Nolan to mentor Superman reboot

[The Dark Knight]

Yes, even replace the iconic theme that perfectly captures the character in every way possible.

I have mixed feelings on this - to me the theme is more iconic than the symbol on his chest.  I would have liked it if there was more of Williams' themes in SR than Ottiman's - and i would wish for any new movie to be the same.

Time to move on. It's how it goes. Batman moved on just fine without Elfman. Even though I prefer his music hands down. For a reboot, I don't see how this is any different. I think a true reboot should sever all ties to the past.

Can't wait for Kal El's round table discussion with Lane, Perry, and White about what it means to be a hero.

I know exactly what you mean. Nolan seems to get themes, such as fear with Batman Begins and anarchy with The Dark Knight, and then rams them home at every opportunity. Characters sit (or stand) around rambling on with speeches for minutes on end about that particular theme. Pretty tiresome, and I don't really think it's natural or commonplace.

[Paul (ral)]

Time to move on. It's how it goes. Batman moved on just fine without Elfman. Even though I prefer his music hands down. For a reboot, I don't see how this is any different.

Batman's theme didn't really move on. Neither Goldenthal or Zimmer's themes had the impact that Elfman's did.  Though themes did move on for Batman (not for the better) - I feel that since Williams themes have been present throughout all 5 movies they should stay - just as Bond has retained his.

[thecolorsblend]

Time to move on. It's how it goes. Batman moved on just fine without Elfman. Even though I prefer his music hands down. For a reboot, I don't see how this is any different. I think a true reboot should sever all ties to the past.

Agreed, agreed and agreed again.  The entire point of relaunching the franchise is to reboot the brand.  That means we'll need even a new main title.  And honestly, as good as the Williams theme is, it's not appropriate for everything.  I couldn't see it holding up in an All-Star Superman type of movie.

I know exactly what you mean. Nolan seems to get themes, such as fear with Batman Begins and anarchy with The Dark Knight, and then rams them home at every opportunity. Characters sit (or stand) around rambling on with speeches for minutes on end about that particular theme. Pretty tiresome, and I don't really think it's natural or commonplace.

I felt like TDK wasn't as bad about that as BB was.  If the theory about Goyer directing the Superman movie is true... well, if he's the writer too (which would make sense), we could be in trouble given that his BB script is, well, his BB script.

On the other hand, Goyer is very much of the comics world so at least there's that.

Between this and the Spidey reboot, my nerves are just friggin shot these days...

[The Dark Knight]

The entire point of relaunching the franchise is to reboot the brand.  That means we'll need even a new main title.  And honestly, as good as the Williams theme is, it's not appropriate for everything.  I couldn't see it holding up in an All-Star Superman type of movie.

Agreed. I love the theme, but it isn?t a heaven sent deity or anything. And frankly, the very association with the Routh film signalled the end for that theme.

Between this and the Spidey reboot, my nerves are just friggin shot these days...

To ribbons. Honestly, this Spider-Man reboot is worse. Even though I?m biased to the character. At least there, we had a concrete series on the roll. This reboot is just after Singer?s abortion, so surely the next film can't be worse. Right?

[Paul (ral)]

Agreed. I love the theme, but it isn?t a heaven sent deity of anything. And frankly, the very association with the Routh film signalled the end for that theme.

The only thing that saved SR's score was William's motifs - but even then they were used/translated poorly.

Williams' Superman theme is my favourite movie score of all time - I spent last week driving to work with it blasting at full volume. Goosebumps...f'ing goosebumps. To loose it for the sake of being new is a huge mistake to me.

[The Dark Knight]

The only thing that saved SR's score was William's motifs - but even then they were used/translated poorly.

Williams' Superman theme is my favourite movie score of all time - I spent last week driving to work with it blasting at full volume. Goosebumps...f'ing goosebumps. To loose it for the sake of being new is a huge mistake to me.

I listen to the themes quite a bit too. And I?m admittedly not that much of a Superman fan. I know it?s clich?, but we wouldn?t lose anything. We will always have that music. You can still drive around to it. We would in fact be gaining.

We?d gain new sounds of the character that otherwise would be left unexplored. Would it be better? Who knows. We definitely won?t know if we play it safe, clinging onto the past.

I feel a reboot has to totally re launch the brand for a new generation.

[thecolorsblend]

Okay, ya know what?  It's time to be constructive.  Nobody wants a whiney jerkboy who complains about everything all the time but never has anything useful to say.  Nobody wants to be that guy so I'll throw out some ideas here.

The Superman movies we've gotten up to now have been relatively realistic.  There's realism as Nolan has done it with the Batman movies but there's also the realism-lite we've seen in the Reeve movies and Singerman.

As with Donner, I find that approach limiting.  Good as STM is, I could never envision Brainiac or Metallo roaming the streets in that movie.  Can't.  Cannot.

On top of that, people (consciously or not) expect a quasi-realism vibe in Superman films.

I therefore say we should go the complete other direction and do something extreme.  Rather than running away from the comics roots, I say we need a movie that embraces the science-fantasy nature of the material.  Superman is not a street level hero who's existence is in any way plausible in our world.  Putting him in those kinds of stories is therefore a disservice to the character.

