'Superman & Lois' in development at the CW

[Clark_Kent]

The issue for me in that Supergirl clip isn't the poor visual effects, but the idea that the episode director/producers/show runner signed off on a part of the script that they clearly didn't have the budget for. The fact of the matter is, Supergirl has pulled off pretty great effects in the past, whether it was the Pilot episode plane scene (CBS, at the time), the Superman fight, and even the Red Daughter fight in the woods...they all have that "tv look" to them, but they have mostly looked really good. So we know their vfx artists can do really good work. I have to assume most of CW's budgeting for visuals is going to Crisis this year, hence why visuals have been poor on all the shows (this clip from Supergirl, the venom-like black goo on Flash, and the extremely poor explosions/fire on Batwoman). I figure the budget going to Crisis is why the crossover is being split over 2 quarters in the first place...part of the director's job is to work within a budget, and when your budget is this limited then you need to make hard decisions. We've seen very little of Barry in the suit this season because when he's in the suit doing Flash things, then things cost more. We see Batwoman doing a lot of walking, and not gliding off of buildings, because it's cheaper. The guys who made that Supergirl episode should have known better: work within your budget, and if you can't afford to do something then you don't do it that way.

As for the Superman show, I'm both excited for it (it's a SUPERMAN SHOW!! C'mon!!) and also a bit nervous, but I'll be there to support it. Like many of you, the direction they took Superman after losing that fight to Kara really soured me on their interpretation of him, so much so that it clouded my opinion on him completely. But the other day, I went back & watched the first 2 eps of Supergirl's second season, which I hadn't seen since "the fight"...and you know what? They actually started out on a good note. Superman is not shown to be inferior to her, and everyone is in awe of him. So I think there's hope, but with 2 major caveats for me:

1: I hate, hate, hate his costume. And it's not even for the cape clips (which are terrible, don't get me wrong)...I hate it because it doesn't fit. It's too baggy in areas, and when he's flying with one or both arms forward then the neckline bunches up soooo much and it just doesn't fit. The costume was made on the cheap for him, so I'm hoping he gets a new costume with the budget & care of Routh's suit (not saying it needs to look like Routh's Crisis suit, just that I'd like it to have that same quality).

2: Please, for the love of Zod, get rid of the Donnerisms. Bumbling Clark Kent, Lois can't spell, these are relics of an era that people need to move on from. Reeve worked his goofball charm to success in 2 films that were shot back to back (mostly). It had worn thin even by the time Superman III came out, so please - get rid of it. There is so damn much more to this character than Richard Donner & Christopher Reeve. It's been 40 years, move on. Until audiences do, the character will be stuck in an endless cycle of "he's boring/too powerful", and will never regain the popularity he once had.

[Stick Figure]

Totally agree on the Donner Superman thoughts. Those movies are why I hated Superman for so long. It was t until MOS that I thought “Ok he can be cool”. I’m hoping they understand what a turnoff that stuff is.

[Jokerz79]

I think they need to move on from Donner simply to avoid comparisons to the most popular version of the character. You can pay homage while still being your own thing.

[Clark_Kent]

Totally agree on the Donner Superman thoughts. Those movies are why I hated Superman for so long. It was t until MOS that I thought “Ok he can be cool”. I’m hoping they understand what a turnoff that stuff is.

I think they need to move on from Donner simply to avoid comparisons to the most popular version of the character. You can pay homage while still being your own thing.

Yeah, and that's something I should mention, in regards to Jokerz comment...Donner/Reeve IS the most popular, or at least, most well known version, and I do love it. Call me a fanboy, but there's very little in regards to Superman that I outright don't like. So I just want to get that out of the way.

The Donner/Reeve version was fantastic in its time. They attempted to bring a verisimilitude to the idea much in the same way comics films do today, and one of the ways they did that is by putting such a big contrast between Superman & Clark so the whole glasses thing made sense. But we don't need that contrast anymore...audiences are now 100% open and accepting of crazy comic-booky concepts, so we simply don't need Clark to be afraid of his own shadow anymore to keep people from guessing his identity. We can just accept "the glasses work" and be done with it. Lois is one of the greatest journalists in the world, are you telling me she really can't spell very well? That was a cute idea in 1978, but...y'know, computers. Cell phones. They all have basic spellcheck lol She has probably picked up now many T's are in "bloodletting" just by using these devices.

