David Corenswet next in line for cinematic Supes?

[Last Son]

Sorry for the outburst, it's just I see criticism about the Donner movies and Reeve on Twitter constantly and the "cats in trees" thing is brought as a way of mocking detractors of the DCEU. As if that's the only thing people who didn't like Snyder's movie care about is menial things like that and Superman literally smiling in every scene. I'm sure I can speak for a lot of fans when saying that nobody expects Superman to be happy for the whole running time of the movie or to only engage in small acts of kindness and never get his hands dirty. There's also nothing wrong with bullies getting their comeuppance and it's not as if Clark beating up Rocky makes him an awful person. I mean, as many people here who would love to see an adaptation of social justice, rough and tumble vigilante Superman of the 30s, you'd think that scene wouldn't be so controversial.

[Vordan]

Sorry for the outburst, it's just I see criticism about the Donner movies and Reeve on Twitter constantly and the "cats in trees" thing is brought as a way of mocking detractors of the DCEU. As if that's the only thing people who didn't like Snyder's movie care about is menial things like that and Superman literally smiling in every scene. I'm sure I can speak for a lot of fans when saying that nobody expects Superman to be happy for the whole running time of the movie or to only engage in small acts of kindness and never get his hands dirty. There's also nothing wrong with bullies getting their comeuppance and it's not as if Clark beating up Rocky makes him an awful person. I mean, as many people here who would love to see an adaptation of social justice, rough and tumble vigilante Superman of the 30s, you'd think that scene wouldn't be so controversial.

The great irony is that Snyder fans get mad at people for saying dumb stuff like “Cavill Superman never saves anyone” when of course he did. But then they also say dumb stuff like “Reeve Superman was a boring perfect person” which isn’t true either. Reeve Superman could be a dick, could be selfish, was funny and had a sense of humor, could be manipulative, and emotional. He was not perfect at all, but he was LIKEABLE in a way that I don’t think Cavill managed to be to the general audience.

That’s what the next Superman movie needs: To make Superman likeable. To make us care for him, to show us how cool he is. I’m one of those people who would love a rough and tough Golden Age/New 52 Superman because what the character needs right now is to assert himself. No more handwringing over “but... must... there be.... a Superman?....” or moping. Let’s see him smile and get angry and tell jokes, and cry, but above all let’s see him save the city and be a likeable person while he does it. Let’s see him save Metropolis or Kandor from Brainiac, or kick Metallo and General Sam Lane’s asses, or outsmart Mxy, or fight in Warworld Gladiator matches, or do ANYTHING other than Lex or Zod again (using those two is the kiss of death for any Superman movie at this point, especially given how Snyder botched Lex).

You can deconstruct the character AFTER you’ve bothered to construct him.

[Last Son]

I agree that Cavill did save people, he saved the whole planet when he destroyed the World Engine, but I feel like the realism held him back from saving more people afterward. Him not doing anything about collapsing buildings is like Homelander arguing that there's no point in trying to save a crashing plane because physics won't allow it. I don't want Superman to be like that.

And I'd like a Superman who can move seamlessly from being amiable and gentle to being tough when the time calls for it. But I don't know if I'd want him constantly at odds with the law or government. Not a lapdog of the establishment necessarily, but I think it has to be considered that a Superman who breaks the law constantly to fight injustice would be viewed as pretty terrifying because nobody can stop him and he can literally do anything he wants. However, if someone is being hurt or is about to die and there's some law standing in the way, I do believe Superman should say **** the law and save them.

[Vordan]

I agree that Cavill did save people, he saved the whole planet when he destroyed the World Engine, but I feel like the realism held him back from saving more people afterward. Him not doing anything about collapsing buildings is like Homelander arguing that there's no point in trying to save a crashing plane because physics won't allow it. I don't want Superman to be like that.

And I'd like a Superman who can move seamlessly from being amiable and gentle to being tough when the time calls for it. But I don't know if I'd want him constantly at odds with the law or government. Not a lapdog of the establishment necessarily, but I think it has to be considered that a Superman who breaks the law constantly to fight injustice would be viewed as pretty terrifying because nobody can stop him and he can literally do anything he wants. However, if someone is being hurt or is about to die and there's some law standing in the way, I do believe Superman should say **** the law and save them.

