This is What Happen When a Movie Makes $500 Million

August 22, 2008
Source: Wall Street Journal


The official box office total for The Dark Knight is only $479 million, but it should push past $500 by the end of its theatrical run. Considering that makes it the #2 biggest box office earner ever and only film to pass $450 million since 1997, that means that the Warner Bros' execs (and its investors) have got to be some of the happiest guys around. But let's stay on topic. Warner Bros' President Jeff Robinov spoke with the Wall Street Journal recently about their financial situation and outlook for the future, which focused on DC Comics and Superman. So just days after we wrote an article asking where the future of Superman could go, they officially seem to have decided to reboot the franchise - and considering the overwhelming number of responses we got in our article in support of a reboot, I think that's a great decision.

When a film makes that much money, it's bound to change the way that company, or even Hollywood overall, works. We already saw Sony greenlight a Venom spin-off to focus on darker villains like Joker, but what else is going on? Well in the article, Robinov mentions that "we're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it." What he means is that they "have been developing every DC character that we own" and their upcoming comic book movies are going to "be bathed in the same brooding tone as The Dark Knight." Additionally, Robinov "sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties." This may not entirely be a bad thing, but that's what happens when one of your movies, a very dark comic book movie, becomes the second biggest box office earner in history. It's just a matter of questioning whether that's the right direction for superheroes like Superman.

In the article, Robinov explains their dissatisfaction with Superman Returns. He says that it "didn't quite work as a film in the way that we wanted it to" and that "it didn't position the character the way he needed to be positioned." He adds that "now the plan is just to reintroduce Superman without regard to a Batman and Superman movie at all." Which, I must say, is a good thing considering we don't want Christopher Nolan to be forced to include Superman in his universe. The article goes on to mention that they're planning more major comic book movies, including "a third Batman film, a new film reintroducing Superman, and two movies focusing on other DC Comics characters." So at this point, not only is Warner Bros definitely rebooting Superman from scratch, but they're probably going for a much darker story.

I'm really not sure what else to say because I'm generally curious to hear more about the direction they're headed in. And unfortunately I'm not familiar with Superman enough to know whether a dark story would work with him. However, going back to the point of this article, this is obviously the impact that The Dark Knight has had on Hollywood and it's honestly too early to tell if it will be good or bad in the end. If you're interested in hearing more from Robinov and the financial end of Warner Bros, the article in the Wall Street Journal is a pretty damn good read. I don't want to force the discussion from earlier in the week to move over to this article, but this is a very interesting development for the Superman franchise. I'm very curious whether Mark Millar's Superman pitch made it to the studio already or whether they're pursuing another dark direction different from what Millar had in mind. Thoughts?

Find more posts: Discuss, Editorial, Movie News, Opinions



OK is Hollywood completely devoid of any common sense? Going dark with Superman, how fuckin stupid is that, just because TDK performed outstandingly well doesn't mean you now gotta have Captain Marvel killing bank robbers and brooding his "dark thoughts" or Superman in black stretchy latex ala Nic Cage/Tim Burton's batshit crazy Superman movie. I'm glad WB is rebooting Supes, but it doesn't need to be grim like the Dark Knight.

PimpSlapStick on Aug 22, 2008


This really pisses me off, quite frankly. "Batman" is a gothic comic. "Superman" is NOT! Let me remind Warner Brothers that both "Batman Begins" and "Superman Returns" made just about the same amount of money at the box-office. And they were released within weeks from each other the same summer. If they would just give Singer a chance to expand on his vision, like he promised (more action, villains, etc), the next film could have and would have kicked ass. But no. Warners only sees dollars signs. And yes, I know it's called show "business" for a reason. But this is just a big fuck you to the fans of "Superman Returns". Every film does not have to have the same tone as "The Dark Knight" because it made a gazillion dollars.

Film Fan on Aug 22, 2008


Don't these sum'bitches learn anything?

PimpSlapStick on Aug 22, 2008


I agree with these PimpSlap and Film Fan. While not really versed in the lore of Superman - I just don't see him being the dark, brooding character that is Batman. And this is one thing that worried me after the success of TDK - that every single comic book movie was suddenly going to have these dark story lines. I think it really needs to depend on the nature of the superhero. I can see Batman and Wolverine going darker - just don't see it with Supe.

Boo-Yah on Aug 22, 2008


#2 I agree on a few of your points, but c'mon Singer's Superman was a big budget glorified soap opera and scrotum shining homage(Pandering) to Dick Donner and all the 1970s. I mean we've seen Lex Luthor before and they made him a gigolo with yet another land scheme, Lois was a 8th grader wearing 'grown lady' clothes, they made Supes a "Baby Daddy" for christ sake. I like Routh as Supes and I think they should keep him and all they really need to do is amp up the action and give Superman an adversary he can brawl with.

PimpSlapStick on Aug 22, 2008


Personally I think a 'darker' Superman is a bad idea. Superman is supposed to be a lighter character, the boyscout of the DC world. I actually didn't think Superman Returns was bad at all, it was very reminiscent of the Christopher Reeves films which is exactly how a Superman film should be I think. Leave the dark and brooding stuff to Batman!

RP on Aug 22, 2008


We all more or less agree dark is not the way to go with Superman, and really it's common fuckin sense and my thing is Warner Bros. (Who couldn't give a damn about DC until TDK blew up) is totally , utterly, completely clueless, these asshat studio suits just don't get it. If you stay true to the fuckin comic nine times outta ten the movie translation will click. Nolan got that, Batman is a grim, brooding, dead serious badass with deadly serious villians to match, Nolan thought to himself "Hmm...if I take the best interpretations of the character and make a serious film outta it, I might be on to something.." That's all Warner Bros, gotta do just follow the comics and creators, well the idiots have by default the damn current writers of the comics in their employ fucking use them.

PimpSlapStick on Aug 22, 2008


Jesus Christ.....how many freaking re-boots and re-makes and re-do's can one god damn movie go through?! Superman is a joke anyways unless your 7 years old and buy the concept of a "super" man, but honest to God....move on. Instead of Superman Part 42 how about Captain America? Green Lantern? Wonder Woman? There's a hundred movies about comic book heroes waiting to be made, yet they want to continue to rehash the same damn movie a hundred times.

