August
18 Superman Status Update

honestly, i thought superman, with his cape and big 's', was a bit dorky way back when i was a kid. and lex luthor is too 'take over the world' for a bad guy today. singer's movie had all those things -- it was a 70's-style movie with a conservative contemporary edge. they need to rebuild superman from the ground up.

i'm not even sure if i would bother to see another movie like singer's on dvd

Yeah, I'm not sure how adaptable Superman is to the modern day. A period piece might be cool.

Yes, I agree...I see SR movie like a Donner's tribute (a fan's tribute), but like a begining too, and only I hope that MOS could it be the developement of this. MOS could it be like X-Men2, TDK...I think that Singer can make this perfectly

That's a shame. I actually liked Superman Returns quite a bit (so did my friends). I think Singer is a talented director and I liked Brandon Routh as Superman. I was looking forward to a sequel but I guess it won't happen. At least Marvel actually makes movies with more than one super hero. I wish DC could take their heroes (other than Batman) to a different studio.

If you want to save SUPERMAN... make it more darker and not commerciallize... just like THE DARK KNIGHT the writer and the director make some risk to the movie and look what happen?? its HUGE because fans and non fans of the franchise was curious of what did they do... i hope if you want to save SUPERMAN make it more darker...

I beg to differ, the last thing a Superman movie ever need is dark. Superman needs to be bright, uplifting, inspiring, as he is the symbol of hope. Superman is a figure that we all look up to. The movie needs to be fun, with the right balance of action and drama. Superman Returns was all wrong in every way. A reboot would be sufficient.

I think the talented team of Singer, Routh and Spacey can all break the bits of limbo created in the last film and move forward in the proposed Man of Steel. There's no need for a reboot. The elements are all there, the groundwork has already been laid out - it's time for the franchise to pick up where Returns left off and make Superman the fun thrill-ride of a movie that it can be. The character is dark and isolated enough; the picture doesn't have to be. What this needs is a green light from WB and DC.

i disagree. superman returns was quite fine. rebooting the whole franchise would be quite awkward. they should give brandon routh more acting lessons tho', the guy was like a living statue in superman returns, with his straight face and all

Superman Returns was fantastic as a first movie. (A lot of people liked it). greenlight MOS already WB/DC. The theme for Returns was dark and realistic. The only thing MOS needs is action (fighting) and we've been promised this by Singer and Routh. Re-booting is a horrible idea.
Re-booting will be just like slapping the people who liked 'SR' in the face, that's a lot of people.

MOS should be greenlight and some non spoilerish info should be released on the internet, to attract fans and movie viewers .

Greenlight this and I'm already interested .

No, a reboot is definitely not the way to go - that would mean another origin story, blah blah blah. All the elements are there, all we need is a rockin' sockin' bad guy for Supes to tussle with. Bring on Lobo! Or Brainiac. Hell, even Doomsday would be nice. We need some big ol' Earth shakin' rumbles to shake the moths out of this sucker, nothing more, nothing less. An all out brawl between alien gods needs to take place to kick this franchise back into gear. "Superman vs. Lobo" - writes itself! Plus it introduces a new character to spin off into a franchise of his own!

Good job Anne.

Finally someone who is more well known and respected has heard the same thing I was told (and reported) more than a year ago which led to the creation of SaveSuperman.com.

Now the question is, how long will it take for the supposed "insiders" on various boards to call you a liar and a fraud like they have been doing to everyone else recently.

This division amongst fans really needs to end. Superman should have been started over just as Batman was. Superman Returns can be viewed as closure for the Donner universe. Now is time to start fresh and start BIG. Bring in someone like Zach Snyder or James Cameron or Peter Jackson to helm a new franchise. Span the globe to find someone truly fitting to play Superman as he is in the comics. Not some twig in a muscle suit.

Superman Returns was horrible (I know, lots of people say they and all their friends liked it, but the box office numbers don't lie, most people didn't, that would be me and all my friends). And no, it does not need to get darker, that seems to be the answer to everything these days, make it darker. Iron man was not dark. Great reviews, great at box office. Just needs to have a well written story that provides plenty action, while letting us see the real heart of the character. Superman always feels a little superficial, like those people that have a wall up and never really let you get to know them.
A re-boot would be good.

I just wish they could have a Superman movie with someone besides Lex Luthor. I know he is Superman's archenemy, but why not have someone like Brainiac, or Darkseid. I would say Zod, but that was done in 2.

On a side note, if they reboot do they get rid of Jason, because if that is the case I am all for a reboot.

Start over with a completely new team. SR did all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons. Someone (anyone) just ask Nolan if he would reboot or keep going with the same team. Oh wait, he's already answered that.

Maybe it didn't meet projections, but the movie was hardly a box office failure. It had an estimated budget of $270,000,000, and grossed $391,081,192 worldwide, with $200,069,408 in the USA. It had an overall 77% fresh rating from Rotten Tomatoes, and a 73% from the "Cream of the Crop." The movie also generated nearly $13 million at the rental counter in it's first weekend, one of the highest debuts all year. The total rental revenue was $53.78 million thru February 18, 2007.

