don't see it doing well. How is it tracking? Does anyone know?

 

[Patrick Sun]

That's a better question to be asked in the 2008 Box Office Thread.

 

[Greg_S_H]

Singer and Co. back? That'll save me some money.

 

[todd s]

They need a reboot. I am a lifelong Supes fan. And the only thing good about SR. Is the space plane rescue.

 

[Chris Atkins]

It will cost me. What will save me $$ is a reboot.

 

[Greg_S_H]

I hope you're illustrating absurdity by being absurd, because that is silly. You may not agree with my statement, but Singer has a track record. I have only liked the original X-Men of his entire output, and I despised Superman Returns. Every aspect, from the casting to the script to the idiot kid walking around with a trash can on his head. I would rather watch Batman and Robin than SR, and that is no lie. So, maybe a miracle could happen and I'd have to eat my words, but ruling out a reboot when it could be absolutely anything? It would save you money if it was, say, Peter Jackson directing a script by < insert fanfave scriptwriter >?

 

[Patrick H.]

Wow, if Singer is the "playing it safe" option, that's a SAD comment on the state of this franchise! I have yet to meet ANYBODY who's said "Yeah, man, 'Superman Returns' was great! What do you think will happen in the next one?!" I myself hated the film, but still, nine times out of ten, if I bring it up in a conversation without making my own opinion known, the other person's response is either "Didn't even bother" or "Oh god, that sucked!" There is NO anticipation for a follow-up out there...nobody's debating excitedly on message boards about the fate of Lois Lane's kid. Nobody's breathlessly speculating about who's going to play Brainiac. Any attempt to build up hype for a sequel will be met with crickets chriping.

Seriously, if they bring back Singer and continue with this storyline, the vast majority of the audience will check out after they see Routh again in the first trailer. Even if the film IS somehow terrific, it will take HUGE word-of-mouth to pull it out of the goodwill deficit it will face. Singer is a competent filmmaker, but let's face it...he had ONE shot to get his concept off the ground and really get people interested in it. It didn't work. Get somebody with a fresh take and some passion for the material, or just let it go!

 

[Brandon Conway]

*Raises hand*

 

[Zack Gibbs]

Despite what some in this thread would perpetuate, Superman Returns did well both critically and financially. No, it didn't fully live up to the box office's burden of exceptions, but that hardly concludes that it's some kind of filmmaking poison.

 

[Larry Sutliff]

Singer coming back is good news to me, as I really liked SR. I'm sure he can up the danger and action quotient for the sequel. That would be preferable to seeing another origin movie.

 

[RobertR]

I don't like the idea of another origin movie. Neither do I like the idea of Singer coming back. I prefer a third choice--a good director who understands the character, IGNORES all the "Superman has a boring kid" nonsense and will cast the right actors.

If it did so "well", why is there all the talk about a reboot and not having Singer do the next film? Why is it even a question?

 

[Will_B]

If Singer can do for Superman 2 what he did for X-Men 2, I am all for letting him do it. And since he has a track record of not staying with a series for more than 2 movies (abandoning X-Men and letting a hack do part 3) then there's every reason to believe he will put all his effort into Superman 2 to make it the best, aware that it will be his last shot at Superman.

As cool as I though Superman Returns was, it was only partly his, since it was so firmly dedicated to the style of the 1978 movie. Now that he's given the 1978 film his respect, he can flex beyond that.

 

[TerryRL]

Robert, the biggest mistake WB execs made was thinking that SR would recoup every penny that was spent on developing a new Superman flick from 1990 on to the entire budget of Singer's movie. Including the $210 million that SR cost, WB spent upwards of $350 million total to get Superman back to the big screen. This counts the $30 million in pay-or-play deals that Nicolas Cage ($20 million) and Tim Burton ($10 million) signed in 1997.

Various FX houses (including ILM) were paid to do flying tests, sets were built, millions were paid on various scripts, both Brett Ratner and McG were paid for their brief stints as director, and the list goes on. SR would've had to do 'Dark Knight' sort of business to recoup all that WB spent.

