Mark Waid has a Superman movie idea - thumbs up or down on the prospect?

[Dispenser Of Truth]

Now it's on his website, so it seems worth bringing up. “Sure. I mean, (being asked to write a Superman movie) would never happen. So it’s really easy for me to say ‘Yes.’ But sure. That’d be interesting. I’d take a swing at something like that. I don’t know what my story would be. Actually, that’s not true. I know exactly what my story would be. But I can’t give it away. It’s the one Superman story I’ve got in my back pocket that -- if we all live long enough -- maybe someone will ask me to tell it someday.” I think we can all agree that, especially with Johns off the big boys' table, this won't be happening as anything other than hopefully a comic down the line. But would it have been a positive prospect under any circumstances?

I'd say it's relevant he has experience working with a version of Superman built on foundations he's not fond of - the post-Byrne, post-Phantom Zoner execution Superman is who he was writing in his JLA run - and while he expressed some discomfort with earlier parts, my impression is that he enjoyed Man of Steel up until killing Zod, rather than that being the straw that broke the camel's back. And while his average quality's dropped precipitously in recent years, he generally can still bring it for one or two projects at a time, and it's hard not to imagine him giving this the bulk of his attention.

[Superlad93]

Yeah, sure. Thumbs up from me. The fact that he frames this specifically as a movie idea has my intrigued. I find myself more and more interested in seeing comic writers take the leap to movies or TV. The interesting set of constraints and unique benefits being placed on a writer of a form of literature. I was very much interested when Millar and Morison wanted a crack at it, so it only makes sense that I'd want to see Waid's Superman movie (or comic) come about.

[DochaDocha]

On the plus side, I am generally happy to see true Superman fanatics get a shot at writing Superman. When you look at recent movies, animation, and even some books, too often I feel like it's a guy getting a paycheck to write for Superman, but wistfully dreams he could be spending his time writing for Batman instead. Waid isn't one of those guys, so I think that'd be a good start. Of course, I haven't always liked all his ideas, and to some degree I think he might be so stalwart in his ideas, which I don't think necessarily bodes well for Hollywood writers, so I recognize this might not be a match made in heaven for me personally, but I'd be on board if he got the keys to the Superman Kingdom.

[Sacred Knight]

I'd have to know what the idea is. That's nothing against him, just that in some alternate reality in which I was in charge of all things Superman, there's really only one guy who I would just give the keys to without needing to know the first thing about his plans, and that's Morrison.

[Hopeful Hero]

Thumbs all the way up! Love the idea and though it may not happen would so love for this to come into fruition (I'm still hoping DC brings him back). I've always been a big fan of Waid and enjoyed his Superman stories so him getting a shot to write a movie about Supes would be a treat to see.

[Adekis]

Mark Waid is a great Superman writer, but there's a handful of issues I have with his understanding of the character which really hold me back from giving the idea of a Waid-helmed movie an unequivocal "hell yes" without any idea of what his movie pitch actually is, so I'm just going to list a few of those issues.

For one thing, he doesn't know the difference between killing and murder. At C2E2 a few years ago I heard him discuss his well-known disdain for Snyder's Man of Steel by dismissing Snyder's take on the character as (direct quote) "a Superman who murders." Now obviously I'm not saying that any Superman movie has to have Superman killing the bad guy. In fact I think that after three movies in a row of the bad guy dying, it'd be awesome to take a step back and have Superman nonlethally defeat a dangerous threat again, either by rendering them powerless, arresting them, or especially by redeeming them in the case of some of the more sympathetic super-enemies in his rogues' gallery. I mean, you'd think that for a character with a well-established, 80 year history of preferring not to kill and not needing to, there wouldn't be so much over-representation of Superman slaying his foes in the movies! It's kind of a mess!

If Waid went the simple "he wins without killing and that's that" route, it'd be absolutely stellar. My problem is less that Waid's unlikely to have Superman kill someone, and more that he might decide to get on his soapbox and have Superman say that nobody should ever kill, that it's not acceptable in any circumstances, or that Waid might set up a villain like Manchester Black from Superman vs. the Elite who kind of has a point that Atomic Skull can't be contained, won't be rehabilitated, shows no remorse and should die, or Magog from Kingdom Come, who is frankly, rightfully acquitted when he kills the Joker, only for Superman to completely abdicate his responsibilities to Earth's people in response. If Waid just wrote a movie where Superman doesn't kill anyone because he's good enough at his job that he doesn't need to, then more power to him, but I'm way too concerned that Waid would try to make a point out of it.

For lesser issues, I don't think he writes Superman as sexy enough or as political enough, nor does he write Clark Kent as a strong enough force of personality, maybe that's just my love for George Reeves and Dean Cain talking though. He also definitely rates Superman's need for public affection way, way too highly for my tastes. Sure I love Dawn of Justice, but to me the important distinction there is in that story, Clark is thinking a lot about whether unintended consequences of his actions do more harm than good, about the endless frustration of systemic apathy to the plight of the oppressed, and the fact that the public questions him is more of a mirror of the fact that Clark is questioning both the public, and questioning himself. In Waid's stories to have Superman temporarily quit it's a very different thing, and in both cases he just feels rejected, in Birthright due to perceived xenophobia, in Kingdom Come because he feels his (again, utterly absurd and outmoded) morals have been rejected. In my mind, if Superman feels rejected, he'd feel the pain, but he wouldn't stop fighting the never-ending battle. The extenuating circumstances of Dawn of Justice make me okay with it in that story in particular, but I'm afraid Waid would go in for a more "classic" type of "Superman leaves and returns" story, which is frankly of no interest to me. Then again, with Dawn's critical and audience failure, perhaps Waid would rightly decide to stay away from anything that'd drawn comparisons to it. I'd hope so, it's definitely a movie that only needed to be made once, if even that.

