Yeah, making things realistic rarely works. Also, I would like to see many characters interract in a Superhero movie. Look at the spider-man movies. Only spider-man and the bad guys, with the small exception of Harry Osborne being a good guy in the end. I would love to see a Spider-man movie where for instance Maddam Web was in it. Good old MW deserves to be in a movie.
Advice From a Fanboy: Superman Edition
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Superman is and always has been a dull, terrible superhero. He is the original Mary Sue character, and it kills any possibility of being intriguing. He is interesting only as an archetypal superhero, which leads to some cool deconstructions, but that's it. Superman Returns is an awful movie for the reasons movies are usually awful (shallow, poorly defined characters, gaping plot holes, etc), not because "they did Superman wrong."
Glad to get that off my chest. Stay frosty, folks.
Glad to get that off my chest. Stay frosty, folks.
Here's my thoughts.
One, please do not include the kid from the last film.
Two, bring in either Brainiac or Darkseid into the film. Brainiac if you want to give the film a much more sci-fi feel for it, or Darkseid if you want it more action packed. If it's Brainiac, let it be based on somewhat of the Brainiac of the Superman Animated Cartoon that used to be on the WB (now CW), an AI that used to work for Krypton and Jor-el before leaving the planet once it found out it was going to blow up, or even better, say he's the one who caused it to blow up in the first place. If it's Darkseid, make it as if he and his forces are going to invade the planet Earth. Making it apolcaylptic somewhat as they swarm the planet, and make Superman the guy who stands as the only thing that can fight off the invasion.
With Lex, instead of making him a guy who obsesses over real estate, make him as how the Superman animated series made him look like. An arms dealer. A guy who sells advanced technology to bad guys in the black market, while doing military arms dealing for a good public image. Make him into a guy who teams up with either Brainiac or Darkseid to access to whatever terrible device or BFG that they have with them, that can cause great trouble for Earth and even kill Superman, and then have him double-cross them so that he has the only access to the terrible device or BFG. Possibly even making him the guy who might be responsible for either Darkseid or Brainiac's defeat or death, then have Lex try and use that device or BFG to try and kill Superman.
Also, I don't like the idea of a silly villian like Toyman put in the film. If anything, should the villian be Darkseid, bring in the Female Furies. Hopefully adding Lashina into their ranks for fan service. Granny Goodness can be used as the silly villian, since she's after all, somewhat of an old hag.
One, please do not include the kid from the last film.
Two, bring in either Brainiac or Darkseid into the film. Brainiac if you want to give the film a much more sci-fi feel for it, or Darkseid if you want it more action packed. If it's Brainiac, let it be based on somewhat of the Brainiac of the Superman Animated Cartoon that used to be on the WB (now CW), an AI that used to work for Krypton and Jor-el before leaving the planet once it found out it was going to blow up, or even better, say he's the one who caused it to blow up in the first place. If it's Darkseid, make it as if he and his forces are going to invade the planet Earth. Making it apolcaylptic somewhat as they swarm the planet, and make Superman the guy who stands as the only thing that can fight off the invasion.
With Lex, instead of making him a guy who obsesses over real estate, make him as how the Superman animated series made him look like. An arms dealer. A guy who sells advanced technology to bad guys in the black market, while doing military arms dealing for a good public image. Make him into a guy who teams up with either Brainiac or Darkseid to access to whatever terrible device or BFG that they have with them, that can cause great trouble for Earth and even kill Superman, and then have him double-cross them so that he has the only access to the terrible device or BFG. Possibly even making him the guy who might be responsible for either Darkseid or Brainiac's defeat or death, then have Lex try and use that device or BFG to try and kill Superman.
Also, I don't like the idea of a silly villian like Toyman put in the film. If anything, should the villian be Darkseid, bring in the Female Furies. Hopefully adding Lashina into their ranks for fan service. Granny Goodness can be used as the silly villian, since she's after all, somewhat of an old hag.
