Chris Nolan to take on Superman?

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

So i was trawling through IGN the other day, and they reported that Christopher Nolan, visionary behind the rebooted Batman movie franchise, will apparently be charged with working his magic on the 2nd half of the World's Finest Heroes, when he tackles the Superman franchise.

Now a few of you are going to say 'Oh Jesus, like we need another Superman movie after the last one.' and normally i'd say the same, but after watching what stunning work he's done with the Batman franchise i think he could do very well.

I don't believe it's going to be a reboot, i think Nolan is just supposed to take the franchise from where it is and continue it, however, knowing how much he hated the idea of having a Robin in Batman, i also think he'd very much oppose having to write a Supes story that involved Kal-El's son.

IGN started a list of things that Nolan should do and things he should not do. For example they said that Nolan should not try and make it into a Batman movie starring Superman, in that they didn't want the movie to become dark and morbid much like Dark Knight was, because let's face it, Superman and Metropolis are supposed to be polar opposites of Batman and Gotham.

They also said that we are in need of a desperate escape from Lex Luthor as the villain. Not only has Luthor been the villain for the majority of the previous Superman films, he hasn't been portrayed properly at all (it's been years since i saw the originals, and i never saw 'Returns' so i wouldn't know, just transcribing what i've read). Where are our Brainiac's and Darkseid's? Our Bizzaro's and our Metallo's? Our Parasite's and Doomsday's?

Superman has such a wide variety of villains to battle against, yet we've only ever seen him struggle against fellow Kryptonians, natural disasters and one balding financial tycoon.

So what say you WZ? Would you be interested in a new Superman movie if it were developed by Christopher Nolan, genius behind 'Memento' and the most recent installments into Batman? And if so, what would you say needs to be included, and what needs to be left out?

 

[Super Crazy]

I would be interested in seeing a Superman movie developed by Christopher Nolan, as he's done wonders for the Batman franchise. It would be great to see the magic he could do on Superman, albeit I would not want it to be dark and twisted like Batman, but rather a better depiction of Superman and Metropolis. What needs to be in this movie, as you said, is another villain other then Luthor. As far as I know, his greatest enemy aside from Luthor was always Darkseid or Doomsday, so why not have him battle one of them in the next movie, and have the other appear at the end to set up another movie.

I feel the movie would also need to focus less on the relationship between Lois and Superman/ Clark Kent. Although this is a major part of the Superman storyline, she needs to be a minor part of the story and real story needs to be the villains.

Also, they need to freshen up Superman's look a bit. I'm not saying have him in a different suit or anything. But instead of the usual somewhat nerdy looking fellow, have him be a little more chiseled and defined, as I depict Superman as somewhat of a muscular guy. So in otherwords, choose a different kind of actor to play him, someone who is more muscle toned.

Also, set up an introduction to the character Steel. He is/was one of Superman's greatest allies, and the movie that was out years ago about him, which I believe starred Shaquille O' Neal, was not all that good. Reinvent the Steel character , and have him around Superman/ Clark Kent at various times until he ultimately decides to suit up himself. Which again I would set up for a sequel.

Those are my thoughts on this and here's hoping they come to fruition.

 

[Mr. TM]

Well finally I am interested in a potential Superman movie. Superman has never been my superhero of choice, as I always perfered the hero who has had to build himself up physically and mentally.

But if Nolan can recapture that magic, the same stuff he brought to Batman Begins, I would love it for Superman. some dark nature being brought into the story would be great to see.

 

[Барбоса]

Something similar to how The Watchmen was adapted might be possible but I just don't think that Superman can be rebooted in the same way as Nolan has done with The Caped Crusader if only because the hero possesses superhuman powers rather than being a smart and rich vigilante and I find it difficult to see how the Man of Steel can be made into a realistic movie the same way as Batman

 

[Mr. Steve]

It would be great. Nolan has a vision of things, and his work with Batman was just great. However, he's probably going the other way with Superman. From what I can take from the Mythos, Superman is the depiction of "God Amongst Men." It would just be a regal approach when Superman first appears because in the costume, he isn't as constrained by what people will see because his alter ego is the exact opposite of him.

