What villain would you choose for Superman: Legacy?

[phonogram12]

I like this idea lot, I must say. Black sorta challenging the core idea of Superman (per Action Comics #775 of course), then Brainiac ends up the "Thanos" level threat for Superman.

IMHO, it just makes sense. I just really like the idea that the villain for the first one having a lot of gravitas and essentially being there to help define this version of Superman. Who I'd pick for the middle one, though, I have no idea.

[JBatmanFan05]

IMHO, it just makes sense. I just really like the idea that the villain for the first one having a lot of gravitas and essentially being there to help define this version of Superman. Who I'd pick for the middle one, though, I have no idea.

Neither do I, sometimes second films can maybe successfully pull off multiple villains. I do deeply believe Lex would have to be present in the first film IMHO, minor/supporting role, so you'd have to "pay off" Lex's story in either the second or third film probably, so...considering that would influence my thinking somewhat on film #2.

[astro@work]

Neither do I, sometimes second films can maybe successfully pull off multiple villains. I do deeply believe Lex would have to be present in the first film IMHO, minor/supporting role, so you'd have to "pay off" Lex's story in either the second or third film probably, so...considering that would influence my thinking somewhat on film #2.

Agree that the payoff for Lex needs to be in the second or third film. I tend to think in terms of trilogies, and if you start off right away with Lex as the big bad, there's nowhere for him to go.

Let the Lex story be a slow burn, so the audiences are begging for him to get his comeuppance,...but let it come at the end of the trilogy. So maybe Brainiac in #1, with Lex as a Metropolis power player and thorn in Superman's side. Second film, maybe Metallo or Kryptonite Man with Lex as the manipulator. Third film finally a suited-up Lex with a secondary villain (Parasite or Toyman) as the red herring but the real satisfying battle is Clark vs. Lex as the finale.

[bat39]

I have to disagree with the whole "We can't have Brainiac in the first film" line of thinking.

There's the question of "how do we escalate from Brainiac", which assumes that the only approach available to a successful sequel is to go with a BIGGER threat. But that's simply not true! In fact, arguably the most successful superhero sequel of all time, The Dark Knight, de-escalated the stakes, at least in terms of raw destructive potential, from its predecessor. Nolan's Batman started out saving the whole of Gotham from Ra's friggin' al Ghul! After that, dealing with the Joker and Two Face is, at least in purely physical terms, a piece of cake. Civil War, another successful superhero sequel, also de-escalated the stakes from the previous Captain America and Avengers film and told a more intimate, but powerful story.

I think Superman Legacy really needs to make a splash and distinguish itself both from the Donner film and from the Snydervese, and the best way to do that, IMO, is to give the people what they want and finally deliver on Brainiac!

Brainiac is also a villain who, IMO, would be perfect for a movie where the focus is supposedly going to be on Clark dealing with his alien heritage.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Nolan had Ra's al Ghul in his first Batman film. I mean, that's a pretty big villain. Conventional wisdom would have said he wouldn't work as a 'first film villain' either.

Brainiac can totally work. Look at Morrison's first Action Comics arc.

[astro@work]

Nolan had Ra's al Ghul in his first Batman film. I mean, that's a pretty big villain. Conventional wisdom would have said he wouldn't work as a 'first film villain' either.

Brainiac can totally work. Look at Morrison's first Action Comics arc.

Agree with the two previous posts. DC films need to quit saving the good stuff for "later". We don't get a later unless the first film is a smash.
Birds of Prey didn't costume up the heroines until the closing scenes...we'll never get the movie with the costumed BOP.
Whedon's JL saved Darkseid for later, and used forgettable whatshisname. We'll never get Darkseid or "later".
Black Adam never powered up Adrianna and Amon. We'll never get Isis and Osiris in live action (or at least, not for many years).

Blow us out of the park on the first try, don't waste a whole 1st film holding back the good stuff!

[phonogram12]

The reason I like Manchester Black as the first villain is because (generally speaking) nailing down Superman's personality and what he stands for is (for whatever reason) the most difficult part of any Superman film. I think Manchester Black is the perfect villain for that (maybe even more than Luthor).

