1. I would like to see Smallville end after this coming season and then spin off into a feature film. I think the hesitancy of Welling (to wear the costume) and Rosenbaum (to shave his head) would evaporate if given the opportunity to headline in a big budget summer blockbuster. As long as the creative team eliminates the annoying teenybopper angst/love triangles, this cast and the "'verse" (as you kids call such things) they have established would translate to the big screen, minus the 90210-style antics.

Posted at 10:54AM on Aug 24th 2008 by James

2. NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! For the love of all that is good, do not bring anything from Smallville to the big screen. I'm a die-hard superman fan but I absolutely hate Smallville. I used to watch it intently hoping the show would get better but it's just all of the same teeny soapy drama and horrible acting. Stay away Warner.... Far away!

Posted at 1:23AM on Aug 28th 2008 by Jerry

3. Well if they want to go "Dark" with superman the best way is to introduce Bizarro cause Luthor still has the kryptonite dagger with supermans blood on it, but anyway to reboot the entire thing is pointless cause the only story better known than superman is Jesus the best thing to do is just keep going with the re-introduction and deal with it.

Posted at 11:02AM on Aug 24th 2008 by Ryan

4. Yeah that would be the "big boy" way to handel it. They screwed up our hero and now they got to but him back on top.
I didnt think "Returns" was terrrible though.

Posted at 11:27PM on Sep 30th 2008 by Jack

5. how about none. Superman is a boring story because he's got to many powers, no legitimate weakness, and a lack of a true purpose

Posted at 11:09AM on Aug 24th 2008 by Casey

6. I can't agree more. He's already very unstopabble as it is.

Maybe we could see the whole thing rebooted with the death of superman. Altough they made it into cartoon form. And probably everyone knows the ending to that story.

Posted at 2:40PM on Aug 24th 2008 by cough

7. I ABSOLUTELY agree

Posted at 11:16PM on Aug 24th 2008 by victor de la torre

8. What about being an orphan? or not being able to have a love life? or having to ...save the planet (while wearing tights.)

Posted at 11:27PM on Sep 30th 2008 by Jack

9. Eric, please link one review establishing TDK as the greatest, most important film of all time. Try to establish one firm piece of evidence in your favor. This TDK bashing amazes me, really. All the Superman fan-boys are royally pissed. I'm an unabashed Batman fan, but even I recognize the limitations of the movie, as did most critics.

So WB screwed up your favorite hero? Don't take it out on the Batman. Its TDK's success that will make your reboot possible. Send your thank-you cards to Chris and Jonathan Nolan.

Posted at 11:35AM on Aug 24th 2008 by Philip

10. Oh, relax. I loved "The Dark Knight," too, and I'm not a "fanboy" of anything. I don't, as they say, have a horse in this race. I was just making a joke about how wildly influential the film has been -- the #1 film of all time according to IMDB user ratings (it has since slipped to #3), and now WB's sudden decision to make more dark superhero movies. ("Hey, we finally got one right! We'd better make a bunch more just like it!") But I know we're not supposed to joke about important things like "The Dark Knight," so I apologize for that.

Posted at 1:55PM on Aug 24th 2008 by Eric D. Snider

11. Maybe what they mean by `darkness' is a sense of reality. The new Batman movies are stylistically more in our world than they are a comic book world. I love Superman Returns but I'm glad they're rebooting it.

For Director, I reckon it should be Steven Spielberg. Where he's at career wise at the moment, I think he'd be perfect. He'd know how to balance the drama with the exhilaration and he's a grittier director now than he's ever been.

In Superman Returns, apart from the space shuttle/jet rescue scene, why were his flying sequences so damned boring? Where was the joy and exhilaration in him flying? Sam Raimi did this magnificently with dynamic and exhilarating sequences of Spiderman swinging through the canyons of New York. Raimi shot them just how I pictured them in my head reading the comics as a kid. And it was the same with Superman. Didn't David Singer ever, when he was a kid, imagine what it would be like to fly like Superman when he swam underwater in a swimming pool?

And when ordinary people saw Superman, like the kid in the crowd with the mobile phone, they just stared at him, but not in a `wow' kind of way, it was like they were looking at a homeless guy covered in vomit. For Godsake! It's Superman!

I have to agree with the emerging Anne Hathaway movement to cast her as Lois Lane. I think she'd be perfect and much more believable than...um, whatever that girls name was. I think she was cast because she looked like the Fleisher cartoon Lois Lane. As much as I like Brandon Routh as Supes, I reckon his moment has gone. I can't see WB casting him again. I think casting a `Man' as Superman instead of a kid would be good too. Using Alex Ross's images as a basis would be a great place to start.

Supes in the comics at the moment is kind of interesting.
There's this whole reinvention of Kryptons history thing happening. How they were aware that they had powers under different coloured suns and used it to their advantage. Brainiac being responsible for the destruction of Krypton and the abduction of Kandor City. (which WB can then use for Supergirl) If they are going to have Lex Luthor again, which I hope they don't...maybe the sequel, he should be much darker. I think they've got him down right in Smallville.