Jason on Aug 22, 2008


Even though both "Superman III" and "IV" sucked, and don't count in my book, it had been nearly 20 years since the public had a Superman film. And as much as I love Tim Burton, I cringed when I heard he was interested in directing a Superman movie. Thank God he didn't. Ditto on Nicolas Cage being sought after to play the Man of Steel. What the hell were they thinking there!? I love Singer's work so I was quite excited when I learned he was the director to bring the franchise back to life. Personally, I think he did a wonderful job. It's clear he is a fan of Donner's first film. It was not only an homage to it, it was a valentine. And I know a lot of people slammed him for that. But I do think it was needed to bring the character back after a long absence. I thought "Returns" was a beautiful film. And one of 2006's best.

Film Fan on Aug 22, 2008


i hope they don't do superman like dark knight, cause thats what everyone would want and the movie won't feel like an original film. I also hope if they reboot this franchise , i really hope there are huge fight scenes like the ones you would find in the series or in the justice league.

Darrin on Aug 22, 2008


Another reboot.. . .and to think that SR only came out in 06 But I gotta say they do really need to spice things up with the character. I did not like Superman returns at all. TOO boring. I do hope they bring back Brandon Routh though. ONLY thing good about Superman:Returns. Bring back Routh.

Whoa! on Aug 22, 2008


#8 Captain America is marvel and they are making a Cap. movie And dont call Superman a joke without him there is a good chance no comic movie let alone even books would exist. He deserves respect. And by the way I hate Superman The last movie suffered from 2 major flaws 1) Dont give Superman a illegtimate child thats plain stupid. 2) How about a new villian that doesnt do the same damn thing he tryed do to in the first damn movie thirty real life years ago. I swear one more Lex Luthor Ill give up on Superman how about Brainiac or Darkseid both would help darken the movie some...but dont go all TDK dark on us.

Joker on Aug 22, 2008


A "Superman" reboot has been in the cards for some time. They should definitely keep Brandon Routh (reminds me of the late great Christopher Reeve)--he is Superman. In addition, I agree with a few posters here that "Superman" does not have to be as grim as "The Dark Knight". Batman is naturally a dark character with deep psychological issues, whereas Superman is a more colorful character with superhuman strength and abilities. Superman has never been near Gothic territory a day in his life. WB suits saw the big figures for the 'Batman' flick and just thought: heck, let's crank out darker versions of these beloved heroes and have them face their personal demons. Well that's just freakin' nonsense! They need to stick to the source material if they want continuous comic book flick success. Straying away will only screw things up, not only with the fanboys, but the general public as well.

Spider on Aug 22, 2008


as much as I absolutley HATE!!!! Superman, even I have to admit that takin TDK road isnt exactly the answer... I mean, the visuals and the overall look and feel of the film was great IMO, but its the story that can just murder a potentially good movie. I mean, Singer made Superman a total Glory-hog, a pervert (xrays through lois' dress? ftw?) and a kid!? I mean, wtf's next? Maury Povichand his DNA tests?... and secondly, Superman has ALOT more villains than Lex Luthor and an island sized green ROCK... c'mon... re-boot is good, just stay away from the Dark stuff...thats Batmans..Supes is bright and fuzzy.... 😛

Carlos on Aug 22, 2008


I don't think that they have to go dark with Superman's character at all, but I do believe that they are allowed to make the story itself more dark. It would be interesting to see how Supes deals with a dark story line. I mean if you think about it, Batman is only dark because of the things that have happened to him and how he decides to deal with those things, Superman chooses not to kill, to be a hero in a different way than Batman does. He could still exist in a dark world. I believe that it would be much more interesting to see some of the decisions that he makes, with the integrity that he has, if he had to deal with the same type of situations as a Batman does. And yes, please don't bring back Lex as the main villain. We need someone new. I honestly would love to see a little bit of Doomsday in the next movie.

Hisheirness on Aug 22, 2008


yes...please forget the reboots, forget Singer, and just use your brains to move on from here.

Matt Suhu on Aug 22, 2008


I'm with Jason (#8)....Superman IS a fairy tale for children....there simply isnt enough realism in the SM environment to entertain anyone over the age of 12, maybe 13... if they must waste the $$$ on a reboot, keep SM light for the kids and maintain the standard now set by Heath Ledger as the Joker for the rest of the villans in other films...jmo...

moldybread on Aug 22, 2008


It sounded, at first, like it might be a good idea but I think that will spell disaster. With the world we live in, I don't think focusing on the dark is going to work in the long run. It might be exciting at first, but it will quickly fade away. Just because The Dark Knight (Best film ever) had the perfect recipe, doesn't mean it's going to translate well to other material. Having said that, who's up for a Spawn remake?

Brian on Aug 22, 2008


Or you could just hire a good actor, good directors, and treat it as an entity of it's own. Not just a money making gimmick. TDK was good because it was a serious attempt to make a serious movie. Just like all of Nolan's other movies. Another reason for it's success was that they didn't role out one after another, they paced themselves and did other movies in between.

Arp on Aug 22, 2008


A new, re-imagined Superman film is a good idea. I, for one, am up for anything Mark Millar has in mind. Hell, I remember when that story came out about Will Smith being asked to play Superman and he declined and how I was relieved because that sounded like Singer trying to ruin another movie. But now that I think about that in keeping with some of the things Millar has said, I wouldn't mind at all having a black superman (as long as it was Millar's idea). It's a take on Superman we've never seen. Would anyone else be interested in something like that? A black Superman?

MacGruber on Aug 22, 2008


I like Superman Returns. It made as much as Batman Begins, and they let Christopher Nolan do a second film. Look how that turned out. Granted, Returns wasn't as good as BB, but Synger was doing the cinematic equivalent of tightrope walking. He had to satisfy fans of the Reeves films, make a film for new viewers, satisfy the studio, etc. It turned out pretty well. If they just gave him one more shot, I think he could make a truly great film. The first X-men isn't very good, but X2 is awesome. Why don't studios consider these things? Whether Synger or someone else is directing, people will come. All they care about is the word "Superman."