I actually agree with you and that’s basically the New 52 trajectory under Morrison. Started out as Golden Age rough and tough, ended being much more subdued and levelheaded. That’s a Superman arc I’d actually what to see play out over 5 movies (ok maybe 2 or 3 ). But I just want my Brainiac movie more than anything. Brainiac, Manchester Black, Metallo, or Mongul those are who I’m dying to see on screen.

[manwhohaseverything]

Sorry for the outburst, it's just I see criticism about the Donner movies and Reeve on Twitter constantly and the "cats in trees" thing is brought as a way of mocking detractors of the DCEU. As if that's the only thing people who didn't like Snyder's movie care about is menial things like that and Superman literally smiling in every scene. I'm sure I can speak for a lot of fans when saying that nobody expects Superman to be happy for the whole running time of the movie or to only engage in small acts of kindness and never get his hands dirty. There's also nothing wrong with bullies getting their comeuppance and it's not as if Clark beating up Rocky makes him an awful person. I mean, as many people here who would love to see an adaptation of social justice, rough and tumble vigilante Superman of the 30s, you'd think that scene wouldn't be so controversial.

If this is a reply to @stick figure. He generally doesn't like superman. He is not a fan of the character . Man of steel is the first time he began paying attention to the character.i think, he is talking about general portrayal of superman which includes Chris reeve(boyscout, saving cat from tree) ,Not about the scene(dropping barbell on the person ) . I believe he is into characters like wolverine. So, it's natural for chris reeve superman to be not for him.
@bold I for one want the rough and tumble vigilante superman. I believe, superman should be like luffy. A character that operates outside the law. Even if he helps out good law enforcement guys sometimes. I don't like superman style Vigilantism being treated as normal. He is a vigilante. Should be treated like one by the cops.it's a different deal if people he saves begin to respect him. It boggles my mind out of the big three superman, spiderman and batman. Superman portrayals seems to reject his vigilante side while the others seem to embrace it. Superman is perceived as 'superhero' and just that. I like superman on the run. It was genuinely exciting.


The should be like 'parker luck' thing for superman something to revert back to at the end of the day.

[Robanker]

I don't think we really need a bright and optimistic Superman so much as we should have a confident Superman. As much acclaim as Christopher Reeve gets, I think George Reeves made for a more realistic Superman.
I think the problem was Christopher Reeve was played a character that was too good, too nice, too sweet. The Big Blue Boy Scout. So to compensate they made Cavill play a character that wasn't as nice, bitter,
a bit of a jerk. With George Reeves we had a Superman that was tough and no-nonsense but still kind to the weak and less fortunate. That is the Superman that should be emulated. If you mess up you are going
to pay for it, but if you need a helping hand, there is a strong hand reaching out to you.

Let me preface my post with I adore Reeve, he's a great Superman and one of my favorite iterations despite his minor forays into Superdickery.

But I don't think he's the best model to follow for today's generation. George Reeves is a good pull. I think a Superman with a healthy shot of golden age contempt for corruption and crime is necessary to make the guy work. There should absolutely be a scene where he comes through a wall or window to stop a wife beater as he did in Action Comics #1 (if memory serves, at least). You can still have him pull cats out of trees or some small acts of kindness intermixed in his day, but going hard at either making him "cool" or Chris Reeve's perceived paragon of virtue is probably going to fail. As much as I dislike the New 52 era of Superman, I will applaud that they attempted to pull that direction a bit at the start with Morrison, but the entire line got away from them very quickly and jettisoning his relationship with Lois (seemingly as a hard reaction to the marriage) soured that era for me.

In the same with Snyder seemed to be saying "not that" to Reeve, New 52 seemed equally cavalier in emphatically moving away from what came before. Superman has a rich history, I think we should try to find where it converges and present a denser, more rich character than trying to push him to one extreme. In live action, George Reeves is definitely the right direction. From the printed page? Honestly, go with Morrison's run from the New 52 and then weave in classic elements (I'd prefer Lois to be his love interest, sure, but also his traditional role at the Planet and for the Kents not both die in an auto accident). Obviously I have my reservations, but tonally for a young Clark? Bang on.

I still hold out hope we'll get Kyle Maclachlan to voice Kal once more. He was such a good Superman for the atomic age in New Frontier and I wish he got to voice the guy again.


