'Superman' Sequel Might Reveal an "Angry God"
Filed under: Action, New Releases, Warner Brothers, Box Office, Movie Marketing
There was a report in the Hamilton College student newspaper about a recent visit paid to the school by Thomas Tull (a Hamilton alumnus), chairman and CEO of Legendary Pictures, the successful production company responsible for respectable hits like Batman Begins, deplorable indulgences like 10,000 BC, and middle-of-the-road successes like Superman Returns. The article surveys numerous issues from Tull's visit, most of which pertain to his professional history. Near the end, however, it's noted that Tull "hopes to invoke more of the image of 'an angry god'" with the next Superman film. Subtitled Man of Steel, it's a sequel that's been in the works for quite some time. Wonders Slashfilm: "Maybe Man of Steel will have a Superman who begins to make irrational emotion-based decisions, throwing cars around out of anger, which will paint him as an Angry God in The Daily Planet?" Maybe, but that's a big deduction for what appears to be a throwaway statement. Whether or not Tull even has specific details about the content of the next Superman film isn't clear, but his emphasis on the character's strength, rather than his pathos, sounds like a response to criticisms of the last movie. Many audiences found it light on action and heavy on a lot of needless other things. Superman Returns was hardly a flop, grossing over $200 million in the U.S. alone, but it could have done much bigger business if it sacrificed some of the contemplative drama for a little more speed.
Anyone familiar with Superman's plights in either the comics or the earlier films knows that he can kick some major ass, and constantly struggles against the impulse to abuse his abilities (such as when he hesitantly turned back time to save Lois Lane in the first Superman). It's too early to say what direction the new movie will take, but there's little doubt that it'll come together at some point. However, unlike the Hulk franchise, the next Superman movie won't be a do-over--but it just might be a do-better.
In related Superman news, Collider spoke with Brandon Routh recently about all things Superman and Justice League. Routh said he hopes to be shooting Superman: The Man of Steel early next year, and that he would turn down a role to play the superhero in a JLA movie if ever approached.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-23-2008 @ 12:15PM
Gina said...
Egads. Like "Smallville" didn't give us enough of a petulant, self-centered, spoiled rotten, abusing-his-powers-at-every-opportunity Superman with a god complex who's better at causing suffering than stopping it. Does no one believe in actual heroes anymore?
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 12:48PM
Riley Freeman said...
i dont want brandon routh he seems boring and bound to come out of the closet
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 4:24PM
nate said...
what.
4-23-2008 @ 12:57PM
eugene said...
I got it. Superkid gets nabbed and killed by a shadowy government group when they decide to "study" him. It shakes clark's faith in humanity and superman goes on a rampage lashing out in his heart broken state. Something something happens, the real villain is revealed to be none other than cyborg who used harvested cells from superkid to clone himself a body capable of fighting superman.
huge fight ensues and superman is forced to confront his own grief and rage and is able to defeat cyborg. Gives a big speech at the end saying he's sorry to let everyone down and ends with a scene atop a shadowy rooftop in the dark of night. Lots of heavy cloud cover... he drifts towards a dark shadow and holds out his hand which is holding a small dark box. From the shadow a black gloved hand reaches out to take the box and superman tells him, "something something poignant something something I trust you something something." And flies up up and away to the familiar superman flying over the world as the credits roll.
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 1:02PM
DAVID F said...
So sad.
Routh wasn't the worst thing about "Returns"....that belongs to the script, Spacey & Bosworth (do these two have to be in EVERY movie together? Who follows who around?). It's obvious that Superman needs to fight some serioud badass, some alien like Mongul or a alien tech threat like Brainiac.
Ah well. How do they write Superman outta bein' a deadbeat father of a bastard son?
Hmmm?
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 4:25PM
nate said...
"but his emphasis on the character's strength, rather than his pathos, sounds like a response to criticisms of the last movie."
it's been a long standing note that the first one was framed to introduce the pathos of the character and that the second film was to be much more action orientated. So, Im not sure if this "idea" is any new reflection on anything.
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 6:41PM
bean counter said...
A Superman Returns sequel could experience a drop of 30% or more from the already anemic box office of the first film. The film didn't break even in theaters. If not quite flop then it was unquestionably a disappointment. Further disappointment was the content of the film. It split the fan base right down the middle. For the latest sign of this, see the SuperheroHype forum poll of fans, with 50% wanting a total reboot and the other half wanting a sequel. That is an astonishingly high number of Superman fans who find a sequel unacceptable.
They've voiced deep concerns about the fundamental structure of SR, ranging from illegitimate child, the broken moral code of Superman, and a too close interpretation of Superman as Jesus. That is the tip of the iceberg in their list of concerns. Delve into SHH's board and you'll spend days going through pages and pages of detailed critique on why they simply find this film's characterization of Superman intolerable and have sworn to forgo its sequel. Regardless of what that half of Superman fandom says, we can expect many to recant and pay to see the sequel, even if bitterly so, but not all of them shall. This puts the sequel in a box office hole, struggling to reach the returns of the first film.
