Taking the blame off Donner.

[CharlesInCharge]

Here's an idea of what they should do for future adaptations: create a different Superman, while working within the established boundaries of the character (i.e is optimistic, compassionate and devoted to helping others). The Russo Brothers talk about this when discussing the climax of Winter Soldier and not taking Cap into an out of character zone:

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/...tors-interview

Something that's also important to understand about Superman: The Movie, is that it is just that, a MOVIE adaptation which was influenced by roughly 30 years of established characterization, since Superman as we know him today, and the version that was adapted for that film, really came about some time in the early 1950s, with the Earth One/Silver Age continuity (the 1940s were really his development process into what we have now). In other words, long before the movie was ever even thought of.

[victorsage]

Whom I blame is the fans and creators that forget that Superman existed before 1978 and insist that Supes in all media completely copy every facet of the 1978 film and it's sequel. They demand and expect Supes be portrayed EXACTLY like Chris Reeve's version with no conciderations of other live action interpretations like George Reeves etc. They expect the Fortress, Jor-El, etc to copy the film. They think it is the blue print that should be followed going forward when they forget it was only meant to be an adaptation of preexisting material.

Basically. There is a cult of the Silver Age that won't die. Even though anyone who actually grew up during that age is well into middle age now, some heading towards the official "elderly" category.

It was so bad a few years ago, that people would try to argue that the original Superman (Golden Age) wasn't "really" Superman, just a prototype to what would follow. Any change from the Silver Age is "false" to this fan base, whether it came before or after that age. They aren't even "guardians" of classic Superman, they guard one VERY specific Superman, and won't accept even the smallest alteration from it. A Superman that really hasn't existed since 1972 in the comics, if even then.

[Flash Gordon]

Here's an idea of what they should do for future adaptations: create a different Superman, while working within the established boundaries of the character (i.e is optimistic, compassionate and devoted to helping others). The Russo Brothers talk about this when discussing the climax of Winter Soldier and not taking Cap into an out of character zone.

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/...tors-interview

Something that's also important to understand about Superman: The Movie, is that it is just that, a MOVIE adaptation which was influenced by roughly 30 years of established characterization, since Superman as we know him today, and the version that was adapted for that film, really came about some time in the early 1950s, with the Earth One/Silver Age continuity (the 1940s were really his development process into what we have now). In other words, long before the movie was ever even thought of.

The Russo Brothers are great. I wish Superman could have people like that behind him.

The Winter Solider is a great film.

[CharlesInCharge]

The Russo Brothers are great. I wish Superman could have people like that behind him.

The Winter Solider is a great film.

Yeah, and the funny thing is, Cap and Superman are cut from almost the exact same cloth. They've been around as long as each other and both are the upstanding paragons of their respective universes. Yet how, in the name of Great Rao, has the former done so well cinematically, while the latter continues to flounder? It really boggles the mind.

[jason white reborn]

No cinematic superman since the Donner films has ever passed the red letter media character test...maybe awful characterization is to blame for polarizing reviews

[Jim Kelly]

I blame Orson Welles. He had to go and make that goldarned CITIZEN KANE that forever changed the way movies would be made and set a bar so high that few can reach it. If he had just stayed in New York doing his silly little radio programs, none would be the wiser and Hollywood could've continued making schlock and call it art for generations to come. Why oh why can't some people just keep their high flying ideas to themselves instead of forcing the rest of us to see the world in a new way. To hell with you Mr. Welles, you had to go and make me think about things I might never have thought about at all.

[Lois]

Don't blame Donner at all either. He made one of the best films of all time and it's still enjoyable to this day.
Really enjoyed Superman Returns and the homage made to Christopher Reeve in Superman the Movie.
The Salkinds who produced the Superman films really lost track in Superman III.
They should have had Donner still on as a director for the rest of the Reeve Superman film franchise.
Man of Steel for me as a long time Superman fan was super and I enjoyed it from start to finish.
DC/Warner brothers shouldn't put the blame on Donner. That's not fair nor is it justified.
They need to look directly at how they themselves are having the Superman character portrayed in the movies and on television.
Choosing Henry Cavill to portray Superman was a wise choice.
For me he's my second favorite actor to portray Superman after Christopher Reeve.
And as a long time Superman fan I have seen many an actor portray Superman both on TV and in the movies.
And I have enjoyed them all.