I do have to somewhat agree with this. To me, Superman is, above all else, uninteresting. He's basically "too awesome to relate to"- unless the situation involves either glowing green space rocks or an opponent who regularly eats entire civilizations before washing them down with their morning coffee, Superman is not going to even break a sweat. There's no point in even watching, unless you like seeing bullets bounce off of a perfectly-sculpted chest. And in situations where he's teamed up with other, less omnipotent characters, his vulnerability suddenly comes from him holding himself back to give the B-squad a chance to look good.BaronFelX said:
You could take almost any other hero from any fictional universe and they'd be far more interesting than Superman. Why? There's always the chance of failure, even death, for them without ridiculously contrived or over-the-top circumstances. Rooting for Superman feels like rooting for the New York Yankees against a Little League team. Even if Hank Aaron shows up in the bottom of the 7th to bat for Tony's Auto Service, I think we all know what the final score will look like.
[small]I apologize to our international audience, and those who are less than familiar with baseball, for the American-sports-centric metaphor in the previous paragraph. Please pretend I instead referenced football [American or international], rugby, cricket, jai alai or whatever other sport you prefer.)[/small]
I wasn't a fan of Watchmen at all. If only they picked another comic series to adapt-
Well it doesn't matter. Snyder will give us good fight scenes and all, but I can't say I'm thrilled at him directing Soupes.
Seriously though, Terri Hatcher...
Well it doesn't matter. Snyder will give us good fight scenes and all, but I can't say I'm thrilled at him directing Soupes.
What, you mean the greatest television series ever made?The_root_of_all_evil said:
Seriously though, Terri Hatcher...
On the whole issue of properly portraying a Superman character without stripping him down or whatever, I can't help but kill a little shout-out to my favorite Supes-type character, Majestros.
See, Majestros is better than everyone, and he knows it. He selfishly imposes his own view of what's right on everyone else. He won't get busy with women, not because he doesn't want to, but because he actually believes there are no worthy females on Earth. He's an alien with an alien mindset. And because of that, I love the guy. He's awesome.
No surprise the Wildcats comics are good, 'cause Alan Moore wrote at least some of them. Hopefully Snyder will go the right way with a Superman movie. He already has experience characterizing omnipotent super beings.
Superman just sucks. He's good because somebody has to be, and all-powerful because somebody has to be. His "weakness" is readily dealt with at every opportunity and hardly ever feels like a legit threat. Apart from a series of Superman stories Alan Moore wrote as well as Final Crisis, I have to say I've hated everything Supes has ever been in... EXCEPT the first 3 seasons or so of Smallville. Say what you will, but Smallville did start off good. Just a shame it turned to complete bilge.
See, Majestros is better than everyone, and he knows it. He selfishly imposes his own view of what's right on everyone else. He won't get busy with women, not because he doesn't want to, but because he actually believes there are no worthy females on Earth. He's an alien with an alien mindset. And because of that, I love the guy. He's awesome.
No surprise the Wildcats comics are good, 'cause Alan Moore wrote at least some of them. Hopefully Snyder will go the right way with a Superman movie. He already has experience characterizing omnipotent super beings.
Superman just sucks. He's good because somebody has to be, and all-powerful because somebody has to be. His "weakness" is readily dealt with at every opportunity and hardly ever feels like a legit threat. Apart from a series of Superman stories Alan Moore wrote as well as Final Crisis, I have to say I've hated everything Supes has ever been in... EXCEPT the first 3 seasons or so of Smallville. Say what you will, but Smallville did start off good. Just a shame it turned to complete bilge.
I like smallville. It's an alternate reality where things happened different than they did im the movies or comics. It was interesting how they statred out with kryotnite effecting people to make the 'villian of the week' and now they are bringing in all kinds of other heroes from the comics in one form or another. I'm looking forward to him putting on the suit and flying away at the end of the series (he can't fly yet!).
Darkseid. Nigh apocalypse. World of Cardboard Speech. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cl_5UwS57X8
I know the dude is perfect and all, but you have to give him a little sympathy. His very existence is a threat to the world he calls home, and to his family and friends. His day to day activities, no matter what they happen to be, takes great restraint on his part. His strength and speed doesn't just lie dormant until he decides he needs it. He has to hold himself back. Give him a villain or situation where he can let loose. Then give him a reason get vengeful (because after all, he may be super, but he's still a man).
