Warner Bros. Confirms Superman Reboot

[Tribal Warfare]

http://www.superherohype.com/news/su...ws.php?id=7609


Warner Bros. Confirms Superman Reboot
Source:Steelsheen
August 22, 2008


Just a few days after this article was posted, Warner Bros. Pictures Group President Jeff Robinov has told The Wall Street Journal that the studio is going to be reintroducing Superman. We assume this will be similar to how Louis Leterrier's The Incredible Hulk was a reboot of Ang Lee's Hulk. Here is what the article says:

Warner Bros. also put on hold plans for another movie starring multiple superheroes -- known as "Batman vs. Superman" -- after the $215 million "Superman Returns," which had disappointing box-office returns, didn't please executives. "'Superman' didn't quite work as a film in the way that we wanted it to," says Mr. Robinov. "It didn't position the character the way he needed to be positioned." "Had 'Superman' worked in 2006, we would have had a movie for Christmas of this year or 2009," he adds. "But now the plan is just to reintroduce Superman without regard to a Batman and Superman movie at all."

The article also talks about Warner Bros. adapting other DC properties over the new few years. "By 2011, Mr. Robinov plans for DC Comics to supply the material for up to two of the six to eight tent-pole films he hopes Warner Bros. will have in the pipeline by then," it says. Those projects will likely be about single characters at first, and will be darker much like The Dark Knight:

With "Batman vs. Superman" and "Justice League" stalled, Warner Bros. has quietly adopted Marvel's model of releasing a single film for each character, and then using those movies and their sequels to build up to a multicharacter film. "Along those lines, we have been developing every DC character that we own," Mr. Robinov says.

Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well.

The studio is set to announce its plans for future DC movies in the next month. For now, though, it is focused on releasing four comic-book films in the next three years, including a third Batman film, a new film reintroducing Superman, and two movies focusing on other DC Comics characters. Movies featuring Green Lantern, Flash, Green Arrow, and Wonder Woman are all in active development.

We'll let you know as soon as the studio has announced its plans for future DC movies.

[Demonpenz]

I love me some USA, but if a movie is going to be about pumping up my patrotic side it better be from a time I wasn't alive. I am too smart and too cynical to be feed some bullshit story. It better have a firm grasp on realitiy. Even on that movie where the passengers crashed the plane my reality button went off wondering about if that plane was shot down and that was just a "feel" good after story that was brought along. I am a sad sad angry man though.

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

We live in too cynical a world these days for those types of films to succeed.

Last one i remember that tried was Costners "Postman"


Ride Postman!!! Ride!!!!

I actually really enjoyed this movie. Seemed like a fairly reasonable and realistic post-apocalyptic scenario, but since it didn't come with special effects nuking, car chases or mutated monsters, the masses didn't like it.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by frazod

I actually really enjoyed this movie. Seemed like a fairly reasonable and realistic post-apocalyptic scenario, but since it didn't come with special effects nuking, car chases or mutated monsters, the masses didn't like it.

Oh come on, it was no waterworld.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Gunther_Fan

1. I wish they'd hurry up with the Wonder Woman movie.

2. I, for one, don't like the way all of these movies are getting darker and darker. I'd prefer light hearted, patriotic fun, not a bunch of evil and depressing characters. I don't go to the movies for that.

3. When is Hollywood going to make some original movies? Can we STOP with all of this superhero crap?! Sure, I like a superhero movie here and there, if they are done well. But, having another subpar superhero movie every month is just getting boring.

Besides the fact that you contradict yourself, Marvel has its own studio, so they're developing movies on their own. They're not a traditional Hollywood Studio (i.e. Warner, Uni & Paramount). They create and develop Super Hero movies ONLY. If you don't like that idea, don't go.

Warners has owned the rights to Batman & Superman since the 50's. They own those properties and have the right to exploit them at any time.

Originally Posted by Gunther_Fan

4. I'll tell you what America is waiting for...... America is waiting for some feel good, patriotic movies. Movies full of Americana. Movies that are uplifting and will make us feel good about ourselves and about being Americans. Movies that will make us feel good or proud, not depressed or ashamed when we leave the theater. Americans like to see movies about over coming challenges, hardship and/or tragedy. We want to see the victorious American spirit. For example: Forrest Gump, Saving Private Ryan, Braveheart and etc. (yes, Braveheart is not an American story, but it fits the mold) Movies have become boring, repetative, predictable, unpatriotic and depressing lately. I'd like to see a movie like Saving Private Ryan made about the Pacific Theater during WWII. Or, I'd like to see a Band of Brothers type of movie made about the heros of the War in Iraq and/or the War on Terrorism. There are so many heroes in the last 5 or 6 years and their stories are not being told. We need another John Wayne to surface in Hollywood. But, with our country turning toward political correctness and anti-Americanism so much, I don't know that we could ever have another John Wayne in American movie making again. It's too bad. Well, that's my rant. I've gone on longer than I thought I would.