[Jim Kelly]

I remember that in some review, in a jaw-dropping display of hyperbole, Roger Ebert said some movie--maybe it was SPIDERMAN--was the CITIZEN KANE of comic book movies. I would never say that about any movie, but surely Donner's SUPERMAN is the one that set the template. His three act structue is the one that almost every super-hero movie copies--to the point where it has become stagnant. But that ain't his fault. Screen writers need to really invent a new template--but they probably don't have the freedom to do that. It's probably studio executives that insist all comic book movies follow this rigid formula: Origins; First feats; Big set piece finish.

[manofsteel1979]

I remember that in some review, in a jaw-dropping display of hyperbole, Roger Ebert said some movie--maybe it was SPIDERMAN--was the CITIZEN KANE of comic book movies. I would never say that about any movie, but surely Donner's SUPERMAN is the one that set the template. His three act structue is the one that almost every super-hero movie copies--to the point where it has become stagnant. But that ain't his fault. Screen writers need to really invent a new template--but they probably don't have the freedom to do that. It's probably studio executives that insist all comic book movies follow this rigid formula: Origins; First feats; Big set piece finish.

I think Ebert was referring to Spider-Man 2. While I emensly enjoyed that film, but if any movie deserves that level of hyperbole, it is Donner's first Superman, as it really did in earnest start the genre.

[CharlesInCharge]

Here's a question for you all:

If the DCEU goes under completely​ and Superman is rebooted yet again, do you want to see him as part of a larger DC movie universe once more or just have his own solo series set entirely in his own universe, with no other heroes from outside his franchise? TBH, I myself would almost rather the second option.

[TheNomadicOne]

Here's a question for you all:

If the DCEU goes under completely​ and Superman is rebooted yet again, do you want to see him as part of a larger DC movie universe once more or just have his own solo series set entirely in his own universe, with no other heroes? TBH, I myself would almost rather the second option.

I personally still think that the larger DC movie universe has potential, I just find it an evolution to superhero movies to actually have a connective world. That being said, if they reboot (which honestly is quite possible), I don't want it like what we have now. Maybe instead of the dark approach like DC or the lighter approach done by marvel, it should follow a stylistic approach. Maybe make their worlds that more visually stunning while having the writing be smart.

[CharlesInCharge]

I personally still think that the larger DC movie universe has potential, I just find it an evolution to superhero movies to actually have a connective world. That being said, if they reboot (which honestly is quite possible), I don't want it like what we have now. Maybe instead of the dark approach like DC or the lighter approach done by marvel, it should follow a stylistic approach. Maybe make their worlds that more visually stunning while having the writing be smart.

I see your point. However, I hope the DCEU keeps going long enough to make it to the Superman solo movie with Matthew Vaughn, and that it kicks off a new trilogy. I don't mind if other heroes cameo but keep it as restricted to Superman's world as possible. After all this time he deserves to not have other characters, such as Batman, stealing his thunder.

[DochaDocha]

Here's a question for you all:

If the DCEU goes under completely​ and Superman is rebooted yet again, do you want to see him as part of a larger DC movie universe once more or just have his own solo series set entirely in his own universe, with no other heroes from outside his franchise? TBH, I myself would almost rather the second option.

They have a hard enough time setting up a universe with just Superman. Adding five or more characters is hard enough. I'd agree with your vote, for no other reason that it makes the odds of screwing up Superman slightly less.

If they do create another shared universe, I'd hope that they would combine Superman with heroes who would complement him better. GL is fine, Flash is fine, WW works somewhat OK (her mythological background doesn't always lend itself well to combined universes), Cyborg OK, Aquaman is kind of like WW. Batman, unfortunately, would probably screw over Superman several times over... again...

[TheNomadicOne]

I see your point. However, I hope the DCEU keeps going long enough to make it to the Superman solo movie with Matthew Vaughn, and that it kicks off a new trilogy. I don't mind if other heroes cameo but keep it as restricted to Superman's world as possible. After all this time he deserves to not have other characters, such as Batman, stealing his thunder.

I agree, Vaughn directing the next man of steel (did they confirm that it's happening?) is excelent news. I want it to be restricted to Superman as well, I actually liked Man of Steel and definitely felt potential there, but it's BvS where I felt the potential is getting hamfisted by WB. For this new movie I really want it to be personal but also brighter in tone, with Braniac as the villain.

Superman shouldn't be weighed down by other superheroes, in my opinion, it should be the other way around to some extent (not as overbearing as Batman). I love Donners work, but these new films shouldn't be weighed down by them. Treat them as a pedestal, not as an obstacle.

[TheNomadicOne]

I don't mind combining either, but I also don't want them to be highlights either. I prefer them to be referenced rather than actually being there.