Batman Begins grossed $205,343,774 in the USA, with $371,853,783 worldwide. The big difference was that Batman Begins estimated budget was $150,000,000. Oh, and the budget number for Superman Returns reportedly includes $40 million from over a decade of false starts.

Superman was not initially a dark comic. Batman was. Trying to duplicate the success of Batman would be a BIG mistake. That's usually how Hollywood screws things up.

Did Superman Returns have enough action given the budget? Probably not, but that's an opinion. Was it a failure at the box office? Absolutely not. I'm not saying there aren't some issues that need to be addressed (WB's marketing, for one), but I think Singer and Routh are perfectly capable of doing so in the sequel. If they don't, then start over.

I mean not to get technical, but Superman WAS dark when he was first written. Dark and bald, may I add...

But no, there is no need for him to go dark. I mean, he himself, as a character. He should not be dark, and he should not be morally ambivalent. The core of his character is rooted in rural moral outtakes: He the mold that all other heroes would, or should follow.

But I'd rather have Justice League.

Superman needs to be re-booted, why? The introduction of Jason. The writers of SR have wrote themselves into a narrative dead-end. Not a smart choice to give the titular character a kid at the beginning of a new franchise, even writers like Mark Waid said it was a big mistake.

Brandon Routh has to go, he was stiff and has no gravitas to pull someone with a charisma like Superman. He couldn't even strike a convincing pose in the first official picture that was released a few years ago.

I want to see a big-budget 2-D animated Superman movie, in the style of the old four-color comics, with the kind of technical detail that we see in high-tech anime like Gundam and Patlabor. Superman should be DRAWN, not acted. (Check out some of the 1940s Superman cartoons produced by the Fleischer brothers to get a hint of what I mean.)

If you're going to do a "dark" big-budget superhero movie, go back to the novel, "Gladiator," by Philip Wylie, the work that originally inspired the teenage creators of Superman, and adapt that.

I hope they don't reboot the franchise as well. I enjoyed Superman Returns, and I thought that the addition of Jason took the franchise in a new creative direction, which has a lot of potential for future storytelling. I don't see how anyone can call the movie a box office failure, given that it had about the same box office take as Batman Begins. Whatever problems people claim there were about a lack of action, or too much melodrama, can be addressed in a sequel just as easily as in a reboot, without throwing away the interesting character development we saw with Superman Returns. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing where they take the current story.

The recently released "Superman: Doomsday" was a great example of combining a dark premise (the Death of Superman), with a ton of action and great story telling. So a live action version probably would not do it justice. But for the next movie, it truely needs to be "the planet at stake - not a land development" piece. Lobo would be great, but Darkseid and Brainic would be excellent.

Rebooting is absolutely the wrong move. If they do it, I will not see the movie. A vocal minority is making it seem like the general audience is against a sequel. But many of those are mad because Tom Welling wasn't cast in the movie. A sequel is still the way to go. Many people like Btandon Routh a lot and want to see him continue.

To reboot superman would have the same effect as what happened with the hulk earlier this summer. The latter hulk, which I can't judge the quality since I haven't seen either, performed roughly the same as Ang Lee's, showing all that work merely confused the public since the two movies were only a few years apart.

Regardless with how you liked superman returns, countless super hero movies have proven themselves by producing a sequel that outdoes the original (spider-man, hellboy, the dark knight, and x-men... which Bryan Singer also directed). Give it another chance.

I did like Superman Returns and don't think a reboot is necessary. The storyline dictates just how 'dark' the character is anyway and Singer has said that the next film would see Superman get angry. I'd like to see Lex Luther create Bizarro who kills the kid and gets Superman angry. Lex uses the shard of Kryptonite he has left in his pocket to make a Kryptonite tipped bullet to try to finish Superman off this time. Then there's a villain with comparable powers for Superman to fight and you get rid of the kid too. I reckon they should get Mackenzie Crook from 'The Office' to play Bizarro. That's the film I'd like to see.

Okay, what's wrong with this picture: not once does this article mention Jason. THAT's the reason I want a reboot. I might stand alone on my own two feet, but aside from that whole thing, the movie was at least PASSABLE. Oh, it's an overrated, confused, @$$-kissing fodder-for-the-mill fest, but it's the whole, "look, he's gone for five years! Look, Lois has moved on and has a kid! Look, he's the real father!" plot that made me wince.

Superman could have worked. Superman as continuation of older films could have worked if they made better choices on what to change and what to keep the same. Why make everything else look like in SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE, but not his costume? And they should have looked at the comics for inspiration. "Oh, well, we have this huge stockpile of stories to chose from, including the best selling comic ever [the death] so let's just give 'em an original story that's banal and wrong for the character."

Thanks for the update Ms. Thompson.

Hopefully WB goes ahead and reboots this franchise. Put the focus on Clark Kent/ Superman and give him some charisma. A superman who helps not because he was prophesied to be Jesus and save us, but because of the values the Kent’s put in him and that he naturally wants to help out. Give Lois Lane her feisty attitude back, let's have billionaire mogul Lex Luther who head's LexCorp. A worthy super-villain. No Jason. No dull love story. Put Superman in a bright modern metropolis setting with modern clothing (no bow tie's Jimmy), and for goodness sake, Superman colors are RED (not muted brownish maroon), blue, and yellow.