Superman isn't a deep character. In fact, he's pretty one note. But this just means you don't have to bog the film down in useless melodrama, because it doesn't work with Supes, and everyone already knows this. This is a good opportunity to just let the special effects fly and have him do amazing things. Then when he meets his match, the audience will be completely glued to the screen.
>.> My two cents. Probably what my opinion is actually worth. ^o^
I know the dude is perfect and all, but you have to give him a little sympathy. His very existence is a threat to the world he calls home, and to his family and friends. His day to day activities, no matter what they happen to be, takes great restraint on his part. His strength and speed doesn't just lie dormant until he decides he needs it. He has to hold himself back. Give him a villain or situation where he can let loose. Then give him a reason get vengeful (because after all, he may be super, but he's still a man).
Superman isn't a deep character. In fact, he's pretty one note. But this just means you don't have to bog the film down in useless melodrama, because it doesn't work with Supes, and everyone already knows this. This is a good opportunity to just let the special effects fly and have him do amazing things. Then when he meets his match, the audience will be completely glued to the screen.
>.> My two cents. Probably what my opinion is actually worth. ^o^
I've never really understood the criticism of Superman being too-powerful to be engaging, mostly because he's fictional. It's not like there's some kind of official "everybody knows" strength-chart telling us EXACTLY what he can do so we always know whether or not a given situation is within his capability.
Thusly, it's a pretty simple fix: Just don't make him TOO strong in the movie, comic or TV episode in question. DC Comics did this in the 80s, when "too damn powerful" actually HAD become a storytelling issue for them after so many decades. They "powered him down" editorially, essentially telling writers that stuff like shoving planets out of orbit was no longer on the "can do" list and encouraging artists to depict him exerting energy when doing especially superhuman tasks. "Stronger than any living man" instead of "stronger than anything ever," basically.
And even failing that, there's still the matter of simple storytelling to contend with: Technically, there shouldn't be any suspense in the "Harry Potter" series either, because almost everyone is a wizard who can conjure damn near anything they need. Solution? Bad guys with better wand-fu and scenarios where magic ain't gonna cut it. Luthor's scheme in the first Christopher Reeve film actually showed a near-perfect example of this: stage TWO evil acts, each which can ONLY be thwarted by Superman... but not at the same time. What was especially great about that was how well it also played into reaffirming the character - Superman is such an earnest do-gooder that a choice where no matter what SOMEONE is doomed actually would be nearly-impossible for him to manage.
Thusly, it's a pretty simple fix: Just don't make him TOO strong in the movie, comic or TV episode in question. DC Comics did this in the 80s, when "too damn powerful" actually HAD become a storytelling issue for them after so many decades. They "powered him down" editorially, essentially telling writers that stuff like shoving planets out of orbit was no longer on the "can do" list and encouraging artists to depict him exerting energy when doing especially superhuman tasks. "Stronger than any living man" instead of "stronger than anything ever," basically.
And even failing that, there's still the matter of simple storytelling to contend with: Technically, there shouldn't be any suspense in the "Harry Potter" series either, because almost everyone is a wizard who can conjure damn near anything they need. Solution? Bad guys with better wand-fu and scenarios where magic ain't gonna cut it. Luthor's scheme in the first Christopher Reeve film actually showed a near-perfect example of this: stage TWO evil acts, each which can ONLY be thwarted by Superman... but not at the same time. What was especially great about that was how well it also played into reaffirming the character - Superman is such an earnest do-gooder that a choice where no matter what SOMEONE is doomed actually would be nearly-impossible for him to manage.
You know, given what I've said about hating Superman in the thread on the Buried review, if they make good on that last paragraph and have him fly through the core of the moon just to get to the villain's dark-side-of-the-moon-fortress faster or some such, I might actually go see this movie.
By my lonesome.
Because nobody I know cares about Supes.
Of course you know the good guys are going to win, but Supes makes it too obvious, he can solve any problem in a million ways once he actually wakes up and gets on with it. He practically never uses his power in an interesting way, and when he does it looks rather pointless or overly gratuitous, like the time reversal madness, if he can do that he should be able to solve every problem that way and be done with it.
