Shane Kelly (3:14 PM on Wed Aug 13, 2008)

I don't see how it could be that difficult to fix what was screwed up in Returns...Firstly, I don't think the public would be as forgiving for a Superman Reboot as they were for a Hulk one, due to the vast popularity of the character. Brandon Routh was fine, but Kate Bosworth has to go as Lois, for future releases (i.e. Katie Holmes)!! The rest of the cast was great.

As for HOW to fix Superman, "the absent father", that is pretty easy to do as well. His "son" isn't really his son. It is...(drumroll)...BRAINIAC in one of his nanobot-hybrid type forms, emulating the guise of a human child in flesh. But, underneath he is all Kryptonian machine. If you think about it, what better way to have influence over Superman than by posing as his child. Imagine the reaction once it's revealed.

IMHO that would ROCK, and allow folks to be more forgiving of Returns, in addition to giving them a new perspective on it, as a film in the franchise.

Anonymous (6:19 PM on Wed Aug 13, 2008)

Wow. I've always sorta hated Brad Meltzer, because "Identity Crisis" was the book that kept me far away from DC Comics for a good long while, so I don't care about what he has to say. Waid and Morrisson, though? Love 'em. Makes me real sad they both think SR's a flop. Taking digs at Ang Lee's "Hulk" just pours salt on the wound.

I also found their complaints rather...odd. Waid's talking about how Superman's vulnerability is important, how his character stems from the loss of loved ones, but those are two of the things I thought SR absolutely nailed. This sense of loss, of isolation, is SO apparent in Superman throughout the film that it's heartbreaking. It's WHY reconnecting with Lois is so important; she was such a vital part of the life he made for himself on Earth, allowing him to overcome that loss and that sadness. When that connection is severed (significantly, because Superman was chasing the ghost of a chance that Krypton had survived), that's our chance to SEE Superman at his most vulnerable, struggling to pick up the pieces of his old life or else be forced to face the fact that he is completely alone in the universe.

Likewise, Morrisson thinks Superman is portrayed as TOO vulnerable. Yet even when deprived of his powers, he finds the will to try and fight. Even with a shard of Kryptonite in his side, he finds the strength to take Luthor's island and toss it into space, essentially sacrificing all of what's left of his past; remember, ALL the crystals from the Fortress of Solitude are on the island. To me, that sort of behavior is the definition of heroic strength.

The Kid...well, I personally like the kid, but I don't know how to address the complaints about him, because they all seem to boil down to "No Kid. Period." without much in the way of a reason WHY.

Tasha (3:14 AM on Thu Aug 14, 2008)

SR flopped, because most people were EXPECTING a reboot of the franchise. It's been a ton of years since the last Superman picture was in release. SR should have been the movie that moved us from Smallville to the Man in Red, Blue and Gold. I was actually very annoyed that SR was a continuation of the earlier films. Basically SR would have been great like a decade ago. We needed something new.

The writers and director were too wrapped up in their own vision to see what Batman proved. Update the character for modern audiences, and people will actually pay to see the picture again and again.

BTW Ang Lee's Hulk failed because it changed the Hulk's story so much that it was annoying for us Hulk fans to watch. I guess the lesson here is "Update the character, but don't change things so much that the whole thing becomes unrecognizable".

Stephen Bergstrom (11:16 AM on Fri Aug 15, 2008)

For my part, I think that SR failed because it expected too much of the audience. We were supposed to buy into the fact that Superman left Earth, with little or no explanation, and was gone for five years. We were also supposed to go with the idea that Lois, who was "super-kissed" and forgot all about those days where she knew about Supes' secret identity back in Superman II, became pregnant during that one night they had together. Wasn't she the least bit curious about who the father was? Was she THAT promiscuous back then?

Then there was the kid's Deus Ex Machina rescue of Lois on Luthor's boat. That was a bit out of the blue. Well-timed, kid. Too bad you didn't save some of that to rescue your mom and yourself from drowning. Good thing Dad showed up when he did. Yeah, it confirmed who the father REALLY was, but come on, that was the best they could come up with? And shouldn't Lois have given SOME thought, once that little revelation hit, as to exactly when and how Superman and she did the horizontal mambo?

My feelings about SR notwithstanding, the best path, IMO, for the next Superman movie is to present an established Superman, having been around for at least five years, and have something come up to establish exactly WHY he is who he is. Think about it. Five years, and the most challenging thing he's had to face is bank robbers and the occasional mad scientist. People are starting to wonder just how relevant Superman is. That's when Brainiac/Mongul/Metallo shows up. He's there to take on those threats that no Earthly agency has a prayer against.

Oh, and Mr. Peters? Jon Peters? If you use Mongul and his war-world, you could have action-figures galore to choose from. All those aliens that he uses in his gladiatorial arena, not to mention Mongul himself, would be choice items to produce.

GameCouch (11:04 AM on Mon Aug 18, 2008)

It seems like any Supes reboot should be focused on fitting him into the Nolan-verse.