DinoChow on Aug 22, 2008


To MacGuber.....Um, no. Go see "Hancock".

Film Fan on Aug 22, 2008


Look all you guys got it wrong, it's pretty fuckin' simple, consult with noted comic writers of the comics to come up with a solid story that's true to Supes (Geoff Johns and Grant Morrison come to mind) Second give Superman more to do than lift shit and perv out on Lois, let the mutha fucka hit something/someone, he needs to be challenged physically by a villian the comics offer a host of uber powered baddies fuckin use them. Third Ramp up the action, let's see Supes in space, on Apokolips, hell anywhere interesting he's SUPERMAN if any hero is gonna tussle on the surface of the sun it's Superman. Fourth Bryan Singer is a good director, I think he just needs to be reigned in with his Dick Donner homages, gayness, and Jesus/Clark Kent symbolism. He's a good storyteller the guy just needs a shot of testosterone or part of his brain switched with Michael Bay's *Kidding* The Superman franchise isn't a total wash you just need to follow the comics and if need be get a real action director.

PimpSlapStick on Aug 22, 2008


this is bad... This is very bad. Superman is not a dark character. But, I would like to see a Superman movie that pushes him to his limits, both phisically and morally. Maybe add Braniac to the mix. BTW, I hope that WB doesn't mess with that Green Lantern script. That sounds like just the right tone for him.

Ajax on Aug 22, 2008


I think it's time for a Wonder woman movie!!! i already have the candidate and a teaser poster!! http://toonfed.deviantart.com/art/wonder-woman-95716524

toonfed on Aug 22, 2008


Dark dark dark dark DARK!! ..what does that word mean again?

Bob on Aug 22, 2008


If every superhero movie goes "dark" the entire concept that began with Christopher Nolan's vision for the Batman world, the genre will just become saturated with dark superhero movies. Then someone will come along and make a "happy" superhero movie and it will do well because it's now fresh and then everyone will change gears and start making "happy" superhero movies because it's what people want. They're going to ruin Batman.

The Great Rodney McKay on Aug 22, 2008


Kevin Spacey as Lex Luther! Four more years!

DCompose on Aug 22, 2008


The success of it being 'DARK' was that the audience felt that Batman was going to be challenged in such a way that no one in the audience wanted to be in his shoes. THATS what makes him a superhero - ITS JUST WHAT GORDON IS SAYING "He makes the decision no one wants to make - He does it because he has to" Well bring that challenge to Superman. In this case, it would have to be another just as powerful as he(Darkseid) - where he antagonizes superman - asking him why does he care when he has the power of a god ? Why does he save them when he could enslave them? Fill incredibly painful fight scenes between the two. So its more of a testament of WHY Superman exists. This goes for The Dark Knight as well. Joker theoretically calls out to Gotham "Why Does Batman Exist and why should you trust him?" Having it be "DARK" is merely a character trait to the movies identity towards its own mythology. The next superman film has to create its own identity trait that assimilates toward Superman's reason for existence, plus dump some incredible action scenes where Superman is a badass - I think the movie-going audiences will believe again that a man can fly.

Nick Sears on Aug 22, 2008


I'm disappointed by this. Some people may have had some objections to Singers film, but the guy is more than capable of upping his game in a sequel. Just look at the difference between X1 and X2. It's night and day. If Singer had made another Superman I guarantee it would have been something on level with the original. And I have to agree with many others. Superman is NOT a dark character. It seems desperate to try and make him dark. All those years Jon Peters tried to develop a dark superman. It never worked. And this is what really bothers me. How come everyone is willing to give Sam Raimi another chance to make up for Spider-Man 3, but they just dismiss Singer's ability to make a better Superman? If you ask me, Spider-Man 3 was way more of a disaster than Superman Returns. Cheesiest movie I've ever seen, Superficial story, bad acting, lame ending to such a classy world developed in the first 2. This franchise does not need to be rebooted from scratch. Just give Singer a chance to make an amazing sequel the way he did with X2. Imagine if they had gone with a reboot after Star Trek The Motion Picture and never gave anyone the chance to make Wrath of Khan?

Colca on Aug 22, 2008


"I'm not familiar with Superman enough to know whether a dark story would work with him." Me neither. BUT - superdickery.com proves there's gotta be some material to work with.

Serafina on Aug 22, 2008


These guys just keep missing the point. Don't get me wrong, I would probably suck to as a studio head....it's a tough job predicting audience taste 2-3 years out. But where is the thought behind these films? They get one hit and they mass replicate it, not only ruining every subsequent film, but also dulling the shine of the original. Its like how a copy of a copy never looks as good as the original, and the more copies you have the less unique the original actually is. Sure we're a retarded audience who falls into formula's, but we're also a culture with moving parts that responds to breaks from the norm that reflect those moving parts. The Dark Knight worked because it was a socially poignant and perfectly placed in our culture. It's not because we like dark story's, although they have been popular over the past year (just look at the oscar nom's), or love our villians. It's that these films say something, and reflect our cynicism about several aspects of our lives right now. Simply making Superman dark is going to run head into a cynical audience because Superman as a character doesn't fit our mentality. He may be the strongest character in the comic books, but he's too weak of a hero to be a movie star without breaking the mold of the original character. We won't be happy either way. I think Captain America is going to run into the same problem. Unless they come up with a damn good story the typical comic book storyline isn't going to hold water in our culture right now unless something fairly dramatic happens to renew our sense of patriotism.

ImaginaryVisionary on Aug 22, 2008


I think they can pull off a dark superman, BUT that should not be what the character is about in the end. He is supposed to be a beacon of hope, so if they can balance that well I think they can do it.

James on Aug 22, 2008


i feel like people are idiots. Superman Returns was great. Underrated and misunderstood. It's a beautiful film.

Carter on Aug 23, 2008


You can't FORCE a dark tone on a character, especially one like Superman, it just has to flow naturally with the movie.