It would be interesting how the duality of Clark Kent/Superman can play out, and I'm damn sure that the idea that Routh had for the superhero would be a bit of an influence (according to Routh, he was playing 3 characters at once: Kent, Superman, and Kal-El).

 

[LamaNamaneumi]

I once heard that they were going to make a new Superman movie to try and get people to forget about the last one that was made.
Then after The Dark Night came out I heard that they were going to make a movie with Batman taking on Superman. After seeing the way Dark Knight ended I could see that movie being a possibility, not that I want to see it happen.
My girlfriends son said in a Will Smith movie I forget the name, but anyway, they had a poster in the movie that said Batman vs Superman coming soon. That might have been a well placed hint or just something to get people talking.
I would be interested to see what Chris Nolan would do with the franchise.

 

[jmt225]

I highly doubt this is true, and certainly hope that's the case.

Seriously, fuck Superman. He's the lamest comic book character of all time, and it's just not possible to make a good movie based off that character. Smallville only works because it's about WAAAAAYYYY more than just Superman and his super powers. However, with a movie, you don't have time to develop character like you can on a television program. And with someone like Superman, it's impossible to have a good two hour film about him, because the character is lame.

Besides, Christopher Nolan needs to be focusing on making Batman 3. That's what I, and I'm sure everyone else, wants from him. Let someone else take the nosedive and make that abortion of a film with Superman. I'm going to be extremely pissed if Nolan takes a Superman project over Batman 3. Words cannot express just how lame that would be.

 

[justinsayne]

I agree with JMT in that Nolan needs to be concentrating on the third installment of his Batman franchise, I feel if Nolan were to take on this project it would take his focus away from Batman

If they want to bring in someone else to take over the Superman franchise, bring in JJ Abrams, I mean if he could make a Star Trek movie that even people who despised Star Trek could enjoy, than surely he can a Superman movie that is just as exciting and fun to watch, perhaps make the Superman movie I have been waiting years for someone to make, a Superman: Doomsday movie, where it plays out the death of Superman with his massive battle with Doomsday, then the following movie of course would the resurrection of Superman, and fi you must put Lex Luthor in the movie then for fuck sake do something interesting and new with his fucking character instead of the same old dumb fucking real estate schemes they always have in every Superman movie, if I remember right didn't Luther run for President in the comicbooks?, why not do that with him in the movie?

 

[Kasey]

No offense to any of you in this thread...but some of you get Superman just as much as Jon Peters does. The only thing that is even remotely promising about the recent release of news leaks is that Jim Lee and more importantly Geoff Johns are involved with DC's new entertainment wing and out of the whole spate of suits involved they're the only ones that know their respective asses from a hole in the floor.

Nolan being involved in Superman is either going to be really good...or really bad. One Warner exec already went on record as saying that they wanted to do something "darker" with Superman. Fuck that. He, like the VAST majority of people miss the entire point of the character completely and can only wrap their heads around a paint-by-numbers character model like Batman or Spiderman.

Say what you will about Superman Returns...it was critically accepted and generated profit. The problems with the film stem from Singer's mis-use of the funds he was given and mostly with an inflated budget due to $50 million dollars worth of false starts and shitty ideas from people like Tim Burton and yes...J.J. ABRAMS that drug the development process through mud all the way back from my middle school days. Some of the problems that compounded SR's profit margin woes included a $10 million scene showing a return to Krypton and overdone running time with throwaway scenes like Clark's Smallville Flashback (which served no genuine purpose and obviously weren't cheap). The smart move would've been to allow Singer to do his sequel for a lesser budget and a greater focus on physical FX instead of letting Stetson and the boys at Sony Imageworks jack themselves off with rendering all day long. Pre-vis or not, they wasted time and money by the truckload.

