Kal-El Will Be Seeing Double

Ah, the multiple villain motif. You know, the first Superman (1978) was great for many reasons. One, was that it had a single villain, Luthor. But then with Superman II the double villain (Luthor and the three Krypton outlaws) was introduced and comic book movies haven't been the same since. The first Tim Burton Batman is still looked on fondly as well because of one villain, the Joker.

Once these movies start introducing more than one it feels like the screenwriter is padding. With one villain more depth of character is required (and wanted) but with multiples it's not necessary because only snippets of each one are shown before moving to the next scene with the next villain.

Think of the James Bond films with one single, notable villain (Goldfinger for instance) and think of those that had multiples (Diamonds are Forever) and see how they compare. The single villain films are always better. The first Star Wars (A New Hope) had Vader, the first prequel (Phantom Menace) had multiples (Maul, Sidious, the Bureaucrats, etc)and look at those results.

Here's hoping for more comic books flicks that give us a battle between a good guy and a bad guy, not a good guy and a committee.

Jonathan
http://cinemastyles.blogspot.com

Reply

ok lex luthor yes you must have him. although if the movie has brainiac in it or someone formidable like doomsday. superman is the only hero worthy enough for 2 people trying to kick his ass. singer has not let us down yet really with x men and x men united. maybe superman was a jump off point to get to something bigger. alas we shall see or maybe they should have done like batman team and reinvent the genre.

thank you good citizens

Reply

Granted, Superman doesn't have the wide variety of rogues' gallery as Batman... but does Luthor have to be in almost every movie?

Reply

I noticed you most of you guys started linking AOL moviefone's website instead of IMDB for movie titles--it's pretty lame, but I understand that you gotta do what you gotta do for your bosses.

Reply

You act like the thing completely flopped at the box office. It did pretty well actually, when you look at the worldwide take. I for one really enjoyed it. From what I understand, the DVD has performed pretty well, too.

I think the feeling at WB is that the difficult job of re-establishing the character is done, and now they can focus on just making exciting movies, instead of figuring out what continuity to use.

Reply

I have to agree w/ Scramble, I liked the movie...was it everything I'd hoped for...not by a long shot.... but I still enjoyed it. And the Box Office brought in more than Batman Begins yet thats considered a huge box office hit. I do hope the next Superman movie introduces something...well more... that does up the ante so to speak.

Reply

Well one movie wasn't supposed to be good, and was. The other was over-rated tripe and the sequel isn't highly anticipated.


Which movie could I possibly be talking about?

Reply

"Over-rated tripe" is in the eyes of the beholder, just like some postings. Superman Returns was a really good film that was a bit long. The sequel will be better. Batman Begins was pretty good also, and I believe the sequel will do even better. The shuttle scene in returns was one of the best special effects in ANY comic-genre film that I have ever seen. People act as if Superman Returns lost money. I wish I had the money it made in cinema-release and DVD sales.

Peace,
Rick

Reply

I liked "Returns". It had some great action sequences but wasn't some hyperactive cartoony superhero flick, like what the first Batman movies devolved into.

Lapper, my favorite Star Wars film was Empire Strikes Back, which had at least 3 villians (if you include Lando, which I do). And the second Superman movie was better overall in every aspect than the first one was. Blanket statements like "single villain films are always better" should be washed and hung out to dry, like blankets normally are.

Reply

Superman needs a complete remake, not another sequel from what was already a worn-out 80’s franchise. To date, Christopher Reeve was the quintessential Superman and Gene Hackman was a good Luthor. Time to let it go. Now, 20 years after the last miserable Superman vs Lex Luthor movie (Quest for Peace), we are being asked to watch actors “acting” like the original actors. How about a fresh story? How about a Superman vs someone else movie? Would it be so bad to drop the over dramatic, flamboyant Lex Luthor for a movie. Give us a year one story with a fresh look. The cookie cutter approach to Superman has tuned me out completely. Superman vs Luthor, or Superman vs someone else with Lex Luthor plotting in the background with some kryptonite in his pocket. I will agree from above that "Batman Begins" was a good effort. It was also a reboot and doesn't compare to Superman. Let's hire actors to mimic Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson and see how great that is. Then, just for grins, let's have the Joker be in every single movie as comic relief. That sounds ridiculous, but it is exactly what we are still being asked to swallow for Superman.

Reply

So what if Bryan Singer has the balls the make a superhero film that has more in common with Brokeback Mountain than it does with Spider-Man, it's called having audacity and vision to make a grand cinematic embodiment of America and the best superhero film ever (I've seen it about eight times, gets better and better). Bizarro and Mister Mxyzptlk on the big screen in summer 2009, awesome.

Reply

"So what if Bryan Singer has the balls the make a superhero film that has more in common with Brokeback Mountain than it does with Spider-Man."

What film were YOU watching?
...not that there's anything wrong with that.

Rick

Reply

It's Brainiac.

After Returns was released, Singer said the next film would feature the evil robot genius Brainiac. Seen in the Superman Animated Series and Justice League cartoons, it would be the first time a live action version of the character was ever done.

And it would liven up a sleepy franchise.

http://www.dailypop.wordpress.com

Reply

I wonder if Brainiac is quad-core.

Reply

Holy crap, I didn't realize there were still comments going on here.

Kevjohn,

Where's the love? I never made a blanket statement, I made a wisely worded... uh,... it was more of a... okay, hell it was a blanket statement. You try typing out comments while at work half drunk.
But seriously, Lando was not a villain, misguided, but not a villain. And Yoda certainly wasn't and
Boba Fett was a walk-on so I would definitely say
Empire is a single villain flick - Vader.

I will strive to avoid blanket statements in the
future. Until then, let me just say that comments
by kevjohn are always better than mine - Always!

Jonathan

Reply