With all that said, I don't hate SR and wouldn't get upset if there is a sequel, but I'm not really interested in seeing that particular vision continued especially with the drag of super kid Jason.

As for the next one "outdoing" this one, forget it! The fact that they went in this direction means that they've dug themselves in a hole they can't get out of.

It's something Superman would never do, and it makes him a complete idiot. I don't look at him the way I would in some other vehicle.

"Oh, if they reboot it, it'll have the same effect as it had on THE INCREDIBLE HULK," which was, what exactly? It didn't make back its money, but it wouldn't have if it was a sequel either.

Y' wanna know why the Hulk movies do so poorly?

THE HULK LOOKS FAKE!!!

One more thing: the fact that a better sequel to a film doesn't mean the first film "proved itself," except--sadly--that means that all these films are just pilots for ongoing series' (or, as the hipster-dofus crowd likes to call them, "franchises" *rolls eyes*) which pretty much means, "hey, let's make a mediocre film, and the next one will be better." Geeze, maybe they should... just make the next film and not bother with the first one.

Sadly, all that would mean for Superman is that there's this movie where he suddenly has this kid due to reasons that are COMPLETELY out of character. Why does he have a kid he's not taking care of? Why did Lois think her son belonged to another man? Why are we even going into this territory with a SUPERMAN MOVIE!?!

Bryan Singer is a hack. Some of his earlier films might have been good, but this was just an attempt to get the usual freaks n' geeks to fawn over him like they did with the X-Men films. He learned all too well on those films what the audience will forgive and the ingredients that are supposed to make for a film they like. Too bad he could no longer cook them properly and he served them with a side of bad ideas.

superman is totally fine for modern day. what the heck is wrong with a hero that actually stands up for something and isn't a drunk or a anti hero. i think that's a stupid statement.

For those of us who grew up with the original Superman movies, the bottom line is this: Superman Returns was a very, very average movie...neither great or awful. I like where Singer was trying to go, and keeping the original music was a good choice of course...but the story was simply uneventful and lifeless. Routh and Spacey (who I always thought was overrated) simply cannot compare to Reeve or Hackman in the original roles.

Routh seems like he is trying to copy Reeve's original performance, but he's not charismatic or skilled enough to carry it out.

Lois Lane's role is mishandled....

With all that said, I don't think the series should be "rebooted", Singer should keep the reigns, just with a better script and better actors.....and more action to complement better characterization.

@Liz

A lot of people argue that Superman can't be adapted towards "modern audiences."

However, there's a very popular show called "Smallville" that does just that. The folks at WB have been killing themselves trying to figure out a way to make Superman relevant to the 21st century, when all the while, they've had a little show in their TV division doing just that for the better part of eight years!

It's time to end Smallville and place Tom Welling, Erica Durance and Michael Rosenbaum on the big screen.

I have no doubt Warner Bros will bypass Singer on any future Superman movies. I think they have to be smart enough to realize that the property needs a modern spin. NO more Lex Luthor. Create a movie with real fear as its backdrop and center the story on 9/11 type terrorism like Chris Nolan's Batman movies did. The Dark Knight has hit a real nerve because of that. Sadly Brandon Routh who was a solid man of Steel will be the odd man out simply because Singer didn't have the vision needed with Superman Returns. I liked that film for what it was but it wasn't what movie fans wanted in this day and age!

mos should be were smallville ends. take tom welling and give him the role he has the build, and the acting ability to do the job.

if they end smallville and have clark don the s and cape it would:
1:bring fans of smallville series in
2:it would be the origin story we all dreamed of if its done right.
3:it will be a break from what we are used too.

so in my mind yes reboot but use what you already have a superman fans KNOW and LIKE.

"hommage"???

NO to a reboot.

What the WB needs to understand is that you people screaming "REBOOOOT" have no idea what you want in a movie that starts from scratch. Look at all of you, it's mayhem trying to get you to agree where a new movie should go if it was a reboot.

You are the same people who didn't want Bryan Singer from the beginning, and are trying to make it seem like nobody liked SR.

The WB needs to push their agenda either way already. We've heard Legendary Owner Thomas Tull speak on where he would like the sequel to go, and I believe with 2 years passed, we all know what needs to be addressed for a sequel to SR.

As for the Smallville group, I PRAY that Tom Welling were to be cast in a reboot, just so you could see how horribly he is viewed amongst the fans of Superman that don't watch Smallville. Which, judging by its ratings, is a crapload of people.

Mark Millar is writing a superman script! If anyone deserves a crack at rebooting Big Blue then it should be this great writer. Read Marvel's Ultimates 1 and 2, the Fantastic Four for a sample of his work.

He has a knack for finding a compelling story and great action sequences. And I think it's about time superman hit something, and not just lifting a big rock into space.

Re-Do superman 2 please Zod was awesome

We Really Need A SUPERMAN - "BEGINS"

I love people who claim to represent all "the fans of Superman."