Bryan always worked best in a limited capacity where he has a limited fiscal allowance (see X-men 1 & 2) and studio assholes like Tom Rothman breathing down his neck. The shittiest part of all this is that they would've been much better off shoring up the deficiencies of the current franchise, as opposed to starting from scratch (which last time took 11 years to remedy and the previously mentioned $50 million). Fresh development is costlier by far because you generally don't re-use anything from the first go-round. Cast, Crew, Costumes, etc. Instead, they'll all be developed from scratch or recast all over again. The search for a new Superman has been horrendous. And don't any of you mention Tom Welling.

To those who say Nolan needs to be focusing on Batman 3? You're right. If he's anything like Bruce Timm or Frank Miller I don't want him anywhere near Superman. Because if that's the case, he doesn't understand what makes Superman tick. Singer's take was a little off, but if they try to ape anything about The Dark Knight it will be the worst thing since Batman and Robin. I'm cautiously optimistic...but then again...I'm not that lucky and we are, after all, only five years removed from the same studio bringing us Halle Berry as Catwoman.

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

My girlfriends son said in a Will Smith movie I forget the name, but anyway, they had a poster in the movie that said Batman vs Superman coming soon. That might have been a well placed hint or just something to get people talking

That was 'I Am Legend' where a poster showing the Bat symbol over the top of the S-Shield, which is commonly used as the symbol for the Batman/Superman comics, when they work together, commonly referred to as 'World's Finest'. Beneath that was also a poster for a Green Lantern movie, and as they ARE actually filming that, it would stand to reason that a Bats/Supes movie could happen.

Seriously, fuck Superman. He's the lamest comic book character of all time

You've clearly never read Aquaman then.

and it's just not possible to make a good movie based off that character

Of course you can. By giving him more challenging villains to fight, and showing that he is succeptable to a variety of things, instead of taking the 'Man of Steel' moniker so literally all the time.

However, with a movie, you don't have time to develop character like you can on a television program.

Why would you need to develop any characters, it's fuckin' Superman! Who hasn;t heard of Superman for god's sake? He's one of the most iconic fictional characters of the last century.

And with someone like Superman, it's impossible to have a good two hour film about him, because the character is lame.

There's a million differen stories they could do that involves nothing but Superman. Forget the Daily Planet, forget Lois, Jimmy, Perry and the rest, forget Smallville. If they just did Superman fighting guys in Space i.e. Brainiac, then they could easily do a 2 hour movie.

a Superman: Doomsday movie, where it plays out the death of Superman with his massive battle with Doomsday, then the following movie of course would the resurrection of Superman

Do-able, but they probably wouldn't. Especially as Supes would be dead in the first half of the first film. Then you'd have to go into why Supergirl is some weird mutant created by Luthor, as well as going into the backstory of the Cyborg Superman, and then completely cut out Mongul and Green Lantern's involvement as well. Plus, they'd never do a funeral scene with all the DC heroes present.

They did already do an animated version called 'Superman: Doomsday' but rather than have 4 Supermen replacements, there was just one, and that ruined it for me personally.

we are, after all, only five years removed from the same studio bringing us Halle Berry as Catwoman.

Funnily i went on IGN again this morning and they've got a list of the 10 worst comic book movies of the last decade, and all of them are Marvel movies except for #1, which was in fact, Catwoman.

 

[Lee]

Today was full of big changes at DC Entertainment, and when DC President Diane Nelson spoke with MTV News earlier today about what those changes mean for the company, its creators and comics, I made sure to get her thoughts on a few other recent items of note, too.

Named the head of the new subdivision of Warner Bros. back in September 2009, Nelson is charged with managing the evolution of Superman, Batman and the rest of the DC Universe across various media platforms, and reports directly to Warner Bros. Pictures President Jeff Robinov.

"Wouldn't you like to know!" laughed Nelson when asked if there was any truth to the recent rumor that "The Dark Knight" director Christopher Nolan will oversee a reboot of the "Superman" movie franchise.