As for David Corenswet? He does look too much like Cavill and as with Kuwagaton, it reminds a lot of them trying to capture Reeve with Routh and that he won't get to be his own iteration of the character. He could pull off the character visually, certainly the curl (please no more slicked or combed back hairstyles), but I have no understanding on his acting ability which is way more important to me. Not in any way against the dude, but I am not going to push he gets the role just because he resembles the guy. I'd have to see more before I get excited were he confirmed for the role.

I actually agree with you and that’s basically the New 52 trajectory under Morrison. Started out as Golden Age rough and tough, ended being much more subdued and levelheaded. That’s a Superman arc I’d actually what to see play out over 5 movies (ok maybe 2 or 3 ). But I just want my Brainiac movie more than anything. Brainiac, Manchester Black, Metallo, or Mongul those are who I’m dying to see on screen.

I'm at this point where I actually want Luthor in all the trailers and he gets dealt with in the first 15 minutes and then Brainiac takes over as the primary antagonist. I love Lex, but I'm so done with him on screen that if they basically Predator us I will be so damned delighted.

Nevertheless, Brainiac, Parasite or Mongul are my picks for a villain. Each lets you address something relatively topical while also, yes, allowing for a big ol' dust up.

Brainiac speaks to how connected we've become to technology and provides a threat Clark literally cannot just punch; he'd have to reach a solution using his mind. He'd have to find a way to disconnect people from Brainiac's network and to root him out. It's an interesting threat because Brainiac could conceivably infect everyone on Earth and make them his pawn in advancing his plan to bottle Metropolis and blow up the Earth, forcing Superman not to use his great strength at times for fear of harming us. For fear of making Superman appear the embodiment of Luddite propaganda, have him find the solution using his own understanding of technology or needing to go within Brainiac's network to root him out and force a confrontation on terms Clark feels he's advantageous in. Do not turn Brainiac into a parable for "phones are bad, children. Play outside as my forefathers did." Cautionary tale of "hey, you're only alive for 50-80 years, remember to disconnect for a while when with your friends or family now and again," you bet. Old man yells at Cloud? Beat it.

Parasite could be used to speak on how we deal with celebrity culture, how we live vicariously through people we follow and how we're a culture obsessed with consuming as much media as possible. Rudy would be constantly draining people to consume an entire lifetime in a moment (like binging TV) until he fights Superman and while he loses, he probably becomes so obsessed he starts Stanning the dude hard and making Clark feel hunted for the first time, constantly looking over his shoulder as he's saving people for fear of getting jumped. Perhaps Rudy manipulates people into situations where Clark will need to intervene so he can latch onto Clark and incapacitate him, thus creating a game of cat and mouse between them. It'd be interesting to have a scene where Clark is robbed of his powers and being chased by an engorged, all-powerful Parasite and required to be clever to survive.

Mongul... if it's more about Warworld, his status as a dictator and symbol of oppression and masking it with entertainment as opposed to "big man to punch," I am all in on that. It's essentially the Roman Colosseum in space, and history has proven that even in times of great economic crisis, people always have need for bread and circus. As Mongul amasses more power and wealth across the galaxy, turning more planets into Warworlds themselves (with each champion getting to fight on his roaming Throne Warworld or some such, treating conquered planets like individual leagues that meet for the Mongul Cup), he eventually sets his sights on Earth and Clark gets involved before he reaches us. Really play into the manner in which those who have oppressed historically have usually also been the hand that offered distraction from oppression. Have Clark start a rebellion, become a symbol of resistance. Hell, he can lose the big fight at the end but have all of Mongul's planets in full revolt and turning against him, giving Clark the more meaningful win (which likely distracts him long enough for Superman to get one last haymaker in that puts him down, finishing Mongul in every way that matters). tl;dr Cosmic Gladiator.

If he's just yellow Thanos, hard pass.

[Last Son]

Those early New 52 Action Comics issues are a good example of how Superman should take a more nuanced approach to his fight for social justice. Just terrorizing a corrupt businessman into confessing doesn't work because he claimed he only confessed to get Superman to put him down. Which kinda goes back to the post crisis stories, with Superman's frustrations over failing to prove Lex Luthor's crimes but not allowing himself to just go in, grab Lex and throw him out his own window or imprison him in the Phantom Zone or whatever. There was another bit where they recreated the story of Superman destroying the slums and building better apartments, which was shown to fail because the new apartments would be too expensive for the people who lived in the slums. I think there are some things where Superman can just bust in and save the day(like stopping domestic abuse), but other times, the answer isn't as simple as slamming through walls, smashing buildings, and manhandling people.