I'm not sure how they can repair the damage done in the eye of the general contemporary movie-going audience to Superman as a movie superhero. Superman Returns was a huge disappointment all around. It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't even close to what it should have been. It was hopelessly mediocre, with a ridiculous storyline and a wooden at best Superman who managed to have even less on-screen charisma than lines of dialog.

Reboot? Absolutely, from the ground up.

Bash Tom Welling all you want, but keep in mind that he's successfully kept the early years of Superman alive and in the public eye for 8 successful seasons - longer than any other actor has portrayed the character. Take a look at Superman-related DVD sales and be enlightened at what people like enough to spend their $$$ on.

At 31 years old, he's a perfect age and look/shape for portraying a big-screen Superman, with or without using any of the other Smallville baggage.

"Fans have been clamoring all over the web--and on this blog--for a complete reboot"...
Please!!!
By all due respect, has it ever occured to you that it's not those who were sufficiently entertained by this movie who sit down and post their troubled feelings about it? I stumbled over your article by coincidence and fail to understand why Singers first attempt should be widely regarded as a failure. It wasn't around here (Austria) amon those who went to the theaters and dvd-stores. Singer was the main reason this movie got out of development hell. And despite it is far from perfect...how many movies are? I believed again a man could fly. Give the man some credit and the get-go, he will do what is necessary.

There should be no doubt that this franchise needs to be completely rebooted. Singer's film was an epic mistake that paid too much tribute to the Donner films and has no room for any kind of sequel. He COMPLETELY missed the boat on who the character is. All of the great Superman writers of recent times like Millar, Meltzer, Johns, etc. have come out to say how much this film missed the mark. Even the friggen producers of Smallville were ragging on it.
Listen to the fine folks voer at the Singer's Superman Sucks blog (http://singerssupermansucks.blogspot.com ) and BOOT SINGER, REBOOT SUPERMAN!

The problems with "Superman Begins" stem primarily from the central issue with most Hollywood productions of comic-book mythology -- the writers don't understand the central tenets of the mythos and churn out junk that doesn't reflect why the character resonates with the human condition.

Here's what Hollyweird decision-makers miss: Superman was the brainchild of two poor Jewish immigrants barely out of their teens who were reacting to the negatives of urban America ca. 1938. Siegel and Shuster felt alien, disenfranchised, and powerless, so they created a god-like being that was equally as alien, but could empower the downtrodden and was supremely powerful. And it's no surprise that Luthor was also created by Siegel and Shuster, because Lex is the perfect antithesis to Supes. Luthor represents those who disenfranchise; he's protector of the status quo, a "native-born American" according to the terminology of early 20th-century, who wants the alien to go away and leave things as they "should be."

Recently, DC and Warner Bros. retconned Lex Luthor as a brilliant and powerful businessman who is convinced that the alien Superman represents a threat to the world -- really, Lex's world, but to the megalomaniac it's all the same. Lex believes that, on Earth, power belongs to a gifted, hard-working human paragon, and that the alien Superman is an interloper whose presence interferes with the natural order of human progression. Superman keeps Lex from his rightful place as the most powerful human on Earth. Lex believes that destroying Superman is a moral imperative: Superman is the greatest threat to humanity because his natural gifts far exceed what any human can hope to gain either by exercising their own gifts or through hard work. To Lex, it's obvious that Superman threatens the core of what it means to be human.

Those are the characters that need to appear in the next Superman movie -- the unique, singular, lonely alien who uses his immense power to defend those in his adopted home that need him the most, and the crusading, immensely intelligent, ruthless human businessman who truly believes the alien is a threat to humanity.

And it's clear that today's moviegoer can relate to every social theme that influenced Siegel and Shuster to create Supes and Lex. For example, in the '30s, the perceived economic threat to native-born Americans was the influx of immigrants competing with perceived limited resources and opportunities; today the discussion is about the economic threat posed by illegal immigrants. Obviously today we continue to worry about the actions of those in power and their effects on those without; economic disorder and abuses of political power make the front page every day. The world environment also is similar; in 1938 the war in Europe was imminent, and in 2008 the US is at war in two Middle Eastern countries. We may believe that American audiences today are "too mature" for a hope-inspiring Superman, but we live in dark times quite similar to those that spawned him.

The next writers, directors, and actors who take a stab at revitalizing Superman on the big screen should take notes from "Hancock," especially Smith's monologue before he went to jail: "Life here can be difficult for me. I am the only one of my kind." That's a great thematic locus.

People who have the mental capacity to bring to life a website called singerssupermansucks.com don't deserve to be heard.

Pathetic, homophobic excuse for an outlet.

Questioning Routh's choices to coninue playing gay characters isn't "homophobic" unless you're one of these dolts who merely sees the word "gay" and runs for the "PC" police. The site posed a legitimate question about him doing so while he still (allegedley) carries the mantle of being the film Superman. Especially in light of all the "Is Routh Gay?" paranoia that was going around back in 2006. No where on the site are there any "homophobic" comments.
Perhaps people who make assumptions about things and generalize content because they only see a few hot-button words are the ones that dont deserve to be heard?

