Superman Returns Sequel discussion thread (1 Viewer)

[Bryan Ri]

I still stand by my idea for the sequel and villain:

Even though it departs from the comics, have Richard become Metallo, created by Luthor.

 

[Sean Bryan]

I don't like the idea of using Zod in the next film. Hopefully this is just an new variation on an old rumor. If he really wants to do something with Zod, I say fight the urge and sit on the idea and keep it as a possibility for something like the third (or preferably fourth) film in the series. But please don't use him in the second (and preferably not the third) film. That is just too much of a re-tread of S:TM and S2.

I'd like to see someone like Brainiac or Darkseid as the big bad in the next film. Whoever they use, I'd like someone very alien and very powerful, and I want to see both Metropolis and the rest of Earth take some heavy damage. I'd like Luthor to be around and scheming, but I'd prefer him to move into the "super-rich businessman pulling the strings who can't legally be tied to the bad he is responsible for" role.

 

[Robert Anthony]

That's the win. Right there. Brainiac I think is a little too soon (Have him come down in the third sequel, born from the planetoid chunk that Superman threw into space) but Metallo keeps Luthor in the mix (financially, I think they'll still need Spacey's name for the sequel) and allows for some NASTY fight possibilities, plus the emotional heft of Superman having to fight his son's Father.

 

[Norm]

Metallo doesn't thrill me. A robot/cyborg seems lame to me & would only work if it was a side kick villain. Especially if they go with that giant Metallo like in the video game. That just takes it to Godzilla territory.

 

[PeterTHX]

Me, I'd think it would be fine if Zod returned, if done right.

Some of you folks need to realize that there are some of us who have never picked up a "Superman" comic book. That's me and a large segment of the movie going public. I look at these movies as films on their own merit.

I loved "X2" and "Batman Begins" despite never having read the comics. To hear you folks throwing around names of possible villians you need to take into consideration what would work in a FILM.

Zod didn't die. He disappeared into the fog in the fortress. The ABC version had him being led away by the Arctic Police in handcuffs. Lets say Luthor or another villian mentioned here figures out a way to give Zod his powers back. With modern VFX tech we could see a terrific fight that we hoped to see back in 1981. Singer has said that the crystals being left by Kitty on New Krypton was a VERY big deal and will be addressed in the sequel.

Is anyone groaning at the thought of Nolan using Joker in "Dark Knight"? Aww, he's just retreading Burton! Right? nope
Magneto was an ongoing threat in all the X-Men films.

Using the same villian again doesn't mean retread.

 

[Larry Sutliff]

Peter, I don't mind those Zod ideas at all. I remember discussing a rematch between Zod and Supes for SUPERMAN III with friends back in the eighties, and the idea was pretty popular then. Of course, SUPERMAN III turned out a lot different than we all imagined...

I guess I'm just living in the past, but I wouldn't mind seeing more ties between the new Superman films and the old ones(at least I and II). But, from a commercial standpoint, I believe that Singer needs to move past this now and make the new film as unique as possible(without repudiating what has gone before, of course).

 

[CoreyII]

Hey Peter

By your own admission, it is pretty safe to assume that you weren't reading Superman comics even when the Reeve films came out and yet Lex and Zod are both villains from the comics that I assume you liked. If done right and must emphasize the phrase "DONE RIGHT" you wouldn't be disappointed in a villain like Darkseid. Darkseid can bring down a s#!t storm on Superman the likes to which Zod couldn't even begin to compare. But then again I'm not so sure if Singer would do Darkseid any justice on the big screen, he really does seem to be stuck in Donnerville.

As far as Nolan goes with Dark Knight, you have to understand that there are many (myself included) who feel that the Joker was never really done right. Yeah Jack did his usual schtick but that's just it, what was done in 1989 was just Jack Nicholson in white make-up doing his usual crazy Nicholson routine, but it wasn't the Joker. Now Mark Hamill on the animated series is another story.

And believe me, I don't cut Nolan any slack, I for one didn't like his (and David Goyer) interpretation of Rhas Al Ghul. Furthermore, Rhas was the wrong villain for the first movie. It really should have just been Batman against Falcone and the criminal underworld with Batman establishing a name for himself among the criminals. I would have loved to have seen a super criminal introduced in the follow up. Plus Rhas Al Ghul is so shrewd and powerful he really should have been introduced 2 or 3 movies down the road when Batman has had more experience and wisdom under his belt.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Don't forget to give Metallo a visor that allows him to shoot Kryptonite-laced force-blasts out of them... *yuk* *yuk*

 

[Patrick Sun]

Next super-foe:


I could get behind this pick.

 

[Bryan Ri]

The action scenes would be spectacular, and allow us to explore Metropolis a bit as well.

The drama could be really endearing as well:

1. Supes having to fight his son's father as you said, but also

2. Jason having to watch Superman fight his father/Jason watching his father turn into a monster

3. Richard finding out Supes is the father of Jason, and seeing his fall into darkness (considering most of us here liked Richard, that would be emotional to see)

4. If Luthor creates Metallo from Richard, now you have Superman defending Luthor from Metallo as well

5. Lois losing her husband

I would LOVE to see this movie made.

 

[Mike.P]

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

 

[Patrick Sun]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Deleted.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

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.]

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]

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.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I don't believe blood trumps all...though I am aware the link between a parent and child is stronger than any other.

I think SR said the link exceeded all others...but didn't show it. Others disagree with me on that. Perhaps if that connection had felt earned, or if Singer had not marginalized ALL OTHER connections except Lois, I would have responded more strongly to it. And therefore, the film.