But, at the core of it, those are personal tastes of mine. My largest objection to the continued use of Donnerisms is the fact that it keeps those 40 year old tropes alive and leaves ZERO room for anything new. The only thing most people seem to want are retreads of Donner, from the theme music to the Clark persona to the suit. Each and every time someone tries to do something new, it has the uphill battle of the Donner nostalgia. Which, to me, is crazy when you figure there were only 2 good films Reeve starred in. Anyway, sorry for the ramble. I just want NEW stuff...you can look at my post history and see me talk about this in the past. If I want to see Donner/Reeve, I have movies and Geoff Johns comics I can check out. They're there, and they are great! I don't need new stuff with that, give me new stuff! Something I haven't seen before. That's all I ask.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Like I said, I've seen enough CW shows to feel the way I do. It's like I can't trust Zack Snyder again with Superman if he was given another chance. He's ruined for me. Besides, the CW already ruined this Superman version for me so far. They broke him in my book, and I don't see how they are going to fix him and make him great. But that's just me. The only thing the CW have done really well so far is Lex Luthor.

Sure, if this particular version of Superman isn't your cup of tea, that's fine. However, if there's some good word of mouth, I think you should at least check out the pilot to see if they've managed to pull off something you enjoy more.

[Patrick Gerard]

To all the folks snipping at the title “Superman and Lois”, I think you’re not allowing the charm of it to sink in.

It’s inherently a little funny and endearing like “The God of Creation and Steve” or “The Multiverse and Amanda” or something of that nature.

I think it works.

[stargazer01]

Sure, if this particular version of Superman isn't your cup of tea, that's fine. However, if there's some good word of mouth, I think you should at least check out the pilot to see if they've managed to pull off something you enjoy more.

I will never love this Superman. But I could learn to appreciate it if I hear really good things about it from people I trust.

[Osiris-Rex]

I think they need to move on from Donner simply to avoid comparisons to the most popular version of the character. You can pay homage while still being your own thing.

Is there really all that much in common with the Reeve Superman and the Hoechlin Superman other than both are happy to be Superman as opposed to the Cavill Superman where Superman was a burden,
a cross to bear? I didn't see much bumbling or stammering by the Hoechlin Clark. He seemed pretty bold and confident when he confronted Lena Luthor and was quite suave with Cat Grant. And of course
among friends he was the wise mentor to Oliver and Barry. The only thing that hinted at the Reeve Clark was the phone conversation with Perry White. Is a happy to be Superman exclusive to the Donner
vision of Superman? As I recall the Dean Cain version of Superman was also happy to be Superman for the most part. Most animation also has Clark happy to be Superman.

[phantom1592]

Is there really all that much in common with the Reeve Superman and the Hoechlin Superman other than both are happy to be Superman as opposed to the Cavill Superman where Superman was a burden,
a cross to bear? I didn't see much bumbling or stammering by the Hoechlin Clark. He seemed pretty bold and confident when he confronted Lena Luthor and was quite suave with Cat Grant. And of course
among friends he was the wise mentor to Oliver and Barry. The only thing that hinted at the Reeve Clark was the phone conversation with Perry White. Is a happy to be Superman exclusive to the Donner
vision of Superman? As I recall the Dean Cain version of Superman was also happy to be Superman for the most part. Most animation also has Clark happy to be Superman.

Agree with this. Honestly I think that was the beauty of Donner's Superman.... It really wasn't DONNER'S superman... it was just SUPERMAN. 'most' of what was in that movie... came straight out of the comic. The costume was spot on, the attitudes were perfect.

Lex being into real estate.... Krypton = Magic Crystal world... and the S shield standing for the symbol for the house of El.... Off the top of my head, that's all I can think of that were new and unique to Donner's Superman. Everything else a kid reading a silver age comic would instantly recognize as being... SUPERMAN.

I haven't seen ANY of the CW stuff that screams 'Donner'... if anything it strays too far into 'reinventing the wheel' that most modern interpretations do. But being a generally 'good guy' who the world loves... that's not just 'Donner'.... that's SUPERMAN.