Put Chris Nolan on it. He'll figure it out...

April 11, 2034

Variety reports that Warner Bros. is planning its fifteenth reboot of the "Superman" franchise.

WB studios spokesman Jerry Thunderkunt reports that studio execs are greenlighting another reboot of the ancient and enervated superhero franchise. "We've learned from the last fourteen critically panned flops which failed to recoup their initial budget," said Thunderkunt. "Clearly, audiences did not respond to the characterization of Lois Lane as a whored-up Jezebel attempting to seduce a bisexual autistic Man of Steel."

According to Thunderkunt, the WB Studio's nearly $320 billion combined loss on the past fourteen "Superman" trainwrecks has done nothing but steel studio executives' resolve to "buckle down, lay off the coke for fifteen minutes, and attempt to wring another dime from a bloodless and lifeless franchise."

"Clearly, having Superman undergo sexual transgendered reversal at the hands of Brainiac, travel back in time, impregnate himself, and then give birth to his own son who was--in fact---himself, confused audiences and accounted for the Burbank WB studios being firebombed by Underoo-wearing fanboys."

The Superman reboot saga goes back to the first decade of the century when forgotten director Bryan "Coxsman" Singer produced "Superman Returns" on a budget of over $200 million. The massively budgeted movie featured miniature train sets being destroyed by a home crystal-growing set, a super-powered bastard child, a seventeen-year-old Lois Lane, and a Superman on loan from the "Man-Hole" corner bar in San Francisco's Castro district. Years after the debacle, Singer remarked, "I was attempting to pull the greatest subversive act in the history of cinema: to slip right under the noses of unsuspecting straight Americans a totally gay superhero with virtually no interesting qualities, conflicts, or action. In the end, I simply made an unwatchable movie that sucked almighty balls."

Superman Returns was a great film! Yes it paid homage to Richard Donner's film, but it had to remind people as to why Superman is such a great character.

He is a symbol of hope, he is NOT Batman. He is the polar opposite of Batman. Superman has his own demons to battle, because he is the last of his kind, THE LAST OF HIS KIND!! Batman, for all his trouble and skeletons in the closet, can at least be Bruce Wayne and be among people.

Superman, in spite of his persona of Clark Kent, is still separate from the rest of humanity, because he isn't from Earth, in spite of being raised on Earth.

Superman Returns set the groundwork for the rebooted franchise already, by IGNORING the events of Superman 3 and 4. Man of Steel is the direction the franchise needs to go in, and Bryan Singer should be allowed to see it through. To do ANOTHER reboot now would be stupid and insulting for those who are emotionally invested in something like 'Superman Returns'. I think Brandon Routh is great as Superman, so STICK WITH HIM!! Let's not do what Batman did after Michael Keaton left, having a different batman for each film. That's stupid, Brandon Routh is Superman, DEAL WITH IT!!!

Don't reboot this franchise, but they do have to bring things back to where things were. Superman's kid and Lois' husband get killed. The tragedy is part of what drives the larger plot. Sort of like the way Rachel Dawes' murder drove the motivations for much of what happened in the second half of The Dark Knight.

One thing about Lois and Superman that WAS profound in Supes 1 and 2 but lost completely in Returns is this: Superman loves Lois IN SPITE OF her vanity and other flaws. That is a very important element that needs to, uh, Return. Superman is NOT a Peeping Tom. Superman is NOT a bumbling sadsack (even Clark is not - he is a clumsy, bumbling optimist but never a sadsack). Superman is a God who wants to be Human. For not understanding these basic concepts, Bryan Singer needs to be booted off the property. He cannot be trusted with the franchise.

If you keep rebooting Superman you'll lose the audience's trust. After a while, nothing means anything and people get confused. Anyway, look at The Incredible Hulk. People keep calling that a reboot, but that wasn't exactly what they did. They changed some things, but they moved on in a somewhat different direction from what Ang Lee did. That's pretty much what has to happen here.

The idea of Superman should be hope represented by someone POWERFUL. Superman Returns failed to deliver that message. In SR Superman was confused, unsure of himself, jealous, love sick and weak because of it all. Thats not Superman. Superman is confident, sure of himself, bashes through brick walls and saves the day. The kid was a HUGE mistake. It's because of that element alone that a reboot is necessary. Any sequel could not recover from that catastrophe. Routh didn't look like Superman, I'm sorry. And the Suit is awful.

A reboot is a fine idea (though there were many parts of Superman Returns I liked) but they've got to stay true to Superman. They can't go and try to get all dark on us. Superman isn't Batman. He needs his own uplifting style...Truth, Justice, the American Way....all that jazz. Some might call it corny but there's a reason he's called a Boy Scout.

They should never have changed the suit, if they wanted to darken anything they should have darkened the blue a little but keep the red, yellow bright. Routh looked skinny, even if he wasn't, because the TIGHT suit with its small S shield elongated his torso and gave him a women's waste, not to mention his neck looked spindly. I want to see Superman, demonstate his power, take on something like terrorism, something that really scares and intimidates us in this day and age, and give him someone he can really mix it up with.

