How would you restart the Superman movie franchise?

[daBronzeBomma]

I'm changing my vote.

I had initially wanted them to bring back Cavill and Adams (but not Synder) for a true MOS sequel featuring Brainiac and Supergirl.

But in light of Michael B. Jordan being approached by WB for the role and rejecting it because he (rightly) could see that the studio has no plan for or confidence in the property, I'm changing my mind.

Burn it to the ground and take a long time to start over the right way (without another origin movie) on the big screen.

Here's my 10-point, 10-year plan to get Superman the movie he richly deserves.

Year 0, Point 0 (2017) - JUSTICE LEAGUE crashes and burns, effectively ending the cohesive DCEU mega-franchise, splintering it into more independent unrelated movies like AQUAMAN, SHAZAM!, and JOKER.

Year 1, Point 1 (2018) - Enhance focus on the main comics of Action and Superman by bringing in A-list talent. Enter: Brian Michael Bendis.

Year 2, Point 2 (2019) - Choose a path for immediate future live-action portrayals. Cavill is out, lacking any leverage to put pressure on WB for MOS2.

Year 3, Point 3 (2020) - Launch new Superman live- action TV show on the CW. Tell different stories than what we've already seen (particularly differentiate it from SUPERGIRL, SMALLVILLE , and LOIS AND CLARK). Hire the best possible writers and actors and do well with the budget. Go for 5 consecutive seasons.

Year 4, Point 4 (2021) - Develop an industry-shifting great video game series for Superman like Rocksteady's ARKHAM was for Batman. That will bring in more new fans than anything else.

Year 5, Point 5 (2022) - Animation domination. Into there'd Superverse with theatrically animated versions of Calvin Ellis and/or Val-Zod and/or Keenan Kong.

Year 6, Point 6 (2023) - Release an industry-shifting graphic novel / miniseries that takes Superman to new heights creatively, another ASS or DKR.

Year 7, Point 7 (2024) - Conclude current continuity with a new Crisis, give the current comic Superman a proper final sendoff.

Year 8, Point 8 (2025) - Hard Reboot Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and the rest of the DCU in time for DC's 90th anniversary; Greenlight the next Superman feature film

Year 9, Point 9 (2026) - Conclude CW Superman tv show with satisfying finale; filming starts on next Superman feature film.

Year 10, Point 10 (2027) - That December, the next Superman feature film is released, breaking national and global b.o. records while cleaning up at awards season.

You're welcome! ��

[Last Son]

I'm between the second and third choice. Either bring back the MoS cast but with new writers and a new director and a new direction that keeps the past movies in continuity, or just start over like The Batman with a new cast and direction.

[Vordan]

Johns and Morrison have worked in Hollywood. Ask one of them to write a script. Isn’t Johns writing a GLC script right now? If that gets used he might get asked to do more DC Films.

[Ascended]

I'm between the second and third choice. Either bring back the MoS cast but with new writers and a new director and a new direction that keeps the past movies in continuity, or just start over like The Batman with a new cast and direction.

Same. I personally want the MoS cast back. The problems were never Cavill or Adams, and people generally seem to like them in the roles. Hell, a lot of people said Superman was one of the few highlights of JL. You can course-correct the MoS-verse easily enough without starting from scratch. Hell, Marvel did it with Thor not that long ago.

The business realities though.....I dunno if it's smart to keep those actors when you want a fresh start. A new cast tells the audience it's a new version, the same cast tells the audience to expect what they've been getting. That's reason enough to start fresh. But I want to believe that in this case, if the marketing established a different tone for the film (as Ragnarok did) people might get behind it.

[Vordan]

Same. I personally want the MoS cast back. The problems were never Cavill or Adams, and people generally seem to like them in the roles. Hell, a lot of people said Superman was one of the few highlights of JL. You can course-correct the MoS-verse easily enough without starting from scratch. Hell, Marvel did it with Thor not that long ago.

The business realities though.....I dunno if it's smart to keep those actors when you want a fresh start. A new cast tells the audience it's a new version, the same cast tells the audience to expect what they've been getting. That's reason enough to start fresh. But I want to believe that in this case, if the marketing established a different tone for the film (as Ragnarok did) people might get behind it.

If Cavill does well as Geralt (meaning the Witcher is a big commercial and critical success), that would give him the strongest leverage because it’s him in a starring role. I still don’t expect it to happen, if WB wanted him back they’d accommodate him look at all the crap Ezra has pulled, but it would be a chance to be hopeful for those of you who want Cavill back.

[stargazer01]

if Superman as a good person who does what's right is boring, then Wonder Woman is too.. right? And Cap America.. Only if you think being good is easy. It's not, especially with the powers of Superman.

[stargazer01]

If Cavill does well as Geralt (meaning the Witcher is a big commercial and critical success), that would give him the strongest leverage because it’s him in a starring role. I still don’t expect it to happen, if WB wanted him back they’d accommodate him look at all the crap Ezra has pulled, but it would be a chance to be hopeful for those of you who want Cavill back.

I understand both of your positions. I also would love to see Cavill and everyone back, but I can accept a new cast if they want a fresher start. It all depends on the vision and story and director. A good story and director with a clear vision can make it work. Someone who likes Superman and his values.

There is also the possibility that The Rock could bring Cavill back with his power leverage, especially if Black Adam is looking like a hit. He can do it and he loves Superman and likes Cavill.

[Ascended]

I understand both of your positions. I also would love to see Cavill and everyone back, but I can accept a new cast if they want a fresher start. It all depends on the vision and story and director. A good story and director with a clear vision can make it work. Someone who likes Superman and his values.

And that's what we need. Cav-El is great. Our problem is the people behind the camera. Replacing the actors without replacing the people making decisions will just result in another bad Superman movie with a new actor.