[manwhohaseverything]

Is there really all that much in common with the Reeve Superman and the Hoechlin Superman other than both are happy to be Superman as opposed to the Cavill Superman where Superman was a burden,
a cross to bear? I didn't see much bumbling or stammering by the Hoechlin Clark. He seemed pretty bold and confident when he confronted Lena Luthor and was quite suave with Cat Grant. And of course
among friends he was the wise mentor to Oliver and Barry. The only thing that hinted at the Reeve Clark was the phone conversation with Perry White. Is a happy to be Superman exclusive to the Donner
vision of Superman? As I recall the Dean Cain version of Superman was also happy to be Superman for the most part. Most animation also has Clark happy to be Superman.

Tell me when henry cavill's superman thought it was a burden to be superman .one instance. He was burdened by deaths. His debut unfortunately was a world ending phenomenon that was stopped only at the cost of genocide. He would be burdened. Helping people is Clark's natural instinct. He ran around wearing capes as a kid for pete's sake.it was his dream to do something like that.

[Flash Gordon]

Hope and optimism aren't exclusive. You can apply that point of view to everything, particularly your entertainment, because that's what Superman is. He's a comic book character that's been adapted into movies, TV, and everything else that has entertained billions by validating hope and optimism over cynicism and despair.

Again, not digging the CW shows is perfectly valid. They aren't necessarily for you. That's okay. We don't all need to be the target audience for every form of entertainment.

I don't have 'hope' with regards to any IP product. I love Superman quite a bit and feel he deserves to be quality, but I'm 100% going to say when he isn't. The 'hope' in the Superman character is about altruism and helping your fellow man, fighting the good fight with a better tomorrow in mind. That can't be applied to whether you're interested in a television show, or not.

[phantom1592]

Tell me when henry cavill's superman thought it was a burden to be superman .one instance. He was burdened by deaths. His debut unfortunately was a world ending phenomenon that was stopped only at the cost of genocide. He would be burdened. Helping people is Clark's natural instinct. He ran around wearing capes as a kid for pete's sake.it was his dream to do something like that.

I don't remember the exact dialogue since it's been a while, but I do distinctly remember him having a talk with Martha in BvS about how hard it was being what they expected him to be.... and Martha's response being 'You don't owe the world anything, be everything to them or be nothing... "

Man I hated Snyder-Kents….

I would say that counts as 'being a burden'

[manwhohaseverything]

I don't remember the exact dialogue since it's been a while, but I do distinctly remember him having a talk with Martha in BvS about how hard it was being what they expected him to be.... and Martha's response being 'You don't owe the world anything, be everything to them or be nothing... "

Man I hated Snyder-Kents….

I would say that counts as 'being a burden'

Martha did. She did because she is mom who wants her so to be happy. She can't fully understand or know what Clark's going through. Her advice is basically sweetie if you don't like what you are doing don't do it. She sees everyone blaming clark and stuff. She doesn't want her son to go through that kind of scrutiny. Clark on the other hand was burdened by the deaths of the people in Metropolis. He has been and was not able to move on. His dreamscape meeting pa was all about it. He had confusions regarding things and people's expectations. That's not burden. That's just natural.he didn't know how to convince people he was here to help. Essentially this


But, superman is his childhood dream and innate instinct.

"Farmer’s dream is all some people have. It’s all that gives them hope"- lois lane.

A superboy and his dog. This is his dream. Always was and will be. He even fought pa because of it.
1)If he really does owe the world something. Then why did everyone in "superman's morality" thread said superman bears no responsibility for the people he can't save or failed.i can understand if you have a different opinion. It is a valid position.but, Clark doesn't need to be the guy people call 'superman' . He does because he wants to by his own choice and instinct. He isn't obligated to be superman. He does because its the right thing to do. Atleast, that's what i think.
2)if you hate snyder-kents you hate the original golden age superman's parents john and mary.but, that is fine. Its valid opinion to have. But can't say kents should be like your preference and not this. Yours is just an interpretation. As valid as others.