"We don't have any plans about that, and as I've mentioned, in the coming months we'll be making a lot of announcements about what our content plans will be," she added. "But right now, that's nothing but rumor — and we frankly don't say a whole lot more about rumor than that, so..."

As for the recent rumor that had the comics world ready to march on DC's headquarters with pitchforks and torches, Nelson said any plans for future "Watchmen" projects in comics or film were also strictly rumors at this point.

"No, that's all rumor," she said. "I'm not sure where it came from. We'll be looking closely at our whole library and making sure we're looking for opportunities to mine every property where it makes sense, and with integrity, but that's just rumor."

"No, there are no plans to do that," she reiterated.

So yeah Diane Nelson has denied the Nolan/Superman match up and I'm glad. Nolan's vision matches the vision of Batman as set out, not the vision of Superman. The point is they're the ying and yan of the DCU, Superman isn't dark and broody, Batman is. Althoguh I admit I disliked a lot of the aspects of Superman Returns whoever all in all it was good at dealing with the Superman myhtos.

My main thing is they need to focus on Clark Kent a bit more, with TV shows like New adventures and Smallville we've got to know and like Clark a lot more than the bumbling fool he is in the earlier movies, Returns didn't even bother going too much into his character.

 

[justinsayne]

Do-able, but they probably wouldn't. Especially as Supes would be dead in the first half of the first film. Then you'd have to go into why Supergirl is some weird mutant created by Luthor, as well as going into the backstory of the Cyborg Superman, and then completely cut out Mongul and Green Lantern's involvement as well. Plus, they'd never do a funeral scene with all the DC heroes present.

Yeah about the only thing I was expecting was the whole Superman/Doomsday battle leading to the death of Superman, I wouldn't copy it from the comicbook word for word, and I wouldn't have Superman dying half way through the first film, instead I would have his death be the end of the first film, this would leave the whole following film to focus on Superman's resurrection, now whether they do this by bring in the four "replacement" Supermen(Steel, Metropolis Kid, Man of Tomarrow, & Last Son of Krpyton), or just using some or maybe even one of them is another issue, personally I would prolly just bring in either Cyborg Superman or the Last Son, explaing their backstories is another issue you'd run into, this is where I would take the easy out, especially if using the Cyborg Superman, and say Lex Luther created him in some secret lab or some shit, basically these movies are just BASED on the storyline in the comicbooks, certain changes should and would need to be made, that goes with just about any comicbook to film transistion

They did already do an animated version called 'Superman: Doomsday' but rather than have 4 Supermen replacements, there was just one, and that ruined it for me personally.

I know I have it, I feel that if they used that and expanded on it they could make a decent Superman movie that movie goers will want to see, and you really would have wanted Steel in there?

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

Yeah about the only thing I was expecting was the whole Superman/Doomsday battle leading to the death of Superman, I wouldn't copy it from the comicbook word for word, and I wouldn't have Superman dying half way through the first film, instead I would have his death be the end of the first film, this would leave the whole following film to focus on Superman's resurrection, now whether they do this by bring in the four "replacement" Supermen(Steel, Metropolis Kid, Man of Tomarrow, & Last Son of Krpyton), or just using some or maybe even one of them is another issue, personally I would prolly just bring in either Cyborg Superman or the Last Son, explaing their backstories is another issue you'd run into, this is where I would take the easy out, especially if using the Cyborg Superman, and say Lex Luther created him in some secret lab or some shit, basically these movies are just BASED on the storyline in the comicbooks, certain changes should and would need to be made, that goes with just about any comicbook to film transistion

That's fair enough, i'm someone who'd want films to be as close to the source material as possible, which is why i loved the last 2 Batman movies so much. Literally the only problem i had with 'Dark Knight' was that Lucius Fox knows he's Batman. Everything else felt like in was watching a moving comic.

If they had a 'Death of Superman' movie, i'd be seriously angered if they didn't have Hank Henshaw, the Cyborg Superman as the primary villain, following Doomsday. The Mongul/Green Lantern stuff isn't necessary, but once Henshaw came into the story after 300 pages, i was hooked on that story.