While the movie did do well (earning $391.1 million worldwide), the studio expected it to do much bigger business. They believed the movie would pull in numbers similar to that of the first two Spidey flicks. Plus, the movie wasn't as well received by the fans as the studio had hoped for.

No offense to Bryan Singer or his team, but he essentially re-made the 1978 Richard Donner film. When the movie failed to ignite much interest on home video, on top of producing extremely disappointing toy sales, WB began to ponder the idea of a reboot. The fact that the movie had little to do with WB's popular "Smallville" series also worked (surprisingly) against Singer's version.

The year before, the studio saw "Batman Begins" get off to a decent opening, then leg its way to more than $205 million domestically. Plus, the movie was one of the ten biggest DVD sellers of the year, as well as yielding some very solid numbers in its overall merchandise sales. WB expected SR to perform a lot stronger given that they had a bigger name director (at that time).

I believe the only reason WB is even contemplating giving Singer another shot is because they haven't been blown away by any of the reboot pitches they've heard during the last year. Some were better than others, but the studio wanted to be "blown away" by an idea that will more than likely end up costing them more than $200 million to bring to the screen.

The jury is still out on if Singer is going to have anything at all to do with the next Superman movie, but he has been meeting with studio heads about the project. With "The Dark Knight" becoming the most successful film ever based on a comic book (on top of generating a lot of Oscar buzz), the bar has been raised very high since WB (and DC) like the fact that one of their properties in one fell swoop bested all of Marvel's big box office guns (Spidey, Iron Man, and X-Men).

Christopher Nolan will no doubt get a blank check to do his third Batman flick, but whoever does the next Superman movie will probably have a very short leash. The studio is going to micro-manage the piss out of this movie to make sure the next Superman movie is a huge hit. It remains to be seen how well any of this is going to turn out because at the end of the day the movie still has to be good enough to get moviegoers excited in the franchise again.

I do find it interesting that there are those at the studio that now regret the decision to axe Brett Ratner because his trilogy was going to be epic on the scale of the 'Lord of the Rings' movies. Ratner was also a big fan of J.J. Abrams' ideas (who was the writer at the time). Ratner left after several clashes with the film's producer, Jon Peters. Some of which were said to have gotten physical, or very close to getting physical. Go figure.

Ratner has several projects in the pipeline now, which includes a fourth "Beverly Hills Cop" movie, as well as a new film in the "Conan" franchise. WB gave McG their 'Terminator' franchise. Michael Bay (who WB has coveted) is currently knee-deep (and extremely happy) in the "Transformers" franchise. Tim Burton is currently helming "Alice in Wonderland" and will follow that up with yet another Johnny Depp vehicle, the big screen version of "Dark Shadows". J.J. Abrams is hoping "Star Trek" will resurrect that franchise.

The list of "where are they now" for former directors and writers attached to Superman seemingly goes on and on. WB seems to be running out of "big names" and Bryan Singer may represent one of the few they can attach to the project. As you can see, WB is putting a lot of expectations on the next Superman movie(s). We'll see what happens.

 

[Mark Hawley]

Wow, great post! Very intersting!

 

[RobertR]

Yes, very informative.

 

[Chris Atkins]

WB has a track record too, Greg, as Terry partly illustrated in his post. Have you read the history of the development of Superman Returns? There were some truly nutty ideas being floated, all with the apparent support of WB, and its a miracle that none of those ideas made it to the screen.

So, when WB decides to do a "reboot" or whatever, when I absolutely adored SR and was looking forward to the sequel, then I am out. After news got out that Singer was off the sequel, I hadn't even checked this thread until I read the Singer news on AICN.

I am sorry you didn't like SR. I've not personally met anyone who didn't (aside from some here) though I can understand why you didn't. I thought it was a nice homage to the Donner films while taking the character in some interesting new directions, done with Singer's customary directorial flourishes. Having seen the original Donner films in the theater when I was a youngster, SR really connected with me. But I understand that others might not have that connection. For me it is one of my favorite 15 or 20 films of the decade.