Yeah! They gave him a woman's WASTE!

He's Super-man, not Doo-Doo man!

The woman's waste was too much, Kal-El may be kinky but he's not into scat an' he ain't no dooky lovin' shiteater!

Reboot, Please! The fanbase is obviously divided now and a restart of the franchise is the only hope of bringing them all together. Make it fresh and look to the comics for inspiration, rather than the Donner movies.

Let Nolan do it and have him meet Batman in the end. Great way to set them up as adversaries in a combined movie...

I thought Superman Returns was OK. I think one of the big problems was that he didn't have anyone to really fight. They should make a movie with a super villain like Doomsday or something.

Reboot the whole thing.
Stay true to the origin story and build a dynasty. It would work. Singer's project was understandable but so out of kilter from what fans wanted to see. I liked what someone else mentioned . . . it was an end to the Donner era Superman, it is time to move on.
Find a big guy to play Superman (Welling would be great but I'm sure about his acting) and bring in the DC universe in time - have fun and grow it like the Marvel characters are being done.

Marvel always kicked DCs ass.

They did it in their books and now they're doing it in the theaters & DVD.

WB execs are on crack.

Its hard to make a boy scout look cool...

SMALLVILLE MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHO'S WITH ME?

SR was a decent but not great movie. Fun but not exhilirating. A little slower than Superman II. The whole crystal island idea was dumb. Not exactly a liveable terrain eh?

However, do NOT reboot this franchise again! Do not recast! Take the expensive lesson learned from the HULK movies. Need more action ala Star Trek 2 along with much better story. It's okay to get crazy with aliens or other superhumans, remember Superman is one! Superman requires a good nemesis, preferably of the physical rather than mental kind.

Don't wait too long to make a decision. The time of intelligent superhero movies is now.

The Warner execs need to relax.

Superman Returns was a fantastic and visually beautiful film. It will stand the test of time. Surely they should be more proud of crafting a mature, revelant character piece than a peice of popcorn trash like Iron Man or Spider-Man 3. Sure they made more money but people will forget all about them by the time the next Marvel movie rolls around.

To be honest the main reaoson the film didn't do that well is because the marketing sucked- plus it would have worked better as a winter release. So don't blame Bryan Singer, you guys had a part to play in that too.

Please give Bryan Singer a chance to expand what he has set up. The cast was pitch perfect except for Bosworth, but I'd be willing to give her another chance.

Another installment from these guys is what everyone wants. Fanboys blogging about reboots just want some quick action packed movie to fill the void until Batman 3.

Singer knows how to stay respectful to the spirit of the Chris Reeve movies and the spirit of Superman as a character. Superman is not some character to be dumbed down in a CGI action fest.

Please give Singer and co another shot, they will knock it out of the park and you will have another timeless film on your hands.

As far as I'm aware, Bryan Singer is continuing to work on the sequel as he was before, and there's been no talk of anything to the contrary. Work on the sequel is moving forward full-steam ahead. No re-start, as Singer has already promised a more action-packed film next time around (which is what the studio, and the fans, want), so that was that as far as WB was concerned. Bank on it, the next film will have Singer as director (and co-writer) and Routh back as Superman.

I'm so sick of all the reboot comments.

Fans who saw Donner's original, back when it was released, would have felt the passion which Singer was aiming for. Superman Returns was a heartfelt homeage to those films, refreshing and updating the character as much as could be done in just one film.

What needs to happen now is a sequel to continue the update. not much needs to change -

- a super villain for Kal-el to fight
- super villain kills Kal-el's son and Lois' husband
- epic climactic battle
- keep the homeage to the originals, ie the music, etc
- Clark to return as more bumbling (ala Chris Reeve)
- Lose the retro look, there is no need for it. The original films were fairly modern in look and feel for their times
- Keep Brandon Routh, he is similar enough to Reeve to sometimes think it is actually the same Superman, but different enough to take it to a new generation aswell

This isn't the mess which Batman & Robin was and doesn't need a reboot.

So, yet again, a Returns' appologist is asking us to take the word of "webmasters" over that of ANNE THOMPSON OF VARIETY! Because apparantly that line of argument never gets old.

Sorry Frank, your webmaster powers are no match to Anne Thompson.

"Fans who saw Donner's original, back when it was released" ARE OVER 40 YEARS OLD NOW! Don't you get that?

THEY MADE A SEQUEL TO A 30 YEAR OLD MOVIE! How the hell did that not raise red flags with the studio masterminds? The target audience of teens were over a decade away from being born when Donner's film was released! And nobody thought of this? Nobody???

This nostalgia bullsh!t from middle-aged Donner/Singer fanboys has to end. It's leading Superman right into the grave. It's the now the 21st century for crying out loud. Reboot and get it over with.

OK, for all those who are saying this movie was great, or even passable at the box office and the movie itself was loved by all, the very fact that there is sooooo much deliberation about what to do next by the studio itself says that they were not happy with the box office take, the fans response, the storyline, or all of the above. Even the fact we are all writing these comments says, something is wrong. You may disagree, and thats ok, but any movie that does well is straight away, no problems at all, slated for a sequel. Third batman movie, sure. Sequel to transformers, sure. Spiderman, Ironman etc etc. Superman, well yeah, but what will we do with it cause the Superman Returns was woeful. And so the discussion continues.
Don't get me wrong, I would definitely pay to go see another take on it, but yeah, it has to be a reboot.