By no means do I want to say "hard no, Mark Waid is a bad Superman writer" because that is absolutely not true. Ultimately, Mark Waid is an absolutely phenomenal Superman writer, with a very strong sense of the character's fundamental and crucial core, and one of my favorite Lois Lane depictions of all time. He has good ideas, he has a good work ethic, and he's written some of my favorite comics ever!

I suppose what I do want to say is, I want to know what Waid's pitch would be before okaying it, and I'd also want someone with a more "Zack Snyder" view on the character to have veto power over even fundamental concepts of the script before I'd want Waid to write it.

[Dispenser Of Truth]

I broadly agree with Adekis's concerns if not all the details, but I think him covering a lot of that material in Kingdom Come + probably wanting to steer far, far away from the aspects of this Superman he's hated with a fresh slate rather than spend a whole movie tackling them head-on would prompt him away from those. For me the big concern is that he'd attempt to get political to the extent permitted: Superman should be political, dude's leftie as hell back to day one with surprising consistency even during his more conservative periods, but Waid's attempts at politicized superheroes in recent years have been the most cringe-inducing sort of older-guy-trying-to-prove-he's-still-down-with-the-kids material.

[Kuwagaton]

It's a weird situation. Any idea worth divulging would have to be a pretty good idea. But it's not 100% impossible he couldn't use it someday, so he can't really throw anything away. So I get why he didn't really say anything, though at the same time I can't say it gives me any impression either way. I can't say going by his past work is any real indication because 1985, 1996 (twice), and 2004 are different enough that 2019 would be presumably quite different.

The biggest pro I can suspect is that he represents the common man's understanding of Superman. They want to a handsome guy with fluffy hair and a wide chest to flex and say clever things and not fail. They want their jaws to drop and hearts to warm at his amazing feats, and they also want to laugh. Waid gets that to the core. I can imagine his take would have a well sourced and non polarizing caper to drive people into the bookstores for feel good legends like All-Star and his own Birthright.

To me that's a little safe though, and I wouldn't say it's impossible that it would actually do that thing mentioned in the OP, making an earnest effort to label itself "not that other story." Waid is a passionate fan deep down and I think that as with anyone, the passion that inspires can go both ways.

[Jim Kelly]

To me Mark Waid is the alternative to Geoff Johns. There was a brief period when one was on the decline and the other was on the rise at DC, but they don't really co-exist together. So until Johns is gone, it would me unlikely for Waid to get any of his ideas in play. Despite Johns being pushed out from controlling the DC movies (if he ever did), he's still present on every single movie in production--AQUAMAN, SHAZAM!, WONDER WOMAN 84 all have his input. The film and TV folks seem to regard Geoff Johns as the expert on all things DC.

Whereas, I'd say Mark Waid has a much better knowledge of DC characters and an understanding of their history. He's done much more research. Johns is in love with his own concepts for those characters. Waid has a love for all the different iterations of the characters. He might want to make bank on selling his own stories to WB, like Johns has, but I think Waid has a better understanding of Superman on the whole and what has worked for that character. I don't see Mark Waid having the chance to pitch those ideas as long as Geoff Johns is around.

[Zero Hunter]

Waid might have a better understanding of history, but that is not always a good thing when someone is "too" in love with the past that they lose sight of the future. Waid loves the golden and silver age a little too much at times for my tastes. I can already imagine his Superman movie idea leaning waaayyy to far into the golden/silver age mindset so it would be alot like Superman 78, which I know the diehards will not agree with me on this, but that movie would BOMB so hard if it was made today because it is way to silver age corny.

Add in that these days Waid is more interested in preeching and making social points in his written than he is in telling good stories, and that adds up to one very bad idea for a movie.

[Kuwagaton]

*shrug*

I mean, Cap and Black Widow were perfectly fine comics. They did evoke politics, but they work for those properties and Marvel at large had quite a push for those sorts of gritty themes. On a scale of 1-10, how concerned I would be that Waid would do a Superman movie the same way he wrote The Champions comic, I can't see above a 4.

But they can do with less comic guys, even swapping one for the other. I mean you kinda need one but improvement for this rote genre could use another Coogler or Waititi.

[stargazer01]

I prefer Peter Tomasi to be given a chance at writing a live action film. His work in the new Death of Superman was really good. He made me care more about his Superman than Zack Snyder and Nolan...


Also, I understand Waid hated Man of Steel..

[Vordan]

I’d be interested but right now I’m going to echo everyone else’s caution. Waid is a guy whose golden years are behind him. I’d have to know at least the generalities of what he’s got in mind.

[Jim Kelly]

Waid might have a better understanding of history, but that is not always a good thing when someone is "too" in love with the past that they lose sight of the future. Waid loves the golden and silver age a little too much at times for my tastes.

I would welcome a treatment of Superman in the movies that actually did adapt the old source material in some way--because no movie has done that yet. But I doubt that Mark Waid would make good on that, because when he did BIRTHRIGHT this is exactly what I was expecting. I thought if anyone (alive) could do justice to the original concept of Superman, it must be Mark Waid given his deep knowledge. Yet BIRTHRIGHT wasn't that--it may have had elements that were re-intrepreted from the old source material--but Waid tried to put his own stamp on the character. You were reading Mark Waid's Superman not Shuster & Siegel's, sort of like how Walt Disney's Tarzan isn't ERB's.

So I don't think a Mark Waid movie is going to satisfy my soul--but I do think he'd look for other things from the history to make new in a way that Geoff Johns won't or can't.

[Raijin]

No thanks. Waid's pretentious attitude ruins his work for me. I wouldn't support anything he does. Ever! And i also feel like he'll just do his own Reeves impression. I really don't want that.