Discuss: Could Steven Spielberg Direct Superman?

Mark Millar did say something recently about having a 3 picture script in mind to pitch to warner and taht he had a big name director behind him.

Is this who he meant?

http://www.superherohype.com/news/supermannews.php?id=7634

Reply

Spieldberg has directed some of my favorite movies ever. I'd bet the ranch on him anyday.

Reply

And bingo was his name-O.....

Reply

Spielberg's Superman, would NOT be a good film. Just like Brian Singer's Superman was NOT a good film, just like Kevin Smith's Superman Would NOT have been a good film. Donner's Superman was an OK film, which is the best anyone can wish for. Why? BECAUSE SUPERMAN IS A BAD CHARACTER. I say this only in reference to film. Superman is a wonderful comic book icon, but that's where he should stay. The problem with Superman is that he's PERFECT, and perfect characters with no flaws, inevitably make for a boring film. The most iconinc film characters are all flawed, Indiana Jones, Citizen Kane, Batman...But Superman? Completely perfect. There is never any doubt, about getting the job done. Which is boring!!!!! It doesn't matter what kind of monsters you throw at him or what director you have attached, if the character has no personal demons, it's not going to be interesting. That being said, I know I will see another three Superman movies during my lifetime, at the very least.

Reply

Better idea. Spielberg, Captain America.

Reply

Someone, get this man more money. You know there's someone somewhere being paid to come up with these same ideas. Why can't that be you and Eugene and then maybe I could enjoy twice as many movies a year?

Reply

I gotta agree with Jaguar Paw, there's nothing intrinsically interesting about the character beyond all the superpowers; and frankly, this song has been sung many times over.

I think the world of Superman could merit some exploration, but with out Kal-El at the focus. There could be some good tale-telling in the Death of Superman saga, or an end-of-days look at the events on Krypton that forced his parents to send him to Earth.

But the Kent v Luther arc has been so overtold that it ended up on CW, for crying out loud.

Reply

Spielberg for Superman would be appropriate. I never understood why Metropolis stood as just another city. Metropolis needs its own feel, look, and style. Gotham is gritty, though TDK, took away a bit of the feel by doubling Chicago for it in daylight. Metropolis is supposed to be a culmination of technological advances, a city of possibility and hope - Superman's domain. Like the post says, Spielberg can fill in the Americana appeal of the Superman mythos.

Reply

In a comment I made here recently, I said that Spielberg would be the perfect person to direct a Superman film, and hey, I guess I wasn't alone!

If they're actually going to make another Superman movie, the only way to make it not pointless would be to get Spielberg in the director's chair.

Reply

The problem with every Superman movie except for SUperman II were the villains. Lex Luthor is just not interesting unless he's got some kind of "invulnerability suit."

The way to go with Superman is to do what Marvel comics do so well. They show how he can combine the use of their powers so they are not just punching and kicking.

Superman needs a real super-villain. One that he can't kill with one punch and that has super strength also. The last time this was brought up I thought the way to go would be to show Supes fed up with the crime, grime and slime in the world and decides to take over.

You could have him pushed over the edge by the death of a loved-one and he then decides enough is enough. The whole world tries to fight him and we could even have some super villains recruited to help.

That would be KICK ASS. We could see Superman having to use his powers in a directed manner rather than showing him lift something large - which is a recurring theme.

The Superman double from the 80s could actually work now. Except that it is actually Superman with a huge chip on his shoulder. The script for the Batman vs. Superman movie should definitely be looked at. (dailyscript.com)

Reply

He'd fuck it up, plain and simple. I'm sure he'd make some uber propaganda piece that has little to do with what makes Superman special. But in all honesty, do we really need another superman film? I don't think so. That last one sucked big time, I mean big time and the studios don't even have the talent to make a really amazing film with a story. Let's just watch superman turn into a VFX odyssey with no meaning. Oh and while you're at it shoot it HD! Fucking pansies!

Reply

This is an interesting idea, but one that I think is unfounded. There are plenty of directors out there who have a real passion for Superman and what he stands for. Spielberg is a great filmmaker no doubt, but he has not expressed any real interest in Superman.

Christian M Howell said the following: "You could have him pushed over the edge by the death of a loved-one and he then decides enough is enough. The whole world tries to fight him and we could even have some super villains recruited to help."

But this goes against what Superman stands for.