It's like if Harry Potter were the villain and the books were about the adventures of Voldemort. Sure, Voldy doesn't know how Harry survived way back when but if it ever comes to a straight up confrontation he's going to beat him hands down and any other outcome would come across like cheating.
You make your villain more powerful than your hero to allow for surprise and growth. It's an interesting situation to see it turned upside down with Superman but its been proven time and again writers can't seem to be able to handle it properly. That's the most important point. Because of the inverted power-relationship between hero and villain people get weirded out, not only the audience, but also the writers who are used to handle it the other way around.
The only way anyone can beat Superman is by cheating in some way, like the two evil acts at the same time dilemma. Or make a play on his ethical beliefs, with randomized innocent suicide bombers or something. The problem with Superman is that in the end the only way you can beat him is by making his powers irrelevant, in which case you can start to wonder why he has these powers to begin with.
I'd even go so far as those problems Supes can't deal with are of such a magnitude that the army would probably have been involved ages ago. Making it a case of why is Supes even doing this at all? This scenario would've been better off on 24 or House or Numbers or whatever as Superman is not made to deal with this type of problem, like milking a cow with a hammer.
By my lonesome.
Because nobody I know cares about Supes.
The proper response to Smallville is to just treat it as an alternate universe and ignore it. Bob got that one right. Whether or not the show is succesful or not should be beside the point, yeah, so Bob is a bit overzealous here and there, what else is new? (Sorry Bob.)unabomberman said:
Sure there's no exact measure but he's done so much over the years that its become completely ridiculous. In Harry Potter they realized the problem and killed Dumbledore just because of this exact reason. He's too powerful and kills the suspense.MovieBob said:
Of course you know the good guys are going to win, but Supes makes it too obvious, he can solve any problem in a million ways once he actually wakes up and gets on with it. He practically never uses his power in an interesting way, and when he does it looks rather pointless or overly gratuitous, like the time reversal madness, if he can do that he should be able to solve every problem that way and be done with it.
It's like if Harry Potter were the villain and the books were about the adventures of Voldemort. Sure, Voldy doesn't know how Harry survived way back when but if it ever comes to a straight up confrontation he's going to beat him hands down and any other outcome would come across like cheating.
You make your villain more powerful than your hero to allow for surprise and growth. It's an interesting situation to see it turned upside down with Superman but its been proven time and again writers can't seem to be able to handle it properly. That's the most important point. Because of the inverted power-relationship between hero and villain people get weirded out, not only the audience, but also the writers who are used to handle it the other way around.
The only way anyone can beat Superman is by cheating in some way, like the two evil acts at the same time dilemma. Or make a play on his ethical beliefs, with randomized innocent suicide bombers or something. The problem with Superman is that in the end the only way you can beat him is by making his powers irrelevant, in which case you can start to wonder why he has these powers to begin with.
I'd even go so far as those problems Supes can't deal with are of such a magnitude that the army would probably have been involved ages ago. Making it a case of why is Supes even doing this at all? This scenario would've been better off on 24 or House or Numbers or whatever as Superman is not made to deal with this type of problem, like milking a cow with a hammer.
I don't think Moviebob meant silliness literally, the correct word or words would be awe inspiring. Superman has always been about being the man capable of doing feats that are suppose to be unimaginable, being faster than a bullet leaping tall buildings in a single bound, putting the Super in man, and if you take that away he will cease being Superman.The Bandit said:
Now granted there is a boundary that shouldn't be crossed, for instance flying so fast to turn the earth the other direction just to turn back time. Superman has been known to nuke the fridge a whole bunch of times but have you noticed he's the only character that's been able to get away with it.
Moviebob is totally right in his last paragraph, they need to go nuts, but as long as what he's doing upholds the laws of physics and the space time continuum, I don't think there would be a problem.
Oh and...
Smallville sucks!!
What is with all the smallville hate?
Seriously it's better then Louis and Clark ever was by far....and in my opinion that was better then the previous Superman TV shows (although those were still quite good in their time).