Please do the sequel! If they do the reboot, I won't even support and won't watch this! Forget it!

Brandon Routh was an fantastic as Superman. Superman Returns was awesome. Loved it.

Please do the sequel, no reboot!!

Thank you.

They have to reboot this. 'Superman Returns' had some great moments and works in a vacuum, Routh was fantastic casting as Superman, but it introduced way to many things nobody wants to see (a kid, lois with another man, a dated interpretation of Luthor). They need to go to the recent Superman graphic novels ('Birthright','all-star' 'For all seasons') the same way they did with Batman and relaunch this thing properly. Lex and Clark the same age and knew each other as teenagers, a young powerful genius Lex, Clark travels the world before he becomes Superman (the Africa sequence from 'birthright'). They could set up a 6 film series with the introductory film and two sequels before moving into the 'Death of Superman'/'Doomsday' trilogy.

I watched "Superman II" twice over the last week and was reminded just how much they got those first two movies "right". Sure, the special effects are incredibly dated, but to perfectly frank, Superman is toosilly a character to apply to modern sensibilities (the kind that have produced Christopher Nolan's Batman movies). They knew that back in the late 70s and so they applied a sense of satire and humour that actually works with the cheesy effects and the ated production design. So it doesn't look or feel real, but that's what Superman should be. His movies should be whimsical and fanciful, like The Wizard of Oz or Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.

"Superman Returns", to me, was like Tim Burton's "Batman", a movie that had a very particular sensibility that ultimately does not match the material. Yes, the special effects were better and kind of spectacular, but they were at the service of something that was very cold, distant, austere, things that I do not associate with Superman. I say lessons should be learnt and Superman should be laid to rest. The original films are what paved the way for the current genre of superhero movies, but they are not the same kinds of movies. The closest we got to the sensibility of those movies were the first two "Spider-Man" movies and the reason they worked was because they tapped into what we remember about thosemovies and applied them to our current sensibilities. And Peter Parker was the perfect hero to pin that on. We've moved past Spider-Man, though.

I love how fans "everywhere" are "clamoring for a reboot." That movie received has a 72 from critics on Metacritic and 77% of critics favored it on Rotten Tomatoes. Face it: people with good taste got this movie. It wasn't perfect but as an homage to the Donner flicks, it got it right on.

they turned superman into a jesus christ wannabe, and then turned him into a super stalker , everytime you turned around he was staring into lois lanes house.
i think it could have been better.
but a sequel done closer to the comics would be awesome if done right.

First of all Tom welling should have been cast as superman from the beginning in a movie to bring his superman to the big screen as a transition film to Metropolis like they were talking about at doing at one time. In my oponion he embodies everything superman is. This would have worked because there is no need to tell another back story because smallville took care of that.
But they went with the Donner film style. I have nothing against those movies, I grew up with them, but they ran their course. superman returns I thought was pretty good, but as a lot of said not enough action. I didnot like how louis lane was cast. first of all she looks like a teenager and second I don't beleive her as louis lane and making superman a father was not the greatest move either, but whats done is done. Now the only thing they can do is move forward and make a better sequel. I beleive a reboot at this point won't work. you lose the audience that way. since they went in the direction they did, they have to build on it.There is alot of drama that can be created with superman being a father but it would have to be done right. As far someones comment earlier about louis not knowing who the kids father was,she couldn't have known before the kid threw the piano at the bad guy. Here is how that works, if you have seen superman 2 you would know that clark and louis got married after he gave up his powers and they consimated the marriage and he also erased louis lanes memory at the end of the movie with a kiss and it would have been too soon for her to know she was pregnant and would not remember that she was even if she knew before hand. superman returns takes place afer those events in superman 2. In which case she could have met jason right after that, which is right about the time superman leaves on his quest and is gone for 5 years. Thats how superman became her "babies daddy" and jason was the guy left holding the bag. Again reboot too risky. Build on whats there and do it right.

I wanted to love SR, I really did but I found myself kinda liking it or, at times, bordering on disliking it. The main reason? Jason. What a horrible idea! I mean, seriously? A kid? That's soap opera crap. That's also the only reason I would vote for a reboot. I enjoyed Spacey, thought Routh was o.k and disliked Kate Bosworth but she could easily be recast. SR could've been a fitting sendoff for the Donner universe except for Jason. So, unless the previous movie was only a dream (Dallas reference) I don't see where they could go with that terrible storyline.

I agree that it was nice homage to the Donner flicks but Superman is so much more than that. 'superman returns' didn't fail as a movie, it's a good movie that did well (albeit below expectations) at the box office as well as critically. Where it failed was as a launch pad for a new series. All the good things about it the audience had seen before but all the 'new' things it introduced failed because a lot of people don't want to see superman with a son that he wasn't around to see for the first 5 years of his life so Lois has moved on to another man who is also a nice guy. The options on where to go are so limited now. If they're going to continue with this series they should have the kid morph into Bizarro or something as a result of Kryptonian and human DNA mixing. something dramatic is going to have to happen to save this continuity.