[stargazer01]

Let me preface my post with I adore Reeve, he's a great Superman and one of my favorite iterations despite his minor forays into Superdickery.

But I don't think he's the best model to follow for today's generation. George Reeves is a good pull. I think a Superman with a healthy shot of golden age contempt for corruption and crime is necessary to make the guy work. There should absolutely be a scene where he comes through a wall or window to stop a wife beater as he did in Action Comics #1 (if memory serves, at least). You can still have him pull cats out of trees or some small acts of kindness intermixed in his day, but going hard at either making him "cool" or Chris Reeve's perceived paragon of virtue is probably going to fail. As much as I dislike the New 52 era of Superman, I will applaud that they attempted to pull that direction a bit at the start with Morrison, but the entire line got away from them very quickly and jettisoning his relationship with Lois (seemingly as a hard reaction to the marriage) soured that era for me.

In the same with Snyder seemed to be saying "not that" to Reeve, New 52 seemed equally cavalier in emphatically moving away from what came before. Superman has a rich history, I think we should try to find where it converges and present a denser, more rich character than trying to push him to one extreme. In live action, George Reeves is definitely the right direction. From the printed page? Honestly, go with Morrison's run from the New 52 and then weave in classic elements (I'd prefer Lois to be his love interest, sure, but also his traditional role at the Planet and for the Kents not both die in an auto accident). Obviously I have my reservations, but tonally for a young Clark? Bang on.

.

I really agree with all this. We need a Superman who is confident, hopeful and protective of the innocent and weak and who shows his power when he has too like stopping a man trying to beat his wife/girlfriend or trying to beat and abuse poor children. And also the kind and gentle guy who helps an elderly woman cross the street or who saves cats from trees and comforts a suicidal teenager. Superman is a rich and complex person. Show his range of emotion and his ideals and wishes for the world. Write him more proactive not just reactive. Don't make him so insecure anymore. A bit of self-doubt is fine, we all have it, but not like Superman in BvS. People need to see Superman as someone real but inspirational who fights for what he thinks is right and good and Clark Kent too as a man and reporter. Give him a personality and charisma like Reeve, and make him tough when he needs too. I can write the movie if they let me.. he, I seriously think I can do a better job than those clueless WB suits.

[Tzigone]

There should absolutely be a scene where he comes through a wall or window to stop a wife beater as he did in Action Comics #1 (if memory serves, at least).

I think there are a couple problems with this. Firstly, it works better a golden-age-power-level character (or non-powered one) than modern Superman. Secondly, it's just been done so many times with so many heroes that it's a trope. Thirdly, it doesn't really resolve anything, generally speaking. The abuser may run away, but if he does, he's likely to treat the next partner the same way (don't really buy "scared straight") and there isn't sufficient evidence for criminal conviction unless wife testifies.

I do think there needs to be balance. I do think Superman should see the good in the world - may not be in touch with his roots, but it's a good aspect now, I think. But not be a "naive farmboy" stereotype, ala the Reeve movies. He was never that sort of naive...well, maybe not never, but not usually. I think that "grew up on a farm" has a much different connotation (which is almost wholly inaccurate) now than it did in the 1940s. It's not a character-defining thing - heck, he mostly grew up in town with folks who ran a general store when we actually saw his childhood - but just a common profession of the era. I think Superman should be someone who is aware of the evil that human beings can perpetrate, but aware of the good, too. And never loses sight of that.

I do think he should be generally positive, very much perceive himself as of Earth rather than alien if the issue ever comes up, be assertive and confident. And be able to talk to people (talking down the suicidal person is a good example). Please stay away from dweeb!Clark. I don't care for that version. He doesn't need to be any kind of leader as Clark, but he shouldn't stand out in dweebiness, either. And he should be smart - it's an important aspect of Clark that he's intelligent. I also really liked Lois knowing his identity early, and her brilliant investigatory skills, and hope that continues in any subsequent movies. I think it might work well if she's the investigative reporter, and he does the political or social-issues type ones. I'm not sure if him as a columnist is really feasible, though, as he is a reporter, traditionally speaking.