Bryan Singer said it right when he said:

" I think people right now, more than ever have become, we've become a individual, selfish culture, at times. I think people worry. People look at themselves more than they look at the people around them. I think he represents that kind of character that can walk among us, but has a selfless side. Perhaps it comes from his heritage, his upbringing on the Kent farm, in the heartland of America. Or perhaps it just comes from the way he sees the world. But he's got a part to him. He's got an inspiring side. Yes, it would be nice if he could come save us from terrible things that are happening that we see on the news every night. He is the light at the end of the tunnel, a breath of fresh air. He is all those things that I've always said. But I think, as a superhero, instead of being angst ridden or bent on revenge, he chooses to see the good. And when there is so much bad happening, it's very, very important to be able to look at a character, even if he's in tights [laughs] and say, Hey maybe I can be a good guy like that."

"They can be a great people, Kal-El. They only lack the light to show the way." He is that light. And that's something he's maintained for seventy years. He's always been the good guy. And for me to shy away from that, or make him the dark Superman or the angry Superman, would be irresponsible."

The above quotes are from here http://www.superherohype.com/news/featuresnews.php?id=4972

Now, I'm not suggesting that Spielberg who inherently rejects pessimism will make Superman some sort of dark conflicted character who reaches a certain point of no return and becomes some sort of angry God.

What I am saying is that there are people out there who believe in Superman for what he stands for (I certainly am admiring of a character who has the above ideologies). I think it's easy to get carried away in the whole he must have an adversary whom he will pummel.

I'm not very learned about the Superman comics, I just have seen the movies (and the abysmal Dean Cain TV series) but to me Superman represents the above quote by Singer.

If Spielberg really does have the passion and enthusiasm to showcase Superman then I'm all for it. I just don't want to see him becoming a tainted conflicted figure. Spielberg certainly has the expertise when it comes to economical cinematic language and stunningly crafted action sequences.

Many people were upset at the kid in Superman Returns, I was pretty upset about it myself, but I've watched the movie plenty of time now, and from what I can gather the kid is not his son. It seems absurd to me that Singer, having said the above and a lot more would allow Superman (out of wedlock (remember this is old school americana) to impregnate a woman, then leave her for 5 years). The scene towards the end where he repeats the lines Jor El said to him to the kid, seems more a wanting to be at one with humanity ("Even though you've been raised a human being you are not one of them") than it is a father child thing.

Anyway that's just my opinion.

I hope to see an entertaining and engaging movie. Hopefully it has a little more direct confrontations with an enemy than what was present in Superman Returns, and I hope whoever directs it shows a passion and dedication to the man of steel.

Fan rant over!

Reply

As a Superman fan I have to say to those who are saying the problem with Superman is that he is perfect, I don't know what you are basing this on. If we are talking comics first off there are multiple versions of Superman in the comics so I don't know which version you consider perfect. The most powerful version of the character is from the 70's and 80's and I doubt if the target movie demographics well be too aware of that version. Superman is not perfect. What he is also not is tortured. Batman and Spider-man are haunted by their past Superman is a hopeful character. He's not the type of character that you'd used to tell an everyman inner turmoil type of story. If you really need that you could have that from the supporting cast. A Superman movie needs to be a big action flick. Movie effects and budgets may restrict a world or galaxy spanning type of story. A soul-searching/finding who I am, would make a boring movie. That doesn't mean the two-villain formula that has become so popular is they way to go either. One villian with lot of huge action would be better. These characters are not all the same. Storytelling that works for some doesn't work for all. Even in comics a Superman story isn't like a Batman story. A story featuring Superman and Batman together isn't like a story when either is solo.

The problem with a lot of movies is that they try to use the same formula that worked for some other movie. Renaming some characters doesn't make it a different movie. Some movies are good because they are somewhat original. Doesn't mean the movies that copy it are going to be just as good.

Reply

2 things.

1. Spielberg isnt a good choice for Superman. I think the next film needs to introduce some pathos to the character, and Spielberg would likely retain the conservative ideal that is the classic superman.
id like to see Paul Verhoeven or Frank miller do a superman flick. I think either of them wouldbe brave enough to take his character apart.

2. True, its difficult to introduce real conflict to a character to is intrinsically perfect/indestructible, but some of the comics have shown that its possible. the scope just needs to get bigger. Read The Dark Knight Returns.

Man, i was bored to tears by Singer's supe. I dont remember him throwing a single punch.

Reply

YES HE CAN, END OF DISCUSSION

Reply

Well obviously I'm going to be in the minority, but I say no to Speilberg. The young ET director of years past? The one who gave us the original Indiana Jones and Fantastic Stories and Close Encounters? Yes. That man I'd love to see direct Superman. The current Speilberg of Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull, A.I. and War of the Worlds? No.

Reply

spielberg? hell no. he screwed up indy 4.

in a heartbeat, roland emmerich.. knows how to stage big-scale destruction, with real world cinematography. (the day after tomorrow, 10,000 bc )

Reply