But in order to send a clear message to audiences that it's a fresh start, a new cast is probably the wisest choice.....even though that means robbing us of Cavill and what he could potentially do with the right people behind him.

Maybe Dwayne Johnson can save us and talk WB into a Cav-El role in Black Adam. Maybe between the two of them they can provide the quality Superman appearance that WB can't. And maybe that'll give WB a clue, and Cavill will finally get a chance to show us his proper Superman. But I'm not holding my breath.

[DochaDocha]

Thor and Thor: The Dark World are not what I consider ahead of the superhero movie curve. Thor was not all that interesting in Avengers or Avengers: Age of Ultron. However, they managed to make him charming in Thor: Ragnarok, and I thought he was the best character in Avengers: Infinity War. Also, despite the controversy surrounding his character in Avengers: End Game, I think it's still a compelling character arc. On the flip side, I think Thor badly needed the Marvel brand. People were willing to give the character a shot, and the latter movies were able to focus so much of the story around him, because people will eat up anything Marvel these days.

In short, I think if they can clean up the DC brand's image, and I hope put in good special effects, you can bring back Henry as Superman. I really think BvS and Justice League could've made a few more bucks at the box office, despite the story weaknesses, if they looked better (call it the Bayformers Effect).

[Osiris-Rex]

if Superman as a good person who does what's right is boring, then Wonder Woman is too.. right? And Cap America.. Only if you think being good is easy. It's not, especially with the powers of Superman.

If Superman is too boring for movies why have all the Superman TV shows been so successful? People that watch TV seem to be entertained by Superman.

[DochaDocha]

if Superman as a good person who does what's right is boring, then Wonder Woman is too.. right? And Cap America.. Only if you think being good is easy. It's not, especially with the powers of Superman.

True, but there are a few mitigating factors to consider:

1) Captain America: First Avenger grossed $176 million domestic. That's way less than the 2008 Iron Man ($318 million), and even less than Thor ($181 million) which came out a few months before Cap. Captain America didn't really hit his stride until after the Marvel brand became premium after Avengers. Civil War ($408 million) easily surpassed Winter Soldier ($260 million), but Marvel cleverly incorporated their best sub-brand (Avengers) into the movie, essentially making it Avengers 2.5. There's a reason why they didn't lead off with Captain America, because he alone wasn't going to be a character audiences could get behind.

2) Wonder Woman checked certain boxes that no Superman movie ever could. We comic fans know that Superman was the prototype superhero, but modern day audiences just see him as another hero. The same cannot be said about Wonder Woman. The name "Superman" alone doesn't guarantee you $400 million in box office revenue; you have to do a great job to rake in that cash.

I really think Superman as a lot more baggage to overcome. Most other heroes have a clean-ish slate. Wonder Woman can kill Ares. Captain America can shoot Nazis. What's the extent to which Superman is "allowed" to do?

[Flash Gordon]

A big key would be to stop looking at it as a franchise, and just make good SUPERMAN film that says something.

Let the rest fall into place.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

A big key would be to stop looking at it as a franchise, and just make good SUPERMAN film that says something.

Let the rest fall into place.

I’d be open to some stand alone one-offs. An All Star or Red Son Movie wouldn’t leave much room for sequels but maybe that shouldn’t always be the priority.

[Cmbmool]

Hard reboot with new cast and timeline and this time we’re doing it properly and respectfully to the mythos. Especially when he’s on Earth. We’ll tease the Legion of Superheroes as a group of kids that Clark helps out during his youth. Throw in Lana Lang and her insect loving uncle a bit. His parents try to teach him values while helping him overcome his powers and insecurities. Pa Kent doesn’t say/condone “let the kids die” moment as he teaches Clark when in emergencies to use his powers in clever ways.

As for his adulthood...having him as a blur a bit would be intriguing to see. His first real fight As Superman with some robots robbing a gold reserve.

Lois has more bite and is more like Margot Kidder take on her. She isn’t a nuisance like in Snyder’s take on her. Her father did serve in the military, but he isn’t a general like in the comics. She’s jade a bit due to constant moving during her childhood. So belief in Superman is more prove it than romantic at first.

Lex Luthor is a genius and business man. He uses his intelligence to further his company after ousting his father from it at the young age of 23. His sister Lena is a moral point to him. Superman comes in and ruins his fame that he earned.

I would have something like Kryptonite Man and or Toy man as villains too with Bizarro as a setup sequel foe along with Brainaic.

[manwhohaseverything]

True, but there are a few mitigating factors to consider:

1) Captain America: First Avenger grossed $176 million domestic. That's way less than the 2008 Iron Man ($318 million), and even less than Thor ($181 million) which came out a few months before Cap. Captain America didn't really hit his stride until after the Marvel brand became premium after Avengers. Civil War ($408 million) easily surpassed Winter Soldier ($260 million), but Marvel cleverly incorporated their best sub-brand (Avengers) into the movie, essentially making it Avengers 2.5. There's a reason why they didn't lead off with Captain America, because he alone wasn't going to be a character audiences could get behind.

2) Wonder Woman checked certain boxes that no Superman movie ever could. We comic fans know that Superman was the prototype superhero, but modern day audiences just see him as another hero. The same cannot be said about Wonder Woman. The name "Superman" alone doesn't guarantee you $400 million in box office revenue; you have to do a great job to rake in that cash.

I really think Superman as a lot more baggage to overcome. Most other heroes have a clean-ish slate. Wonder Woman can kill Ares. Captain America can shoot Nazis. What's the extent to which Superman is "allowed" to do?

Winter soldier is still the best marvel movie for me though. It is the only movie i go back to. It was great.it might not have hit a billion. but, i can see the third part being very successful.