No, my good friends, I say we make a movie where things like the old school renegade scientist Lex Luthor robbing banks with heavy duty sci-fi gear (giant robot?) is a relatively common sight.  A world where supervillains are thick as fleas and Superman is needed to turn them back and defeat them.

Some folks prefer the corporate Lex.  I admit I have a few preferences there.  But the entire point of a corporate Lex is to make a character who always "gets away with it".  Something like that works great in an episodic format like comics where multiple conflicts and subplots can be carried on for months, even years.  A film is a different animal.  If you make a film where the lead villain gets away with it, how do you not make the hero look weak?

On the other hand, if the corporate Lex is busted in one film... why even use the corporate Lex in the first place?

Superman is the only survivor of the planet Krypton; let's keep it that way.

I'm less concerned about casting an unknown for Superman than I am about someone who looks the part.  Christopher Reeve looked the way Curt Swan had been drawing Superman for years.  We don't need to find another Reeve, we need to find someone who looks the way the character has been drawn for the past several years and can play the part.  This isn't Shakespeare; we don't need to angst over his ability to play a dual role.

Speaking of dual roles, Reeve went waaaaay over the top with his nerdy, dorky, clod routine.  Some of the best Supermen have had more hardass Clark Kents- Fleischer, Adventures of Superman/George Reeves and STAS.  The comics played him straight for years too and that worked pretty well.  Leave the nerd in the past.  Whether Lois knows Clark is Superman or not, there's no friggin way she'd saddle herself with some Inspector Clouseau type of guy.  For professional respect if nothing else, it'd never happen.

Speaking of Lois, she's tough but not butch.  She's attractive but not a supermodel.  She's career-driven but not obsessive.  She's a tough character to get right but, again, previous adaptations have managed the job nicely (AOS/George Reeves, STAS, Smallville, etc).

Krypton is the world of tomorrow.  I'd like to see a Krypton that has more in common with Coruscant from the Star Wars prequels than a friggin igloo, m'self.  Ditto the Fortress of Solitude.  Originally, Superman built it as a home away from home.  It was never intended to be a replication of Krypton on Earth.  Get rid of the stupid ice and crystal nonsense that the comics never had and are boring visuals anyway.

I'll probably think up more later.

[Paul (ral)]

The only reason I want the theme and the things that worked in the previous series to stay are because of the inevitable comparisons that happen. Most are agreed that the Williams themes and the fortress were the best bits of SR.

The comparison of plot, script, costume and colour pallet are what hurt SR - and rightly so!

Comparisons will happen - even I will make them...cause I love Reeve's flicks so much. 

I agree with what colors said. In the publics mind, Superman is Reeve.  We need a Superman that doesn't try to be Reeve....who's Clark isn't Reeve's Clark.  The amount of people (non comic book fans)  who said Routh looks just like Reeve (and not Superman) was staggering - that needs to be corrected!

[The Dark Knight]

I therefore say we should go the complete other direction and do something extreme.  Rather than running away from the comics roots, I say we need a movie that embraces the science-fantasy nature of the material.  Superman is not a street level hero who's existence is in any way plausible in our world.  Putting him in those kinds of stories is therefore a disservice to the character.

No, my good friends, I say we make a movie where things like the old school renegade scientist Lex Luthor robbing banks with heavy duty sci-fi gear (giant robot?) is a relatively common sight.  A world where supervillains are thick as fleas and Superman is needed to turn them back and defeat them.

Agree with all of that. I believe Superman films should embrace the fantastical. Giant robots, spaceships, deep space battles, the lot. Present scenarios that only Superman can deal with. Lifting things just doesn't cut it.

[johnnygobbs]

Sorry to be joining this particular party so late. 

My personal take is that the Donner Superman films (including Superman 2) were superb and I find it hard to believe that any other movie-lover couldn't feel the same way about them.

However, Singer's slavish reverence to the Donner Superman films encumbered any opportunity he may have had to add his own stamp to the character.  For the most part, I like Superman Returns, but Singer's failure (or more likely refusal) to break away from Donner's shadow meant that it was always going to suffer in comparison to what came before.  Had Singer not so clearly replicated certain plot points (most noticably Luthor's modus operandi - the creation of a new piece of real estate), his film may have been more effective as an unofficial sequel (his stated intention), rather than an apparent remake.

As for a new Superman franchise, I concur with many of the points colors raised in his last post, although I don't necessarily agree that Reeve overplayed the more socially inept aspects of Clarke Kent's personality, or that it would be even desirable to depart entirely from that faect of his character.  Nevertheless, I would certainly like to see a more formidable Luthor in a future film, or if Luthor must be portrayed as a semi-comic cad surrounded by bumbling sidekicks (as was the case in both the Donner and Singer versions) that he be an adjunct to a genuinely lethal and vicious villain, as opposed to Superman's primary nemesis.  As an aside, I always found Gene Hackman's broad take on the character more agreeable in Superman 2 than its predecessor, once Zod and his cohorts had assumed their position as Superman's primary threat.