Daas on Aug 23, 2008


Dark Knight wasn't a great movie simply because Batman is a dark character. It was a good movie because the script, acting and directing where all very good. Instead of trying to make exact copies of everything that brings in money the studios should focus on developing movies that have really good scripts.

Andreas Climent on Aug 23, 2008


This is bullshit ! superman returns was already too dark, that was the problem + the stupid story. having superman beaten up, stabbed, drowning, dying in a hospital, forced to carry kryptonite island wasn't dark enough to you??? the dark knight made money thanks to hype and critics who were sick of being ignored and went with the popular hype. the movie itself was crappy. bring back a colorful naive superman like the ones in the 80's and you'll make even more money than stupid DK.

adilator on Aug 23, 2008


doomsday anyone? i hope they do the death of superman story. i wouldn't even mind if the movie were 3 and a half hours long

Josh on Aug 23, 2008


by dark,they may not literally mean superman, but the story,villians,etc. Someone like lex could be explored in his evil ways. By dark, I think they mean to explore the darker sides of apersons psychology...not put him in a black suit only to fight at night. Can't wait for the reboot

mike on Aug 23, 2008


Try and think back what you were thinking on the day 9/11 occured. Didn't you wish Superman existed to make things right. Well that's the movie WB needs to do. Create a story as kaotic and scary as that horrible day, and let Superman spring into action. If done right, Audiences will cheer hard for the man of steel once again!

entertainmenttodayandbeyond.com on Aug 23, 2008


Superman Returns did have a lot of dark moments I agree....however, if you will remember what happened in Superman II, when the Man of Steel gave up his powers and was able to bed Louis, thus the Baby, ( I cannot believe some of you missed that tie in). I say let Singer try again. WB is out of control, yet I must say I think there needs to be Superman in the Cinema....and totally agree with NO MORE LEX LUTHOR! Thanks to TDK and Ironman, the next 20 years or so look promising to see our Heros "come to life!"

D-9 on Aug 23, 2008


Lol has this guy ever read Superman comic? What exactly is Superman suppose to be brooding about? "Oh I'm an ailen from another world that's long gone boo-hoo" Hollywood sure loves to jump on the bandwagon characters like Batman Wolverine Daredevil work in dark tones that's their world. Now if they try making Metropolis a dark city with Superman the only shining light in the city that be ok. Only 2 good things came out of Superman returns Brandon Routh as Superman and Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor (just if you keep him make him more like the Luthor in the comics) and please a new villian. If they do go in the Nick Cage/Tim Burton direction well that's just not Superman even if he wears an S on his chest its not Superman. This is very upsetting for me DC needs to get involved before they ruin Superman. Also have nothing against Singer doing another film just the kid idea and stalking Lois weren't good ideas.

Samuel on Aug 23, 2008


I think you guys MISREAD and are MISSING the point here. They said that "they're willing to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it." That doesn't mean that it's going to be as DARK as the Dark Knight cause as we all know Superman's character isn't as dark as Batman. Actually I like this idea, this means that they'll probably try to make a film that's more complex and realistic but not like in Returns where they have him as a stalker and him being a daddy? Returns was already dark in it's own rights, but it was a sissy kinda dark. Again, as I mentioned in the other post... I think that Synger does deserve another shot at this... if they give him a better script to work with I think he could still pull off a great Superman movie.

Omega728 on Aug 23, 2008


Alex, I just want to say that you're a good writer. Keep it up! (sorry this has nothing to do with Superman)

vu on Aug 23, 2008


this is a seriously bad idea, if anything they should do the opposite, Superman is a cash cow for kids. we don't need Superman scaring the shit out of 4 year olds that want to emulate him.

The Delightful Deviant on Aug 23, 2008


This goes completely contrary to all the decades of established work that DC comics has invested into these characters. In the DC universe it comes down to the Big Three, Wonderwoman, Superman, and Batman. Of these three it is Superman and Batman who stand as the polar opposites and examples by which all the other heroes of that universe judge themselves. These two heroes are seen by the others as the founders for their respective viewpoints and the ones who set the tone for how to act as a hero. For those who take the more shadowed and "do whats necessary" standpoint Batman is the icon to which they aspire. The Bat is an almost mythical figure, one who strikes fear into even other heroes and is seen as the unstoppable force to do what is right at all costs. Those who strive to do things within the law, to follow the strict moral guidelines and to try and be the best that they can look to Superman as their guiding influence. But Superman is even more than just a role-model, he truly is the best that there is. He is the one person who stands forth as the paragon for righteousness and Truth, Justice, and the American Way. (Even though I'm not American this still is the motto I remember him by.) Supes is the best that any of us can ever hope to be and that is part of his mythos. Even Batman himself looks to Clark as the one person he admires and respects whole-heartedly. If you take away that sense of good and what is right about Superman and reduce him to just another vigilante in the streets then you diminish a big part of what makes the character truly Super to begin with.

DarkRaven18599 on Aug 23, 2008


I hope they establish Superman as the next big franchise so there's more of a chance to see other DC properties. Fingers crossed for a Dark Knight Returns adaptation much further down the road.

Ramon M. on Aug 23, 2008


As much as I like Superman, I like the idea(l) of Superman better. Superman is a symbol, much more so than any other comic character. The idea of Truth Justice and American Way, and I like that. But, that has its dramatic limitations. One of the best ideas in a Superman movie was in that horrendous Richard Pryor monstrosity. I actually liked the part where Superman was fighting himself! (The scene in the bar with the peanuts was great,too) But that is as dark as Superman should get. Superman should be inspirational and uplifting, while not leaving out the kicking butt factor, of course. I liked Superman Returns a lot, one of the most beautiful movies I have ever seen, and would love to see Singer return. But please, another actress for Lois Lane...I mean, wasn't Zoey Deschanel available for the last one?

kitano0 on Aug 23, 2008


how the hell is it the 2nd biggest earner ever? Learn some math and economics you tard This film is in the low 40s if you take inflation into account. If you're gonna quote things to pump up this film, using the f-ing facts

