Control-Alt-Delete
Apparently Warner Bros intends to reboot the Superman franchise.
Personally, I think this is a very good idea.
I realize I'm saying this as a person who genuinely liked Superman Returns, which is a rare opinion in some circles. I enjoyed the overall story, heck, I even liked the love triangle (I give them props for not making Richard weak or a tool, which would have been very easy). I liked Kate Bosworth as Lois and Brandon Routh as Clark.
But I really did think it suffered as a direct sequel to the other movies. For one, Kate Bosworth was younger at the time than I am now. Doing the math, she would have had to have started at the Daily Planet at the age of what, fourteen? She'd be barely eighteen at best when she had the cute four year old kid of Superman.
That doesn't work for me. For obvious reasons. Not in the least because it's creepy. I LIKED her Lois, I did. But after the sublime Margot Kidder I was disappointed. I wanted to see a Lois that was of appropriate age, damnit.
Brandon Routh did a good enough job as Superman, even though it seemed to be a somewhat thankless role. He channeled Christopher Reeve well enough, but I thought he was fettered by it. I would have liked to see Superman by way of Brandon Routh, not Superman by way of Christopher Reeve by way of Brandon Routh.
I do think, with the great cast that they had, they could have made a phenomenal origin movie. And the storyline could have been much better than the bizarre combination of Jesus symbolism, rehashing of the first movie, and love triangle that this one turned out to be.
I'd also have liked to see a Superman a bit more concerned about squishing people with a stalagmite and more inclined to punch things too.
So if you couldn't tell, I think this is fantastic news. :-)
Personally, I think this is a very good idea.
I realize I'm saying this as a person who genuinely liked Superman Returns, which is a rare opinion in some circles. I enjoyed the overall story, heck, I even liked the love triangle (I give them props for not making Richard weak or a tool, which would have been very easy). I liked Kate Bosworth as Lois and Brandon Routh as Clark.
But I really did think it suffered as a direct sequel to the other movies. For one, Kate Bosworth was younger at the time than I am now. Doing the math, she would have had to have started at the Daily Planet at the age of what, fourteen? She'd be barely eighteen at best when she had the cute four year old kid of Superman.
That doesn't work for me. For obvious reasons. Not in the least because it's creepy. I LIKED her Lois, I did. But after the sublime Margot Kidder I was disappointed. I wanted to see a Lois that was of appropriate age, damnit.
Brandon Routh did a good enough job as Superman, even though it seemed to be a somewhat thankless role. He channeled Christopher Reeve well enough, but I thought he was fettered by it. I would have liked to see Superman by way of Brandon Routh, not Superman by way of Christopher Reeve by way of Brandon Routh.
I do think, with the great cast that they had, they could have made a phenomenal origin movie. And the storyline could have been much better than the bizarre combination of Jesus symbolism, rehashing of the first movie, and love triangle that this one turned out to be.
I'd also have liked to see a Superman a bit more concerned about squishing people with a stalagmite and more inclined to punch things too.
So if you couldn't tell, I think this is fantastic news. :-)
posted by kalinara @ 4:53 AM
8 Comments:
At August 23, 2008 5:52 AM,
LurkerWithout said…
Hopefully the next version will finally have some giant spiders...
At August 23, 2008 6:02 AM,
Anonymous said…
I'd agree that a (good) reboot would be a very good thing. My only concern would be that I saw in another article about the reboot quotes to the effect that they were looking to make it darker (inspired by the success of The Dark Knight). I'd much rather see a bright, hopeful, inspiring, fun Superman film myself. But that might just be me...(again!)
At August 23, 2008 6:31 AM,
Jeffrey Hardy Quah said…
Superman Returns is one of my favourite movies, but a reboot is probably for the best.
Also, looking at this "dark" direction that WB wants to take, is it me or will superhero movies take the wrong lessons from Dark Knight the same way superhero comics took the wrong lessons from Watchmen?
At August 23, 2008 9:04 AM,
Jer said…
I also loved Superman Returns, and I also think this is a good idea. For a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that there's a LOT you can do with Superman before you bring the possibility of a son into the mix.
Like dan and jeffrey, I'm also concerned with this talk of "dark" in Superman. Superman always has had a level of "dark" around him - generally in his villains - and I hope that's what they're talking about. Actually, I'd be really happy if they took Grant Morrison's All-Star Superman run and mined it for ideas. You don't need to do an adaptation of it, but his run has the right tone and some good ideas in it that would work well on the screen.
I hope they skip the origin this time around (we don't need a 2 hour origin movie for Superman - he's Superman! You can do his origin in the opening credits). And I hope they nuke the whole New Age Crystal Krypton Richard Donner design. I'd also like to see them use a villain other than Luthor, but given that this is a reboot I bet they'll think they need to use him. Maybe he can be the guy behind the scenes and he can use some thugs like Metallo or Bizarro to get Superman to THROW SOME DAMN PUNCHES. Ahem
At August 23, 2008 12:34 PM,
Riddering said…
Reboot or continuing the line doesn't phase me--I just want to see Superman put through his paces by a challenging villain so there are big fights and a resolution that displays everything Superman is capable of and everything that makes so goshdarn great.
I was also uneasy about the comment that they plan to go darker with DC superhero films. Theatrical superhero releases should err on the side of fun so I can re-watch them without becoming clinically depressed (see: TDK). Of course, that part of the article was referring to the company developing all the superheroes for film so we could still see a bright, shining Metropolis for Superman.
But please, movie makers, no pouches and guns and gritting and hologram variant posters. Please.
At August 23, 2008 4:35 PM,
Will Staples said…
I just hope the next movie either A) plays Lex Luthor the way he's portrayed today and not 30 years ago and/or B) acknowledges that Superman actually has a rogues gallery beyond the bald guy.
At August 23, 2008 5:16 PM,
Scott (The Mad Thinker) Anderson said…
I agree with everything you said, and I'd say the central conflict of Superman having an illegitimate child and trying to decide if he should break up Lois's marriage or not let his kid know how his father is or whatever it was, was the worst kind of conflict for Superman. I just don't think that's why anyone goes to see a Superman movie. It was one of those complex moral, too human things for Superman. I really like the more black and white moral issues for Superman. I want him to be the ultimate good guy who always makes the most ethical decision and this one made me think he was a cad ... and a whiner, not at all the kind of stand up guy I want to feel exists if only (or mainly) in fantasy.
At August 26, 2008 1:47 AM,
Evan Waters said…
I'm kinda saddened by the news. For one thing it really does further the film's reputation as a failure, and it kinda sucks that Bryan Singer's career has to suffer for doing something as thoughtful and earnest as this (especially while X3 was an easy hit.) If nothing else it validates the complaints of people who think fight scenes are obligatory for superhero movies.
Hopefully Singer will either still be on board, and/or it'll be a "soft reboot" instead of really having to establish the entire story again. If nothing else I hope he moves on to bigger and better things, as Ang Lee did with the whole Oscar thing and all.
Post a Comment
<< Home