I think the Superman franchise would be a very hard series of films to reboot. Superman himself, at the very basic level is a very iconic, and I dont think it works very well in the modern world. Its very much "good versus evil" type material. And with that, I think the series doesnt need to be more dark, but needs to be more fun. Bigger, louder, campier, and with and a great sense of adventure and wonder. Not soo much on the drama, but more leaning on the sense of discovery and self awareness. I think it just needs a different director with different style looking at it. Somebody like peter jackson. who knows what big and wonderous is. Or maybe even the director of Pan's Labyrinth? just a thought. (I would spell his name, but I'd just mess it up)

Superman misses his court dates, runs off after a one-night-stand for five years to make sure his home planet that blew up is…still blown up… Stalks his ex-girlfriend, invades her privacy, and is a baby daddy. On top of all of this, he is invoking an emotional affair with an attached woman…

Singer needs to step down and let someone else to a REAL Superman movie instead of rehashing Donner's classic (although outdated) vision and be a stand-alone movie. Superman doesn't need to be 'dark' or 'emotional' to be good, he's already great. Keep Routh, dump Singer, get a villain aside from Lex that Superman can actually struggle against, and PLEASE get rid of the romantic overtones. Married with a kid? Sure. But being a part of some CW-style triangle of lurve, BS.

There should really be a petition for things like this since the execs are on the fence, just line up the votes and here what the fans want.

You group of 30 desperate Apologists that populate places like Blue Tights and Singerman Homepage need to just give up the fight. It's been 2+ years now just admit this film's shortcomings and move on. Stop pointing to a film's 70% score on Rotten Tomatoes as evidence that its somehow a good film. You all go out of your way to rip Spider-man as being "popcorn fluff" yet 2 of it's 3 films scored higher than SR on RT, so whats your excuse now?
Anyone with even the slightest inkling of who the character of Superman is, smelled a turd from the minute this film opened. Millar, Meltzer, Johns, Morrison, Kevin Smith, and Mark Waid, 5 of the people who know the character the best, have come out against the movie, saying that it failed in every creative aspect to understand the character. Singer doesnt get Superman. He tried shoe-horning his personal agenda into an established continuity from 30 years ago and it blew up in his face. It was horribly miscast too. Routh is wooden. Bosworth was overwhelmed, and Spacey was phoning it in. Sure the cinematography and effects were nice (as they should be in a $250 million movie). And stop with pretentious "it's too smart for you, you just dont get it" crap too. The only one who doesnt "get it" is Singer. Hey we all waited a long time for a new Supes movie and invested a lot of time in seeing it come together. In the end it was a piece of garbage. Accept it and move on.

Guillermo del Toro. Both those directors (Del Toro and Jackson) are so successful because they are so reverent to the source material and would be great for Superman. I disagree with the camp direction though, they need an epic, modern mythic direction.

Please, Warner Bros. appease the homophobes and support the hate they spew. Make sure they get their way. Yeah. That guy Archangel (Steve) is a real beauty. This is what he wrote on that savesuperman web site:
"And I don't expect people to agree with everything I believe in just as they shouldn't expect me to agree with everything they believe in. Each of us was raised differently. Many here are in other countries with completely different morals, cultural upbringings, and religious beliefs, etc. In Iran, homosexuals are executed. I don't agree with that extreme view, but I do believe it is an immoral lifestyle against what God intended.
Then, the scientific side of me is able to possibly view it as a mental disease or defect in the same manner as pedophilia. Studies suggest that the two conditions are nearly identical in that homosexuals have an uncontrollable desire and love for the same sex and pedophiles have an uncontrollable desire and love for children which is something that is treated even in prison as a disease. Recent DNA studies cite a possible gene that is linked to homosexual thoughts and feelings. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has greatly limited the ability and scope of research into this making policy where they have no right to. In addition, look at all controversy involving Catholic priests. The children sexually molested are ALL boys. Is that not homosexual? Is it ONLY pedophilia? The most common instances of pedophilia are same sex. The involvement of children makes it illegal. But when only adults are involved it simply considered homosexual and should be accepted? That's just plain hypocritical in my opinion.
Now before you jump up and think I'm advocating pedophiles, get that thought out of your head. I have two siblings who were abused by a neighbor. I'm simply pointing out how one is supposed to be accepted because adults can make their own decisions in life. It's still just as immoral and just as disgusting."
- Steve

If it ain't for the goddamn kid, then it don't need so much of a re-boot. Someone said only people with good taste got this movie, well what's so deep about this movie that we didn't get? The person who said this need to see more movies to upgrade his/her taste

Keep Routh and Singer! MOS is a great title with a lot of story line to work with. Most die-hards will always have their opinion which typically is opposite of what the general public wants.

Routh didn't have a lot to work with, IMO. He was TOLD to act like Reeve and to his credit I thought he did just that. The problem was he didn't have enough time in the movie to develop it further. Which I blame the writers - not