Jimmy on Aug 23, 2008


What!? Did I read correct!? Warner Bros wants to make their DC characters with a darker tone. Starting with Superman? First of all The Dark Knight was a masterpiece as Kevin Smith put it. Just because of it's tremendous success in the box office, doesn't mean it's the way to go for every other super hero movie. It only worked in the Dark Knight because that's just the way Batman is. That's his thing, that's his world. But deciding to go that dark route with Superman, na-UH! That's just not going to work..... Through my observations, these are the elements that make a super hero movie work: 1.) The Hero (that's given) 2.) The Villain (Which must be selected carefully, because he must be able to carry the movie and evidently be almost the hero's equal) 3.) Pick a great story from all of the stories and adventures the super hero has gone through. Most importantly pick a story that will test the hero to his extremes almost to the point of death. (Examples: Morality, Physicality, Spiritually) 4.) A director (He must be totally aware and immersed of the world that the superhero lives in and be able to visualize that in our world, today. He must stay TRUE to the character and DON'T stray away from the character and story. {Example: Superman's kid!?} The director just can't be any director, he has to genuinely care and have great passion for the character and want to make a great movie using the eyes of those that envision it the way it should be) [Great examples John Favreau, Christopher Nolan & his brother] These elements will make the movie a success everytime!!!! That's all you need..

MIKEDEE6282 on Aug 23, 2008


When people talk about Superman not being Dark, I want to bring some things into light. 1. Superman is supposed to kill all the humans and destroy the earth (its why he was sent from Krypton) 2. As a child/teen he had to keep his powers on the low-low. (I'm sure he was so happy about that) 3. He still has to switch back and forth from Clark Kent to Superman (and this won't mess with you why?) 4. Superman meets Doomsday (yeah it wasn't so dark when Doomsday killed him) 5. In Frank Miller's the Dark Knight, Superman is supposed to kill batman (Superman's the good guy right?) 6. In the Zero series, the green lantern goes on a killing spree and a rampage, in which the whole universe gets totally screwed (which effected Superman's livelihood very much) check out Superman:Zero. yeah... Superman's not so dark..

staiolz on Aug 23, 2008


honestly, to me, this may be a good thing, other than some flashy effects super man was not that great, sure i enjoyed it, but i wont ever watch it on DVD, it was too long and drawn out. I think rebooting it, may be good, now we may see how the darker works out, but what people (in the movie industry) need to realize, is that Darker doesnt always mean better. the darker batman was amazing, because thats how he was. But super man, give us a more beefy super man, a more amazing ridiculous super man, who picks ups cars and bashes people's faces in. Darker isnt always better, but, rebooting may be! we shall see.

taurinh24 on Aug 23, 2008


staiolz... Where did you get the idea that Superman was supposed to kill all the humans?

Ajax on Aug 23, 2008


i agree with just about everyone here: a dark and brooding superman would be far too cliche at this point, and seeing the angle nolan's film was trying to take on batman, it made sense there. but superman is not the same whatsoever. however, if you really did want to make a "dark and brooding" superman film, there are some obvious additions and subtractions from the cast and characters presented: 1. Lex Luthor MUST GO! He's an overused cliche in Superman films and so far, the only enemy that seems to ever have been able to stand up to Superman. 2. Use somebody who actually IS dark and/or brooding as a villain. Darkseid anyone? Brainiac? Hell, I'll settle for a Superman V. Bizarro anyday (they can be catchy and just call the film Bizarro and confuse the shit out of most people.) Point I'm trying to make is, you CANNOT make a dark or brooding Superman film without cutting the former films' losses (i.e. EVERYTHING THAT MAKES SUPERMAN SUPERMAN) or adding something to his character that presents a fatal flaw in the audiences' eyes. That said, seeing as Mark Millar is interested in the project, could we finally see the "Red Son" movie adaptation I know myself and other crazy comic book fans are actually looking for?

Josiah on Aug 23, 2008


I like how they are probably going with a new crew and cast, but no way should SUPERMAN be a dark character.

Ryan on Aug 23, 2008


I knew this shit was going to happen. WTF, they were happy with superman when it came out, Why are they acting like they can speak up now cause batman changed there direction. FUCK!!! did they forget that the had like 4 FUCKING HORRIBLE BATMAN FILMS!!!! the first Batman film and batman begins and TDK were the only good ones. The micheal keaton batman movies almost 20 years ago. Fuck its been that long. And superman, DC you guys havent even begun to start that franchise again. Singer was right in doing what he did Its about fucking time superman got busy and knocked up loise lane. Now you have to let him continue, and taking it darker, ok but you assholes better give him red Kryptonite. and make some one not of this universe come kick his ass. Man WTF is wrong with these guys. Now your going to want to have the same realism with the Superman franchise as the Dark Knight.. uuuugghhh!!!!!

therblig on Aug 23, 2008


i want dark superman

xXx on Aug 23, 2008


Fooking hollywood suits !! Simply stay tru to the comics modern visions and they succeed !!

Fenris on Aug 24, 2008


this could be a good thing if they accomplish one thing, concentrate the "dark" in the villan! if you have villans who care nothing for human life and only see humans as pawns to use against superman then you have a movie that does not take superman to a dark place. at the same time he must question his moral code and decide if being the boy scout is worth the peoples lives around him. and in the midst of that, some hardcore action would be nice!!!

atg2040 on Aug 24, 2008


Aaargh! How many times will they redo the same character again and again? I agree with the majority of the forum who think that dark is NOT the way to go for Superman. Superman is NOT Batman. That is what makes him so unique. And why even bother about another Superman movie so soon? I don't think audiences really want to watch another movie this soon after Superman Returns. Why can't they concentrate on using another superhero who is not Batman or Superman for a change? Poor Wonder Woman has had to sit out on the bench since donkey's ages. Give HER a chance! I'm sure the general public would be much more receptive to a new WONDER WOMAN movie than they would to another Superman flick. And she's much more malleable than Superman anyway.