They can replace the lost revenue with an infusion from action fans, presuming that the sequel is reconfigured as Michael Bay-ish action film, with a lighter comedic tone, far from the tone of “angry god”, “wrath of khan” or the general depression of the first film. A successful swap of that lost audience of Superman fans with pure action movie fans will have the resulting box office back up to SR levels. Considering studio unhappiness with the margin on SR, that is problematical. In this environment of the split base/swap base strategy, the only way to improve margin is to cut production cost. However, the cut production costs generally result in more drama and less action. That’s precisely the thing to drive away all the necessary new action fans. The one thing they don’t want to see, and hated about SR, was more drama. Michael Bay is the one of the few directors capable of taking a ~$150 million budget and delivering a wall-to-wall action film tentpole. Singer, for all of his virtues, isn’t so capable. He, like most directors, makes up for lack of action with more drama. This worked out in X-men 1&2 box office-wise, since he had the support of the “nerd” core fans, who eat up drama. Such “nerd” core fans are the ones who’ve fractured over SR and need to be replaced with action fans with no drama tolerance. Perhaps the best bet to achieve all objectives for a sequel, considering its hostile environment, is to get Michael Bay himself to do it.
Reply
4-28-2008 @ 12:56PM
Kevin said...
this is exactly the type of over-analysis of movie making that has hollywood churning out derivative crap year after year. Don't worry about box office projections or marketing ploys or any of that junk. Come out with an awesome superman movie and people will pay to see it, bottom line. Figure out what it is about the character that has made him so resilient throughout the years and capitalize on those characteristics. If you do that then the movie will be a smash hit, bottom line.
4-23-2008 @ 8:37PM
Batzarro(A.K.A Rap-Rock Cameo) said...
Maybe try working Superman...as a Superhero? What a concept that'd be...
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 9:04PM
AJ Wiley said...
It's not that Superman Returns was a "contemplative drama"...it was that it was a BAD contemplative drama.
Singer took the already boring character and turned him into a regular dullard. I'm not saying that I need or want ActionActionAction!, but some emotion or worthwhile characters would be nice.
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 10:22PM
Skapig said...
There's nothing wrong with contemplative drama surrounding Superman as long as it's done well. This was not the case with Superman returns, though.
I really wanted to like the film, but found that it was overwhelmingly bad. Poor casting, rehashed plot devices, and an awful lot of cheesiness made it unbearable. I'm sucker for comic adaptations, so I'm usually pretty forgiving to just allow for a good time. In this case, I made an exception.
Superman Returns fails in its execution and squandered the big opportunity that was presented in order to revive the movie franchise.
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 10:42PM
love stoned said...
what, you didn't appreciate the BabyMama drama? Doesn't everyone go to a Superman movie hungering for that?
In other news, some brain damaged fool is running around various blogs claiming insider news that WB/DC will kill off Clark Kent and replace him with Jason/Chris Kent as the new Superman. Supposedly this is so the corporate scumbags don't have to pay the Siegel and Shuster heirs anything for the continued use of Superman. I have to laugh. Not even the morons in charge are that stupid.
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 11:32PM
Ross Carroll said...
I've said it once - I'll say it again. `Truth, Justice and the American way'. Either as one movie or a trilogy, maybe a bit hamfisted but strewth! It's what made Supes inspiring in the first place. Not just knockin' giant robots and aliens into space but standing up for the little man. Sob! Why won't they listen!!
Reply
4-24-2008 @ 3:09PM
Eric H said...
The angry god will be our own if a sequel to the crapfest is made.
Reply
4-28-2008 @ 3:45PM
nicole said...
what i think should happen is the Jason aka super-kid gets killed by someone that superman has either put away in jail or someone that hates superman and in the result superman cant handle it and leaves the city. Bizzaro,Brainic plot to take over the city and the world with the help of lex they comes to town and start causing problems everyone is really scared and starts to lose faith in continue causing havoc in the city superman returns to have a huge face off with bizzaro and Brainic as he find out that their the ones that killed jason.
Reply
6-10-2008 @ 2:08AM
Kenny said...
Superman returns obviously left a bad taste in EVERYONE'S mouth. With that being said so did the Batman directed by Schumacher. Very similar situation. So what did they do after the "bad" Batman experience? THEY STARTED OVER, started fresh and made a great Batman Begins and that's exactly what they should do with this Superman character. Dump Routh, dump Singer and even dump the whole Christopher Reeve inspirations. Make Superman buff, not scrawny for starters, bigger than Dean Cain. Bring in Hans Zimmer for a new score. I like the old Superman theme music but that even needs to go. To contrast the goodie two shoes image of superman you need a dark villain with a demented twist similar to heath ledger but with super powers. The costume needs to be changed again as well, Singer's version didn't cut it, I don't know if you should go back to the old costume or what but Singer's doesn't work. Above all you just need a groundbreaking set of visuals to get the franchise going again. The only visuals that were somewhat eye catching were the out of control jet that superman saves. I like Superman more than any other comic book character and I think if they were to make a sequel with Routh it would be a major flop. I'll praise Singer's attempt to reinvent Superman but I just think all the pieces in his puzzle didn't quite fit together. But please..please I hope they continue to make Superman movies the rest of my life, just good ones.
Reply