Unfortunately for you, the rest of the nation disagrees. "The Dark Knight" is closing in on "Titanic" to become the biggest movie of all-time (it's second right now). If people weren't interested, they wouldn't go. "Iron Man" is the second biggest movie of the year so clearly, people enjoy SuperHero movies.

As for "Braveheart", "Forrest Gump" and "SPR", they grossed $620 million combined. "Spiderman" made $404 million and "Spiderman 2" made $373 million. So two Spiderman properties earned $150 million more than the three different movies you listed. If you were a studio head, which property would you greenlight?

As for "Americana", those movies exist. You've mentioned them. There's no reason to create movies in that vein they already exist and quite frankly, they just wouldn't work in today's environment. "3:10 to Yuma" was re-made last year with Russell Crowe & Christian Bale and it lost money.

America in 2008 is far different from America in 1948. So it stands to reason, cinema will be far different as well.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

"3:10 to Yuma" was re-made last year with Russell Crowe & Christian Bale and it lost money.

Awesome movie, by the by.

Westerns are a niche these days, even lower on the totem pole than genre films. I know a lot of people didn't get into it, but I also liked "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford".

That's just where the market is.

But, hey, we can all rejoice in Oliver Stone's "W". Wave those flags, boys!

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Awesome movie, by the by.

Westerns are a niche these days, even lower on the totem pole than genre films. I know a lot of people didn't get into it, but I also liked "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford".

That's just where the market is.

But, hey, we can all rejoice in Oliver Stone's "W". Wave those flags, boys!

I haven't seen either movie but I've been told by multiple people that both are great movies and I do look forward to seeing them soon.

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Westerns are a niche these days, even lower on the totem pole than genre films. I know a lot of people didn't get into it, but I also liked "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford".

I walked out of the theater about half-way through. That movie was like fingernails... slowly... mozying... across... a... chalkboard.

[Tribal Warfare]

Originally Posted by KcMizzou

A "dark" version of Superman doesn't make any sense.

I think they mean a more serious story arc which Clark isn't a geek and Superman's less of a boyscout( still a beaken of hope, but not a goody goody apple polisher), and has an internal conflict in being an alien with superpowers.IMO, it will deal with Clark more so than Superman concerning the " dark" part.

[007]

Originally Posted by frazod

I really like the first two movies he was in, especially now that the Donner Cut is available for II (the scenes with Brando are amazing). Too bad III and IV were so awful.

III and IV should have NEVER been made.

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by Guru

III and IV should have NEVER been made.

Mercifully, I never watched the fourth one, either at the theater or on TV. The bad taste left by III, mixed with the bad reviews, spared me that noxious blast of shit. It joins other wretched never-should-have-been-made sequals that I just pretend never happened, like Arthur II or Alien 3.

[Deberg_1990]

Superman IV virgins.....I give you Nuclear Man!!!

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Guru

III and IV should have NEVER been made.

I'd add "Superman Returns" to that list.

MORE Lex Luther? A bad Lois Lane? Parker Posey? Superboy?

Yuck, yuck, yuck and more yuck.

There's more than 70 years of Superman comic history in which to create an amazing movie. But Bryan Singer chose to rehash what we'd already seen and spend in excess of $175 million do so? And to make an inferior movie to those made in the 70's?

What a waste.

Of time. Of money.

And mainly of an opportunity to create something special.

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I'd add "Superman Returns" to that list.

MORE Lex Luther? A bad Lois Lane? Parker Posey? Superboy?

Yuck, yuck, yuck and more yuck.

There's more than 70 years of Superman comic history in which to create an amazing movie. But Bryan Singer chose to rehash what we'd already seen and spend in excess of $175 million do so? And to make an inferior movie to those made in the 70's?

What a waste.

Of time. Of money.

And mainly of an opportunity to create something special.

Well said. I could not agree more. A waste of time and talent.

[Valiant]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Well said. I could not agree more. A waste of time and talent.

I did like Brandon Routh portrayal of Superman though..

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by frazod

I walked out of the theater about half-way through. That movie was like fingernails... slowly... mozying... across... a... chalkboard.

Yeah, I remembered you mentioning you didn't like it.

It's no Unforgiven but it kept me watching.