Sara on Aug 24, 2008


It's freaking SUPERMAN. His story doesn't need an explanation or lead up film. The FIRST MOVIE THEY MAKE should be OUTSTANDING. That doesn't mean to go darker. Just stay true to the story and don't Cornball it up. Any movie like SUperman should KICKASS. It should really out preform movies like 30 Days of NIGHT, Watchmen, 300, just because of all the material they have to draw from.

Dustyman1505 on Aug 24, 2008


the New Batman just felt realistic. Like watching just a good movie, not a comic book movie. They could bring that element to Superman. Brian Singer picked Brandon Routh, the biggest "Pretty Boy" ever. Superman shouldn't be a "Pretty Boy"

Dustyman1505 on Aug 24, 2008


"We won't be happy either way. I think Captain America is going to run into the same problem. Unless they come up with a damn good story the typical comic book storyline isn't going to hold water in our culture right now unless something fairly dramatic happens to renew our sense of patriotism." -ImaginaryVisionary- Yeah..I disagree about Captain America, sure he's a "Patriotic, bright and shiny type" similair to Superman, but heres the thing Captain America is a soldier and he has made extremely tough choices in warfare the guy has a pretty high body count. People forget that he is a trained killer Superman is not, Superman is traditionaly an 'American' hero but really he belongs to the world. Where as Cap is strictly a symbol of America and Democracy, the conflict is inherent in Cap's story in that he's a man out of time, the guy lost 70 plus years and he has to balance his own values versus the current American agenda. Also Cap ain't nigh-omnipotent like Superman so finding a villian who can challenge him isn't an issue like Superman.

PimpSlapStick on Aug 24, 2008


When people talk about Superman not being Dark, I want to bring some things into light. 1. Superman is supposed to kill all the humans and destroy the earth (its why he was sent from Krypton) 2. As a child/teen he had to keep his powers on the low-low. (I'm sure he was so happy about that) 3. He still has to switch back and forth from Clark Kent to Superman (and this won't mess with you why?) 4. Superman meets Doomsday (yeah it wasn't so dark when Doomsday killed him) 5. In Frank Miller's the Dark Knight, Superman is supposed to kill batman (Superman's the good guy right?) 6. In the Zero series, the green lantern goes on a killing spree and a rampage, in which the whole universe gets totally screwed (which effected Superman's livelihood very much) check out Superman:Zero. yeah… Superman's not so dark.. staiolz on Aug 23, 2008 1. Your a fuckin moron, Superman wasn't sent here to kill all humans idiot, he was the last survivor of a dying planet, damn even my grandma knows that. 2. Of course he kept his powers hidden as a kid, but it doesn't make him 'emo' what part of his Norman Rockwell, Kansas, apple pie childhood did you not understand? He was raised by loving good, solid parents it's why he's the hero he is and not Batman. 3. Switching back and forth from Clark to Superman, is supposed to make you crazy? It's his job, he's a superhero it's no different from firemen changing to civilian clothes and going home to there families. 4. Sure the fact he died was "dark" dying isn't usually a happy affair, but unlike most deaths his inspired other heroes to fight the good fight, his death in the comics actually spurred on the rest of the costumed heroes to live up to his standards. 5. Frank Miller's Dark Knight is an else worlds story it doesn't count for continuity it was only a "possible" future for Batman and remember this is Frank Miller your talking about, the guy would make the Power Puffs Girls whores. 6. So Green Lantern going nuts means Clark Kent should go nuts? Your logic is akin to hammering your own scrotum to a chair with a bean bag.

PimpSlapStick on Aug 24, 2008


"the New Batman just felt realistic. Like watching just a good movie, not a comic book movie. They could bring that element to Superman. Brian Singer picked Brandon Routh, the biggest "Pretty Boy" ever. Superman shouldn't be a "Pretty Boy" Dustyman1505 Your right Supes shouldn't be a pretty boy, but ya'know what Christopher Reeves was a pretty mutha fucka just like Routh and he worked out well didn't he? What you think they should hire the balding Jason Statham as Supes?

PimpSlapStick on Aug 24, 2008


I dont think its a good idea to reboot superman. Superman has nothing dark like batman. Batman has a darkside for a reason. His parents were killed infront of him as little boy. As for superman, his whole planet died, due to a dying sun. He was send off his own planet as a baby, by his parents, so he can be save. Superman cares about humans and see justice just like any police officer, in which Batman is more of a vigalante. Thats how it is in the comic books, and if you read the comic books for Batman and Superman, they are very different. What I think needs to be done, is to make 2 more movies about superman to where the movies can make up for the Superman Return. In this 2 movies, superman can face off with worth villians and during the 2 movies to show hints of the comming of Doomsday on a 3rd movie.