[phantom1592]

Martha did. She did because she is mom who wants her son to be happy. She can't fully understand or know what Clark's going through. Her advice is basically sweetie if you don't like what you are doing don't do it. She sees everyone blaming clark and stuff. She doesn't want her son to go through that kind of scrutiny. Clark on the other hand was burdened by the deaths of the people in Metropolis. He has been and was not able to move on. His dreamscape meeting pa was all about it. He had confusions regarding things and people's expectations. That's not burden. That's just natural.he didn't know how to convince people he was here to help.

That sounds like a difference of opinion. You say it's natural... I say sometimes a burden IS natural. However it was, it was played up like it was a burden that he went to his mom for advice on. Whether it was being Superman that was a burden or the consequences that being superman did... that's splitting a fine hair.

1)If he really does owe the world something. Then why did everyone in "superman's morality" thread said superman bears no responsibility for the people he can't save or failed.i can understand if you have a different opinion. It is a valid position.but, Clark doesn't need to be the guy people call 'superman' . He does because he wants to by his own choice and instinct. He isn't obligated to be superman. He does because its the right thing to do. Atleast, that's what i think.
2)if you hate snyder-kents you hate the original golden age superman's parents john and mary.but, that is fine. Its valid opinion to have. But can't say kents should be like your preference and not this. Yours is just an interpretation. As valid as others.

1) I would say there is a difference between a real burden and perceived one. Whether he feels he has responsibility is where the burden comes from... not whether he really DOES owe the world or anything. heck, when he was asking the priest whether he should give up or keep fighting he looked pretty weighed down if I remember right. Really it's his opinion that matters, not ours and not ma's. And I did see signs that it was a tough decision.

2) Yeah, I have no reference for Golden Age Kents. I had ONE pop-up book or book on record or SOMETHING that may have referenced them.... I remember Pa on his deathbed telling Clark he had to use his powers for truth and justice... but whether that was really silver age I cant' honestly say. Doesn't seem to jive with a Superboy in the 70's though... so I always figured it was Golden Age. In Silver age Ma made his costume out of his baby blankets...

My point in hating the Snyder-Kents though... is that they were WAY to focused on Clark's safety and did nothing to instill in him the idea of fighing and helping the little guys. Smallville has a LOT of faults, but I LOVED Jonathon Kent there. he also focused really hard on 'keeping their secret' and 'protecting the family'... but when it came to a choice of 'let people die' or 'keep your secret' he NEVER let people die. No Pa Kent I can imagine would have ever replied to 'Should I have let them all die?" with 'Maybe..." If he had responded with 'Of course not, but you have to be more careful' I would have thought it was excellent.... but 'Maybe??' That just sucks. Then to have Martha follow up with 'Take care of yourself, you don't owe anyone anything..." I hate that.

It takes away any kind of 'nature vs. nurture' debate in a way I hate. They do it all the time in the Elseworlds too.. the idea is supposed to be that Clark was found by kindly midwestern family that raised him to respect life... and he became superman. However, the elseworlds of the 90's used to push that he was genetically good. Raised by Russians... raised by the Waynes… Raised by DARKSEID... and one good push and he'll still turn out to be the superman we know and love. Not a fan of that.

[manwhohaseverything]

That sounds like a difference of opinion. You say it's natural... I say sometimes a burden IS natural. However it was, it was played up like it was a burden that he went to his mom for advice on. Whether it was being Superman that was a burden or the consequences that being superman did... that's splitting a fine hair.



1) I would say there is a difference between a real burden and perceived one. Whether he feels he has responsibility is where the burden comes from... not whether he really DOES owe the world or anything. heck, when he was asking the priest whether he should give up or keep fighting he looked pretty weighed down if I remember right. Really it's his opinion that matters, not ours and not ma's. And I did see signs that it was a tough decision.

2) Yeah, I have no reference for Golden Age Kents. I had ONE pop-up book or book on record or SOMETHING that may have referenced them.... I remember Pa on his deathbed telling Clark he had to use his powers for truth and justice... but whether that was really silver age I cant' honestly say. Doesn't seem to jive with a Superboy in the 70's though... so I always figured it was Golden Age. In Silver age Ma made his costume out of his baby blankets...