I think in the reboot, the villain should be Metropolis itself. It should be a city that's cynical and hostile to someone like Superman. Superman should fight for and win not just Lois Lanes heart but Metropolis's as well. Thematically, there's still the old `Truth, Justice and the American Way'. It's the very heart of what Superman stands for and why we love him. He stands up for the downtrodden and those that have been hard done by. In the old comics, Clark Kent would investigate and write about people who were being targeted by criminals or solving a mystery of some sort while the mysterious Superman would fly in, sort the problem out with a bit of Super Biff and bring the bad guys to justice.
That's what I reckon.

Posted at 11:38AM on Aug 24th 2008 by Ross Carroll

12. How about the kind where they just drop the geek stuff entirely and make a movie for people older than 12?

Posted at 11:41AM on Aug 24th 2008 by crabbie

13. Superman Returns was not a reboot, it was a half-assed sequel to the Richard Donner movies. Same Jor-El voice, same style, etc.

It needs to be done right. I'd like to see another origin story, Brainiac, Darkseid... if done right it can be good.

Posted at 11:46AM on Aug 24th 2008 by Marcos Kirsch

14. Totally agree

Posted at 4:53PM on Sep 20th 2008 by Brandon Barbin

15. The only way a Superman movie would work now, and really the only Superman movie I would want to see would be The Death of Superman. It was maybe one of the best graphic novels/comic books ever done, and it would be amazing to see Superman face off against Doomsday. Its dark but dark without changing the character of Superman and his tone. By doing so, they could keep Brandon Routh cause he wasnt that bad, but just kill him off. It would be a major hit with alot of potential. But fuck Bryan Singer. The guy hasnt made a decent movie since Xmen and he totally blew it with Superman Returns. Plus I hear hes a dueschbag

Posted at 12:02PM on Aug 24th 2008 by Alex

16. Think about how many characters could be in it. And you could even have more people in it than the graphic novel.
Eradicator,superboy,cyborg,steel etc....
But we all know that superman comes back but if they do it right.....they could have their dark superman.

Posted at 11:27PM on Sep 30th 2008 by Jack

17. As someone who liked Superman Returns I always get a little annoyed that it's considered a great failure. Was it perfect? No, but I liked both Brandon Routh and Kevin Spacey in their respective roles; Kate Bosworth, not so much. Director Bryan Singer has been talking about going "all Wrath of Khan" on the sequel with the possible introduction of Brainiac to the feature films for the firs time. I like that idea. One, it lends itself to being a little darker than most Superman films because Brainiac is such an evil character. Two, it's a different villain from Lex Luthor.

People my disagree with me here, but Superman II is example of how a Superman film could go a little darker than normal. If Warner Brothers hadn't been so scared of Richard Donner's more dark version and decided to go campy it would have been a much better film (and it still remains a great sequel). Singer, or any good director for that matter, could do the same thing with a Brainiac storyline.

However, if Warner Brothers wants to go Dark Knight on Superman I don't think that can work. The guy who stands for truth, justice, and the American way (whatever that may mean in the 21st century) just cannot go as dark as Batman, I just don't think it work. But I could be wrong.

Posted at 12:10PM on Aug 24th 2008 by Jimmy

18. My thoughts exactly. I liked "Returns," as well, and saw a lot of what Singer did as necessary to retcon away the nasty taste 3 & 4 left in everyone's mouth, as well as retcon IN some of the stuff that was put back into the "Donner Cut" of 2. Now that THAT'S out of the way, we can move on to a more action and deep plot-oriented film. Brainiac, Darkseid, Doomsday- Hey, they're all dark (I wouldn't call Bizarro dark, since I prefer the portrayal from the Timmverse, where he's a misguided poor copy of Supes, but his heart's in the right place.). Superman himself would be tough to be dark, unless we got into "Dark Knight Returns" or "Kingdom Come" territory.

The only reason Warner Bros. doesn't see "Returns" as successful was because THEY made "Returns" responsible for all of the bank spent on the many incarnations of the failed "Lives" project. Most of the money that the press listed as "Returns" costing wasn't spent on "Returns" at all. It was spent on Kevin Smith, Tim Burton, McG, Brett Ratner, Nicholas Cage, and all the other guys Jon Peters brought in & then tossed aside in order to make the "Darker & Edgier" Superman film that ended up putting the series into Development Hell the last time (Spiders? "S" logo becomes knives? What is this crap?!?!). They should chalk that money up as lost money and let "Returns" be the restart. Any new reboot would be box-office poison.

Posted at 1:03PM on Oct 22nd 2008 by ReverendRob

19. Here's an idea, let's make a Superman movie without Kal-El in it at all, or only until the very end. Make a sci-fi story about the end of Krypton and Jor-El's decision to send his infant son off into space. That's a good place to start a reboot.

The inevitable problem is that Superman just isn't very cinematic anymore. He's a force of nature, not a character with an arc--and his story has been told over and over. They've even told the story of the guy who used to play him (a l a Hollywoodland).

Posted at 12:13PM on Aug 24th 2008 by Kurt

20. Then there is your answer. Stop the whole "Superman is a force of nature" thing and turn him into a character.

Posted at 10:14PM on Aug 24th 2008 by Justin