Jaime on Aug 24, 2008


When people talk about Superman not being Dark, I want to bring some things into light. 1. Superman is supposed to kill all the humans and destroy the earth (its why he was sent from Krypton) 2. As a child/teen he had to keep his powers on the low-low. (I'm sure he was so happy about that) 3. He still has to switch back and forth from Clark Kent to Superman (and this won't mess with you why?) 4. Superman meets Doomsday (yeah it wasn't so dark when Doomsday killed him) 5. In Frank Miller's the Dark Knight, Superman is supposed to kill batman (Superman's the good guy right?) 6. In the Zero series, the green lantern goes on a killing spree and a rampage, in which the whole universe gets totally screwed (which effected Superman's livelihood very much) check out Superman:Zero. yeah… Superman's not so dark.. In response to #51 staiolz: 1. Superman was sent to earth by his father Jor-El as both a means to save his son and because Jor-El knew that his son could be a great force for good on earth. The following is quoted directly from the first Superman movie and is recapped in Superman:Returns. Jor-El: Live as one of them, Kal-El, to discover where your strength and your power are needed. Always hold in your heart the pride of your special heritage. They can be a great people, Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you... my only son. I don't think genocide was on his mind when he hit the launch button. 2. Superman, or Clark as he merely was at this point was asked by his parents to keep his powers in check in public merely as a means to protect their son from people who would exploit or try to take their son away from them. At home, an idyllic farm removed from prying eyes in a peaceful small town in Kansas, he was able to use his abilities to help his parents with day to day chores and also to test the limits of his own abilities. The Kents were good loving people that truly only had their sons best wishes at heart, and Clark knew this. 3. The thing about Superman is that he's the only superhero where the roles are really reversed. Most superheroes, Spider-Man for example, are just regular people before they get their powers. Spider-Man is the costume he puts on to fight crime, but Peter Parker is who he really is. For Superman the role is reversed. Kal-El, exiled alien from a dying world is who he really is. The Red, Blue, and Yellow suit is his birthright and the fantastic powers he possess are just because of who he is. Clark Kent is the costume he puts on so that he can associate with normal people and try to fit in. He dons the Kent personna by choice. He could easily fake his own death and just be Superman all the time, but he WANTS to be among the people. So I'm pretty sure switching back and forth between identities doesn't annoy him all that much. 4. I can see the sarcasm you're throwing out on this one, but I'm gonna be baited by it anyways. Of course it was "Dark" when Doomsday "killed" Superman. The world had thought it had lost it's single greatest champion by that point. This was a person who despite his perceived nationality of being American was beloved the planet over by the common person. The sense of loss over his sacrifice was seen the world over. And in the hero community it acted like a lightning strike to galvanize those who remained to be willing to step forward and try to fill the horrendously huge void left behind by the planets greatest defender. All of them realized that they took for granted that Supes would always be there to bail them out and that now they had to start thinking of others before themselves. In his "death" Superman provided the single greatest spot of motivation and encouragement the hero community had ever seen. 5. As was stated by #64 PimpSlapStick, TDKR is considered part of the Elseworlds line of books and is only a POSSIBLE future for the DC Universe. And even in this Clark was only sent to bring Batman in for Justice, not assassinate him. In the back of his mind he probably knew Bruce wouldn't come quietly, but he was willing to give him that chance. 6. So having long hair means you're "Dark"? Wow. Someone better let Jesus know right away! All in all, I think yer nuts. Check into the character before making claims about them that aren't true. Remember, it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool that to speak (or write) and remove all doubt.

DarkRaven18599 on Aug 25, 2008


Singer and co. did an excellent job walking the tight-rope of reintroducing the Superman "icon" to today's audiences while not abandoning the history of the past movies. I think he set things up perfectly to have a more action filled sequel - hopefully one that would involve a more capable villain. (Every time I saw Kevin Spacey's bald head it was hard to take him as a ruthless villian) A "dark" Batman works because Bruce Wayne has been a tormented soul from the beginning. I would suggest that in relation to Batman, "dark" is a redundant term. They didn't just invent the title "The Dark Knight" for the movie. But taking Superman dark is the opposite of the character. Dark "Truth", dark "Justice" ....?

BlueBlood on Aug 25, 2008


The only thing that can make SUPERMAN interesting is to make a movie on the backstory of DOOMSDAY. Then come out with a 2nd film where SUPERMAN battles DOOMSDAY and where DOOMSDAY kills SUPERMAN. Then a third film where all the spin off SUPERMAN characters are introduced. that or maybe possibly introduce BIZARRO.

blank on Aug 25, 2008


Finding villians for Superman to fight isn't a challenge just the writers and directors don't want to use them. You can look them up and see the potential of each one just seems like everyone is in love with Luthor for some reason. Highly doubt Cap will have the same problem as Supes as stated before Cap is soldier and I think some writers for get he's killed before. and he has enemies also just need to be use correctly (like in Cap comics now) I'm not familar with all DC's elseworld stories but staiolz 51 is he talking about when Hal first got possessed by Parallex? that was in continuity. and about Superman suppose to kill and enslave the earth maybe he's talking about smallville? and about his teens he started to develop his powers (deciding with reboot you go with he had it as a child) as for the changing back and forth to Clark and Superman I doubt it could mess him up the suit and glasses and the "act" he puts on I think is him actually (or should be) him nervous someone figuring him out. he was Clark before he was kal-el (I mean in the sense that he grew up as a human before embracing his ailen idenitity) he can't turn his back on that even if he wanted too and like Parker its his escape he's not heroing.

Samuel on Aug 25, 2008


I don't want to see Superman, Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, Captain America, Martian Manhunter, Flash, or any other lame ass superheroes. I am really starting to get sick of this whole comic book movie thing because of all the news of making a movie for every freakin' super powered hero. I dig Batman, because he is human. He has no special powers or natural advantages against his opponents. He's a badass, with superior intellect, detective skills, ninja training, and tons of family money. He has a great origin story, great villains, and thanks to Nolan's re-imagining, a gritty realism. I've wasted too much money already to continue pouring it into these half baked, rehashed, refried ideas. Fuck it. Fuck superman, fuck it all. Watchmen and a third Batman by Nolan, and then I'm done. Isn't it enough already?

JL on Aug 25, 2008


I think Superman is in dire need of a reboot. Firstly , eliminate the entire cast of Superman Returns and keep Bryan Singer far away from it. Get an actor for Superman who is probably in his early-mid thrities with a greater physical build and get an actress for Lois Lane who has that sensual cynicism that Margot Kidder had (Kate Bosworth was horrible). I think that more people are losing interest in Superman because he's so overpowered that he never has to struggle with anything. What Nolan did for Batman was show a character who is flawed and troubled but not in an emo way, someone who we can relate to. The audience can't relate to someone when bullets bounce off their eye!!! Superman Returns was so boring and what the new film needs is more action but not braindead type of action. The series needs to start over and free itself of the past continuity like Batman Begins did. Superman's powers also need to seriously be toned down, make it so that he can't lift things that are enormously heavy (or at least he struggles to lift it) and there are tons of things he's weak against other than Kryptonite such as gases, electricity, drowning and most importantly he can be attacked psychologically. The series also needs to use a different villain other than Lex Luthor, he's appeared in 4 of the 5 Superman films and he's gotten too played out, he can be reintroduced in a later sequel but not in the first film. I think they could really use Braniac, he could perfectly use his intellect to exploit Superman's weaknesses and push him to the edge. Superman also needs to be darker but by darker I don't mean he's pulling guns out on people, I mean he's more realistic and flawed. The origin also needs to be retold in a modern setting, The original film "jumped" a lot when showing Clark Kent's past and the origin could be better fleshed out in the new film. We know that pretty much the whole world knows Superman's origins but the new film could add a new unique touch. What if Superman was really sent to conquer Earth, not save it? That would be a gutsy and interesting approach.