My point in hating the Snyder-Kents though... is that they were WAY to focused on Clark's safety and did nothing to instill in him the idea of fighing and helping the little guys. Smallville has a LOT of faults, but I LOVED Jonathon Kent there. he also focused really hard on 'keeping their secret' and 'protecting the family'... but when it came to a choice of 'let people die' or 'keep your secret' he NEVER let people die. No Pa Kent I can imagine would have ever replied to 'Should I have let them all die?" with 'Maybe..." If he had responded with 'Of course not, but you have to be more careful' I would have thought it was excellent.... but 'Maybe??' That just sucks. Then to have Martha follow up with 'Take care of yourself, you don't owe anyone anything..." I hate that.

It takes away any kind of 'nature vs. nurture' debate in a way I hate. They do it all the time in the Elseworlds too.. the idea is supposed to be that Clark was found by kindly midwestern family that raised him to respect life... and he became superman. However, the elseworlds of the 90's used to push that he was genetically good. Raised by Russians... raised by the Waynes… Raised by DARKSEID... and one good push and he'll still turn out to be the superman we know and love. Not a fan of that.

Well, that distinction does matter.that means if he wasn't being in the mess he was he would love doing ****. Heck! He did decide inspite. My argument being Superman isn't burden. But, the deaths, public scrutiny, the expectations that are vague all made clark question thing. That doesn't mean being Superman is a burden to him.for instance, i might want to be a singer. I went on stage for first time sang a little off pitch. Everybody made fun of me. I begin to question what i did wrong. Seeing state, My mom tells me it's ok. I don't have to force things. I still decide to continue things.it proves that singing isn't burden to me. It never was.
1)he asked the priest whether he should give himself up to zod for humanity. Because he doesn't trust humans entirely nor the kryptonIans. He wasn't burdened there. He was just confused. Confusion and burden are two things.priest gives him an incentive to trust humanity. He surrenders before humanity not kryptonIans. He feels responsible. But all supermen feel that. Come on how many times has clark felt he couldn't save some one?it's many.snyderman is very much not deviation. Nor does it prove being Superman is a burden. It only proves that his job isn't easy. Also, he doesn't need to feel responsible. I mean, all versions of superman will have to leave the clarkent id, everything else and be 24 x7 superman. If he were to act on his feeling of responsibility. He doesn't. Because he is selfish enough not to. especially the version's of superman that are godlike with no need of anything. Other versions of superman atleast have a reason(need fkr food, air.. Etc) That tells you something.

2)pa kent tells clark to hide his great strength until the right time because the people will fear him in golden age. The same thing this guy says.the thing with your 'nature vs nurture' criterion is. You want nurture to be something you can love. Something that you term good.that isn't how the discussion works. Your interpretation of 'kindly couple raising him to be superman' is just an interpretation. But, the alternative can also be true. I mean, Morality has an evolutionary basis. There is some genetic basis to it. Morality helps stability of a society. Society is crucial in survival.
Here, jor el, lara, priest are the idealists. Clark is instinctualy good. I mean, come on how can someone raise a superbaby. If he had no instinct to be good. I mean, clark has no reason to follow his pa or ma. Children are known to throw tantrums and such. Clark cannot be disciplined through conventional methods. He doesn't need much. He is independent and nothing can hurt him.they are still kindly couple who took the risk of taking in clark. A risk that could have blown up in his face. But, it didn't Because clark has that innate potential to be good.
Pa and ma are the realists that want him to control his instinct for his own good and happiness. Also, of everyone around him. That maybe is just that. Pa doesn't know the answer. I mean, is clark responsible if he doesn't help for the kids in the bus?would you expect a normal kid to 'save them' like clark did?no.you would only expect them to gatber help, that would be biggest expectation . Other thing, every second people are dieing because of things. Clark could hear them or see them. No version of superman helps everybody everytime. Does he?i mean, he does walk around being clark and does other stuff.pa and ma wants clark kent to exist. Not get destroyed by ideal of superman. Like batman killed bruce wayne.
Also, clark wasn't ready for taking on the responsibility. Pa knew that. He just wanted to make clark understand that his actions have consequences. People won't take to superman that easily. They will fear him. Fear of him can be of epic proportions, could cause chaos and far greater damage than people he saves.