I know I have it, I feel that if they used that and expanded on it they could make a decent Superman movie that movie goers will want to see, and you really would have wanted Steel in there?

I've always liked John Henry Irons personally, but the whole sub-plot in 'Reign of the Supermen', where he goes and battles a bunch of weapon smugglers when everyone else is freaking out about a teenaged Super-Clone, a Super-Cyborg and Superman with ray band goggles turning up, didn't really sit well for me.

Ok, so for future purposes, they were going to just lump Super-Boy in with the Teen Titans, and Cyborg Supes is one of those villains who appears once every 3 years, and obviously Eradicator was gone by the end of that arc anyway, so Steel did need some sort of introduction to make us care about him later, but that particualr story just didn't do it for me. He's awesome in arcs like '52' or 'Emperor Joker' though.

I think they could have done Supes: Doomsday with Eradicator and Cyborg Supes at least, instead of a singular adult clone. A Cyborg wiping out an entire city so he can transform the Earth into a new WarWorld was a lot more impactful than everyone hating the Super-clone just because he killed the Toyman, although i will say, they did get Luthor down perfectly in that movie.

 

[Kasey]

Well, seeing as Warner just replaced the legal team involved in the Superman rights case opposite Toberoff, I don't think there is much truth to any of this Nolan talk. I guess we'll have to wait and see...but I doubt that they'd sink their A-team into rebuilding a franchise when they aren't even sure as to what piece of the pie they'd even retain from the grosses after the creator's families get their respective shares. I am happy to see the families get what the creator's deserve (even if the families didn't do shit), considering how Supes' creators were given the heave-ho years back. But it bites balls that they are slowing down the movie end of things.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I would be interested in seeing a Superman movie developed by Christopher Nolan, as he's done wonders for the Batman franchise. It would be great to see the magic he could do on Superman, albeit I would not want it to be dark and twisted like Batman, but rather a better depiction of Superman and Metropolis. What needs to be in this movie, as you said, is another villain other then Luthor. As far as I know, his greatest enemy aside from Luthor was always Darkseid or Doomsday, so why not have him battle one of them in the next movie, and have the other appear at the end to set up another movie.

I feel the movie would also need to focus less on the relationship between Lois and Superman/ Clark Kent. Although this is a major part of the Superman storyline, she needs to be a minor part of the story and real story needs to be the villains.

Also, they need to freshen up Superman's look a bit. I'm not saying have him in a different suit or anything. But instead of the usual somewhat nerdy looking fellow, have him be a little more chiseled and defined, as I depict Superman as somewhat of a muscular guy. So in otherwords, choose a different kind of actor to play him, someone who is more muscle toned.

Also, set up an introduction to the character Steel. He is/was one of Superman's greatest allies, and the movie that was out years ago about him, which I believe starred Shaquille O' Neal, was not all that good. Reinvent the Steel character , and have him around Superman/ Clark Kent at various times until he ultimately decides to suit up himself. Which again I would set up for a sequel.

Those are my thoughts on this and here's hoping they come to fruition.

This I completely agree with, as I definitely feel like we need a new villain other than Lex Luthor. I would say Superman's next greatest or most famous nemesis would be between Brainiac or Darkseid, and I would likely side with Darkseid as being the better villain for the film.

Extremely ruthless and very powerful, the ruler of Apocolypse would make a fantastic nemesis for Superman, and give a break from Lex Luthor and his usual types of plots.

I must say I was rather disappointed in the portrayal of Darkseid in the latest Superman Animated series and much prefer the one in the film more closely resemble the Darkseid from the Super Friends. The voice actor for that part did an incredible job, and I think may have been the same person to voice the original Dr. Claw in the Inspector Gadget cartoon. Doing that type of voice had to tear his throat up.

But since Nolan did a fantastic job with Batman, I think he would do just as good a job with Superman, another superhero film.