One thing I think I would like to see is a Luthor/Brainiac team-up similar to what they did to that first season of JLU. I thought that was pretty rad.

[Quinlan58]

On principle I'd prefer an Earth-based villain instead of an alien one. While MoS had a great Zod, starting out another Superman's story with an alien threat could lead to an impression that he's bringing the problems to Earth, instead of trying to fight problem from Earth. In that sense, Livewire could be a fun villain for Clark to face against.

That said, considering the only solid thing we have on this movie is "young Superman comes to terms with his heritage", then the obvious choice is Brainiac.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

That said, considering the only solid thing we have on this movie is "young Superman comes to terms with his heritage", then the obvious choice is Brainiac.

Brainiac is also such a stereotypical alien compared to Superman. Evil invader, green skin, emotionally detached, abducts people and conducts experiments on them...

Seems like the perfect foil for a Superman coming to terms with being an alien.

[manwhohaseverything]

I would rather they leave manchester or action #775 alone...Sheesh!elder statesman paternalism would be a bore to watch.Especially since this is a young guy..i am as is cautiously optimistic since getting morrison influence.

Anyhow,This is james gunn.His characters aren't exactly screaming that kinda superman.So him doing that story and him bringing manchester to the screen.He might outshine superman.So becareful what you wish for.

[phonogram12]

I don't see any version of Manchester Black outshining Supes. Like, at all.

[manwhohaseverything]

I don't see any version of Manchester Black outshining Supes. Like, at all.

I read superman and authority..pretty much loved manchester.It was a breath fresh air for me.All that sass and sarcasm.A bit like Constantine,But needed.Heck! Lobo another that is easily fan favourite.

You've got Manchester Black prominently here. What made him the perfect foil for Superman as the Man of Steel enters his grizzled years?

It's kind of a reflective age for Superman who looks back and wondered if it worked, all that gaudy presentation, fighting with Doomsday, having Crises? Were we all wrapped up in our superhero bullshit and not dealing with all the problems that we started out with and tried to [solve]? And then you have Manchester Black and his first appearance in that celebrated story by Joe Kelly and Doug Mahnke, "Whatever Happened to Truth, Justice and the American Way?" Manchester Black is an absolute punk opposite, he's the Johnny Rotten to Superman's Elvis. I kind [of] brought that dynamic back, with Manchester Black as the questioning, angry voice of the cynic saying, "You know why that didn't work? You talk a good game but you don't follow through!"

[bat39]

The reason I like Manchester Black as the first villain is because (generally speaking) nailing down Superman's personality and what he stands for is (for whatever reason) the most difficult part of any Superman film. I think Manchester Black is the perfect villain for that (maybe even more than Luthor).

One thing I think I would like to see is a Luthor/Brainiac team-up similar to what they did to that first season of JLU. I thought that was pretty rad.

I actually think Manchester Black would work better for a second, or even a third, movie...when Superman is really established and very certain in both his moral code and his place in the world (and the audience is certain in it as well). Manchester Black needs to be confronted by a Superman who's at the top of his game and who's been at it for years, not by a relatively inexperienced Superman who's recently started out. It's not a question of power levels or scale...it's a story that inherently calls for a more mature Superman.

In fact, that's what I meant by sequels not necessarily having to escalate in order to be successful. Hypothetically, I can imagine a trilogy where you have Superman coming into his own saving the world from Brainiac in the first film, and then a second film where he deals with, I dunno, Darkseid or Mongul or someone. The third film? We get what appears to be a deconstruction of Superman with Manchester Black and the Elite, only for Superman to flip the narrative off in the third act. Superman revealing just how dangerous he can be and how much he restrains himself could be a powerful climax to the entire trilogy and demonstrate how much he's grown since his early days, while still leaving us with the nagging feel that maybe Black isn't 100% wrong...

[manwhohaseverything]

A crazy thought,I kinda think manchester could be superman's first sidekick that actually compliments him..like dick did to batman.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

A crazy thought,I kinda think manchester could be superman's first sidekick that actually compliments him..like dick did to batman.

You could have them be allies before Manchester goes his own way.

That would work for a young Superman story.