I very much don't want him to try to fix the world's problems as Superman. I mean, in a Superman IV kind of way. I can't think of any way for that to work as a story at all. Not that anyone has suggested it.

[Robanker]

I think Superman should be someone who is aware of the evil that human beings can perpetrate, but aware of the good, too. And never loses sight of that.

I don't think you can really call yourself a Superman fan unless you hold this true. It's his core ethos; the world isn't perfect, but it absolutely can be better and will be if we try. He really believes that if you just do your best to be a positive influence to those around you, anyone can be Superman. No matter how awful some are, this world made the Kents, Lois, Jimmy and so forth. It's why he never gives up trying to make today better than yesterday and tomorrow the best it's ever been.

[manwhohaseverything]

I think there are a couple problems with this. Firstly, it works better a golden-age-power-level character (or non-powered one) than modern Superman. Secondly, it's just been done so many times with so many heroes that it's a trope. Thirdly, it doesn't really resolve anything, generally speaking. The abuser may run away, but if he does, he's likely to treat the next partner the same way (don't really buy "scared straight") and there isn't sufficient evidence for criminal conviction unless wife testifies.

I do think there needs to be balance. I do think Superman should see the good in the world - may not be in touch with his roots, but it's a good aspect now, I think. But not be a "naive farmboy" stereotype, ala the Reeve movies. He was never that sort of naive...well, maybe not never, but not usually. I think that "grew up on a farm" has a much different connotation (which is almost wholly inaccurate) now than it did in the 1940s. It's not a character-defining thing - heck, he mostly grew up in town with folks who ran a general store when we actually saw his childhood - but just a common profession of the era. I think Superman should be someone who is aware of the evil that human beings can perpetrate, but aware of the good, too. And never loses sight of that.

I do think he should be generally positive, very much perceive himself as of Earth rather than alien if the issue ever comes up, be assertive and confident. And be able to talk to people (talking down the suicidal person is a good example). Please stay away from dweeb!Clark. I don't care for that version. He doesn't need to be any kind of leader as Clark, but he shouldn't stand out in dweebiness, either. And he should be smart - it's an important aspect of Clark that he's intelligent. I also really liked Lois knowing his identity early, and her brilliant investigatory skills, and hope that continues in any subsequent movies. I think it might work well if she's the investigative reporter, and he does the political or social-issues type ones. I'm not sure if him as a columnist is really feasible, though, as he is a reporter, traditionally speaking.

I very much don't want him to try to fix the world's problems as Superman. I mean, in a Superman IV kind of way. I can't think of any way for that to work as a story at all. Not that anyone has suggested it.

Goldenage guy saw himself as an earthling. But, at the end of the day he grew up as a freak or extraordinarily gifted in a relatively normal world . Being postive to people that need it one thing. Talking to deaf ears is stupid. Goldenage guy didn't do that. He was for all the faults and contradictions a good guy. He never wore a mask. Never fought for himself. So, i say goldenage guy was pretty balanced.this was also that dude.

This is the issue were jimmy olsen debuted.

[daBronzeBomma]

Well, that didn't take long:



Someone took the liberty of putting David in the supersuit.

He looks like the love child of Henry Cavil and Tom Welling. Not a bad thing. But not a new thing either.

Like the upgraded suit here. Very close to the Reborn suit.

[Vordan]

Well, that didn't take long:



Someone took the liberty of putting David in the supersuit.

He looks like the love child of Henry Cavil and Tom Welling. Not a bad thing. But not a new thing either.

Like the upgraded suit here. Very close to the Reborn suit.

Yeah he looks like a good fit. I really need to watch the Politician to get a sense of his acting ability because that’s the truly crucial part.

[Sacred Knight]

Independent of the actor, those minor suit alterations are boss. Though I'd still get rid of the piping altogether.

Specific to the actor, he definitely has the right look. Even has a quality where I think he could do "goofy Clark" quite well.

[Adekis]

I know I'm legally a broken record at this point, but I'm still with Cavill.

Much like Jordan, this kid could potentially be good, and I'd give either of them a shot if they wound up playing the role, especially if CK is part of the equation, but I'd rather not see our current man out the door.