Yeah, so it's a bit Dawson's Creak, but it was also about a Teen aged Clark growing up....it made sense. And in my opinion Micheal Rosembloom (not sure how to spell his last name) was freaking awesome. It was a sad day when he left the show especially since it picked up in so many ways at that point (stopped having all the enemies be meteor freaks and started incorporating the justice league etc)
I've watched the show for what 10 years now? I watched Louis and Clark before that as well (never missed an episode of either show). I'm a superman fan and I just can't see why everyone is so down on smallville. Yes it's not perfect, but it's kept me entertained for years.
The original Law and Order had the record as the show that I have watched consistently the longest...but it's gone now. Smallville has taken it's place as the longest show I watch every week and never miss an episode. This is the last season it will be on though and then almost everything I watch consistently will be fairly new (in the last 5 years or so), which I find very sad.
I am going to miss Smallville when it is gone and I highly doubt that Wonder Woman is going to do a good job taking it's place. Maybe I'll get lucky and the girl who plays Wonder Woman will at least be hot. I am very disappointed in "No ordinary Family" especially since the girl from Angel and more recently Dexter is a main character. Talk about a soap oprah, family show with a dash of super hero in it.
Smallville may have gone to Dawson's creek a few times (or many times early on) but at least it had some cool villains and story lines (at least I thought so) over the years. There are very few television shows that I have watched as many episodes of as Smallville and there were quite a few of them that I really enjoyed.
Seriously it's better then Louis and Clark ever was by far....and in my opinion that was better then the previous Superman TV shows (although those were still quite good in their time).
Yeah, so it's a bit Dawson's Creak, but it was also about a Teen aged Clark growing up....it made sense. And in my opinion Micheal Rosembloom (not sure how to spell his last name) was freaking awesome. It was a sad day when he left the show especially since it picked up in so many ways at that point (stopped having all the enemies be meteor freaks and started incorporating the justice league etc)
I've watched the show for what 10 years now? I watched Louis and Clark before that as well (never missed an episode of either show). I'm a superman fan and I just can't see why everyone is so down on smallville. Yes it's not perfect, but it's kept me entertained for years.
The original Law and Order had the record as the show that I have watched consistently the longest...but it's gone now. Smallville has taken it's place as the longest show I watch every week and never miss an episode. This is the last season it will be on though and then almost everything I watch consistently will be fairly new (in the last 5 years or so), which I find very sad.
I am going to miss Smallville when it is gone and I highly doubt that Wonder Woman is going to do a good job taking it's place. Maybe I'll get lucky and the girl who plays Wonder Woman will at least be hot. I am very disappointed in "No ordinary Family" especially since the girl from Angel and more recently Dexter is a main character. Talk about a soap oprah, family show with a dash of super hero in it.
Smallville may have gone to Dawson's creek a few times (or many times early on) but at least it had some cool villains and story lines (at least I thought so) over the years. There are very few television shows that I have watched as many episodes of as Smallville and there were quite a few of them that I really enjoyed.
Woah! I absolutley hated Dawsons Creek! I do however like Smallville. It started out pretty slow and did have a bit too much tween drama but over the past 5 seasons or so has grown up quite a bit. Yeah, there is still a bit of the old soapy crap but by and large the mythology has come to the fore and the show is all the better for it.Gildan Bladeborn said:
I was never a big Supes fan but watching Smallville got me interested in reading more of the books than the few I own.
Frankly I think that a link to Smallvlle wouldn't be a bad thing, but as the show does not follow the mythology too strictly it might be a wiser idea to just look at the books from the past decade or so and weave a plot from them.
Then again, a lot of the people who will go to see this movie wont be comic readers so WB would probably get better gross if they used the film to cap Smallville, in a gigantic, hugely destructive way of course >
I find the "don't listen to the fans" part a bit ironic, but you and I both know that they should listen to you on this stuff. I really hope they at least read the part about going all out for Superman, FREAKIN. SUPERMAN. Grabbing a plane isn't ANYTHING compared to lifting the Chrysler Building! As somebody in high school who wants to make movies someday, I'd like to say that your advice is worth taking.
I think if the forum posts can be considered a reasonable sample, you might be off the mark in your assessment of Smallville, Bob. Which is not to say you aren't right that it ought to have no place in the making of the movie.