SlashBeast on Aug 25, 2008


once again....relax all. Dark doesnt mean that they are going to make a batman movie for supes. If you think about it, superman is a complex character and that can be explored. He is a person striving to fit in, keep a low profile, stay on a morale straight track, and lives with these decisions everyday. THis is a man so powerful that he has to be careful in everyday tasks. A simple touch could devistate and destroy . Clark Kent is a flawed person who is always trying to make the right choice. But it is still a choice he has to make. In the comics, for instance, superman has killed. It was a choice he had to make to protect others from harm. It nearly drove him crazy . that right there is a dark story. Darkness is all around...choices we make have consequences. This is a character whose choices could kill, hurt , or help people. This has a huge effect on a persons mind. then again, just as the joker brought darkness to TDK, they could have a villian do the same. Lex Luthor is a killer...plain and simple. But he is a well respected business man throughout the world and practices his evils without the world knowing. I once read a comic where luthor was sparring a partner and that partner actully hit luthor and wone the match. Luthor dismissed everyone to attend to business. while the other person was in the locker room changing, he was snatched up and killed. Luthor , in a sense , could be comparedd to the joker except that he puts on a charade that he is a rational, caring businessman. But deep down, he is psychotic . a reboot is in need. no one has really gotten superman right and it is time we did. Kevin Smith and Mark Millar are among those i hope are involved . not siger, not jon peters, def not TIM BURTON (what were they thinking) . I would love to see superman vs doomsday, then reign of supermand and return of superman . there is such a wonderful story there...one that is still popular to this day .

michael on Aug 25, 2008


#65 Brandon Routh and Christopher Reeves are nothing alike. Maybe you need your vision checked. Brandon is flawless. I'm just saying that superman doesn't need a babyface, he has to look tough, maybe older, elite, presidential. Brandon Routh can sound amazingly like Reeves in the way he talks, but how do you come to the conclusion that their the exact mutha fuckin same? Yeah, and Kevin Spacey did a perfect mutha fuckin Gene Hackman.

Dustyman1505 on Aug 25, 2008


WOW, i hope Rubinov can see all this warmth about the Superman character. Superman is all about 'Heart & Soul'. The Boyscout. its good to have some 'dark' edges, but I think that department is in the Batcave. Kal El is always about 'truth, honor, justice'. If WB decides to go dark then, it definitely will not bode well. Superman Returns was not a bad film. It was neither a great film. But it most definitely was not a 'Batman & robin'. Just stick to Kal El's nature and throw in some big 'fist' fights with Braniac &/or Doomsday and all the fans worldwide will be pleased. Nuff said.

Shawn Gregory on Aug 25, 2008


I think this is a good thing....I've seen all the films but always had the same problem with Supes...he's too much of a fucking boyscout....Nobody is that fucking perfect all the time which is why I fucking hated smallville and one of the reasons why this franchise is now being rebooted. While it doesn't have to be a complete copy of TDK, it would be a refreshing take on the character to see his moral compass pushed and see how he deals with that. And give us a fucking complete character of a villan....we've already seen Lex a thousand times....Give me doomsday or Darkseid or someone cool for like that, dammit!

Cmurder on Aug 26, 2008


I have never posted a comment on anything like this, but after reading through most of the ones previous, I just felt compelled. First, do any of you know anything about the comic book story lines for DC after 1986? Its obvious that Brian Singer doesn't have a clue (not sure he knew anything before that either). Growing up a fan of the Superman storylines, I waited nearly 20 years to see a quality, modern version of the character on film. While I do respect the Donner films, and the Christopher Reeve character, they are outdated. Brandon Routh was cast as a new Chris Reeve, not Superman. He should not be kept around for a new incarnation. Someone like Clive Owen would be better suited to play an up-to-date Man of Steel. Like so many fans, I had high hopes for Superman Returns, but found myself shifting in my seat within the first 10 minutes. With all of the possible storylines that could have been used, this one was weak to say the least. Is it watchable? Yes, but, speaking for all of the true fans of the character, it was not OUR movie. I felt cheated. I hope that Warner realizes that this type of movie should be done by someone who knows and cares about the character as much as the normal paying fans do. If this is the route they want to take, I will wait another 5 years to see THAT Superman over getting another Donner... I mean Singer version out in the next year or so.

TOK on Aug 26, 2008


Just a thought, how about getting Jim Caviezel to play the Man of Steel? He has that pretty boy look but still has that darker rough look also since they want to go darker for the next film. He's got a more solid built and looks more like a Super Man, Routh looks more like a Super man in his college years. Plus Caviezel is a pretty good actor, in Count of Monte Cristo he was able to play the helpless victim to the confident strong hero role.

Omega728 on Aug 28, 2008


Why do people think the orignal story of superman is based on the movies and the series. Superman does not have anything dark. Even when he died, when he fought Doomsday, there was nothing dark. Superman is a being with great powers that he protects the human race. When he died there was nothing dark about it, just saddness, due to the fact that he went through a hell of a beat, which no one thought he would be beaten. Thats when the world had a shock! Now lets not get confuse on what Smaville or even the sups movies go about. Especially Superman Returns, I think they should scrapp the hell out of that movie. How can sups have a kid, who the hell came with that idea. But I say they need to make 2 more movies and introduce Doomsday.

Jaime on Sep 7, 2008


Yeah I also agree, who came out with the idea with superman having a son?!

alucard on Sep 7, 2008


If they're rebooting it then get rid of Super-Offspring, never mind how impossible it would be for Lois and Superman to have a kid (He's an alien afterall).

SlashBeast on Sep 14, 2008

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed -or- daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main account on twitter:
For the latest posts only - follow this one:

Add our updates to your Feedly - click here

Get the latest posts sent in Telegram Telegram