Regarding spectacle, I think it's worth remembering that both 2012 and Independence Day were bad movies. Okay, yes, the latter was a fairly successful bad movie. But there was nothing in it that wasn't straight out of Screenwriting 101, not a single memorable character, not a single moment that bore thinking about for fifteen seconds after the credits. From the token gay character dying in a fireball to the President of the United States strapping into a jetfighter, there was nothing there that wasn't aimed at getting a brain-dead visceral response (never mind the queasiness later.) For that matter, Superman Returns didn't exactly skimp on spectacle. I agree that this shouldn't be downplayed into Dark Knight-style quasi-realism, but I'd strongly advise against making a CGriffic short-attention-span-fest, either. We've had plenty of those... And frankly, even of the good superhero movies of late have been at their weakest in the scenes when they gave in to the impulse to go that route.
Finally, I think there's one utterly crucial element that goes unmentioned in your piece: Superman is likable. The reason a site like Superdickery is so funny in part is because it so goes against our expectations. If Batman is the fans' fantasy that, pushed to the wall, they too could be the Baddest Motherf@$%#er on Earth (to borrow a phrase from Neal Stephenson), Superman is the fantasy that, given the powers of a demigod, we wouldn't change- we'd still be basically decent people who would seek to use those powers for good. Part of Superman Returns's fail was that we never really got any picture of the man behind the suit- we were to busy watching him do epic things. You don't have to go overboard, you shouldn't turn Superman into some sort of moody angst-fest by any means, but if Singer's X-Men movies showed us one thing, it's that handled properly you can get a real sense of a character if you're willing to take five minutes from things going boom. Just five minutes. Seriously.
Regarding spectacle, I think it's worth remembering that both 2012 and Independence Day were bad movies. Okay, yes, the latter was a fairly successful bad movie. But there was nothing in it that wasn't straight out of Screenwriting 101, not a single memorable character, not a single moment that bore thinking about for fifteen seconds after the credits. From the token gay character dying in a fireball to the President of the United States strapping into a jetfighter, there was nothing there that wasn't aimed at getting a brain-dead visceral response (never mind the queasiness later.) For that matter, Superman Returns didn't exactly skimp on spectacle. I agree that this shouldn't be downplayed into Dark Knight-style quasi-realism, but I'd strongly advise against making a CGriffic short-attention-span-fest, either. We've had plenty of those... And frankly, even of the good superhero movies of late have been at their weakest in the scenes when they gave in to the impulse to go that route.
Finally, I think there's one utterly crucial element that goes unmentioned in your piece: Superman is likable. The reason a site like Superdickery is so funny in part is because it so goes against our expectations. If Batman is the fans' fantasy that, pushed to the wall, they too could be the Baddest Motherf@$%#er on Earth (to borrow a phrase from Neal Stephenson), Superman is the fantasy that, given the powers of a demigod, we wouldn't change- we'd still be basically decent people who would seek to use those powers for good. Part of Superman Returns's fail was that we never really got any picture of the man behind the suit- we were to busy watching him do epic things. You don't have to go overboard, you shouldn't turn Superman into some sort of moody angst-fest by any means, but if Singer's X-Men movies showed us one thing, it's that handled properly you can get a real sense of a character if you're willing to take five minutes from things going boom. Just five minutes. Seriously.
Whereas I don't personally care about Smallville, it's not fair to say -nobody- cares about it. The people who love that show like it for a reason that, well, eludes me, but doesn't surprise me, and quite frankly adds a wonderful dimension to the mythos of Superman. Do you remember Lois and Clark? It's in a very similar vein! I would say its success was responsible for Smallville, and if you don't count its existence, you're not including one of the most amazing things about Superman. Superman, if you think about it, does what no other superhero has been able to do: he has managed to appeal both to the geekdom and to the sweetheart femme audience out there; the Grey's Anatomy crowd, for example, has a show that gives them some credence to not look down on the comic book world. My sister, for example, a 30 year old novelist, absolutely -loves- Lois and Clark AND Smallville, and she's no dumby. Like I said, I don't care for it myself, but it should say something to his credit that Superman can have the die-hard following of somebody like Quentin Tarantino AND have what is almost the equivalent of chibi-otaku-charm in North America. He unifies in unheard of capacities. Dude, he's Superman. Good article, though.
Good article, though.